Commonalities and differences in public and private sector performance management practices; a litarature review
Hot
https://psaar.net/media/reviews/photos/thumbnail/300x250s/8e/f4/69/emerald-82-1491332282.gif
Uploaded by Jan van Helden
Uploaded date: April 04, 2017
2537
Publication date
September 02, 2016
Author(s)
Paper language
Abstract
Purpose: An examination of the commonalities and differences between performance man-agement practices in the public and private sector
Design/methodology/approach: A literature review of 100 publications in international aca-demic journals over the last 20 years
Findings: The paper develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarized as follows: Multidimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS-design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.
Value: A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector
Research limitations: Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable
Practical implications: Mutual learning between both sectors, e.g. the public sector can learn from the private sector how to link strategy to the PMS, and the private sector can lear from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS
Design/methodology/approach: A literature review of 100 publications in international aca-demic journals over the last 20 years
Findings: The paper develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarized as follows: Multidimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS-design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.
Value: A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector
Research limitations: Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable
Practical implications: Mutual learning between both sectors, e.g. the public sector can learn from the private sector how to link strategy to the PMS, and the private sector can lear from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS
Preferred Citation
van Helden, J. & Reichard, C. (2016), Commonalities and differences in public and private sector performance management practices; a literature review, in: Epstein, M.J., Verbeeten, F. & Widener, S.K. (2016, eds.), Performance measurement and management control: contemporary issues, Vol. 31, Emerald, 309-352.
Keywords
Performance management; public sector; private sector;
Email
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Category
Performance measurement
Type of Paper
Published paper
