Challenging the Performance Movement: Accountability, Complexity, and Democratic ValuesRadin, B. A. (2006). Challenging the Performance Movement: Accountability, Complexity, and Democratic Values. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
CHAPTER 1The Ubiquitous Nature of PerformanceCitizens are growing more skeptical about the quality of work produced by various institutions in our society. Performance measurement strategies have been put in to place, creating formal processes that determine if the goals of the program have been achieved effectively and efficiently. Traditional effectiveness in organization has been measured by evaluating the inputs and the activities and process utilizing these inputs to produce specific outputs. A shift has been made in contemporary society; the focus is now on outcomes. Despite the inherent problems with this (often, outcome measurement is hard to do, especially in the public sector because the “complexity of public action frequently involves a range of actors with different agendas and conflicting values operating within a fragmented decision process (pp 2)”.
”. The primary goal of this article is to understand the role of performance in making the program successful, and it was hoped that in doing so, our current methodology and the various tools being used must become the basis for more precise assessments of performance.The goal of the article is to give the reader an in-depth examination of the various performance measurement methods used for public agency programs. Among the methods utilized in performing performance on a private or federal level, it was attempted to provide a general understanding of such methods’ performance measurement parameters, using a variety of objective measures that would assist in identifying the best tools available in a given industry, but were not intended to be used to perform general public agency performance.1. Performance Measure
A program’s performance measurement procedures are based upon the following four primary objectives:1. To understand the purpose of the performance measurement. 2. To determine the performance characteristics of a program’s performance and to evaluate the quality of that information. 3. To determine the level of accountability for the performance. 4. To determine a standard for the quality of all performance information collected into a single report with respect to the performance of all agency programs.The following information should be included in the report: “The Programmatic Framework” (p>10)
⃥ • The mission statement of the program and the role of the Federal Government In this report: I identify the objectives, strategies, procedures, and strategies employed to achieve performance goals—including the goals that the Program does not fulfill, the procedures and processes employed through which such goals are achieved, and the criteria used during these activities to evaluate the effectiveness of the Program. I evaluate these objectives, strategies, procedures, and strategies as they operate; I assess their effectiveness after these objectives and reviews the evaluation of them. I consider that the objectives, strategies, and procedures employed during the activities to achieve performance goals will vary according to the program, the objectives and strategies of the Department, the type of federal organization that employs the Program, the type of Department agency that has access to performance information collected during the performance reviews, and the nature and extent of its access to performance information. In doing so, I assess how the programs are performing for the individual people in the field representing it, and determine that the system is working effectively and efficiently. In evaluating the programs’ performance metrics, I look at the following four elements (pp 1, 2, 4):In order to determine how to best measure performance in a program, I review five different measures described above.In order to evaluate effectiveness of each of these five metrics, I evaluate the program’s performance using only the information available in a publicly available report. I also refer to methods for analyzing the performance. I evaluate the methods used, the method of calculation of the methodology used for calculating the results, and the degree to which using these methodologies reduces or mitigates the program’s performance.I evaluate the effectiveness of the methods cited in the following sections on the different methods used to assess performance. The methods described in paragraph (a) include the following:In accordance with the Department’s Standards and Guidelines for Reporting on Cost-Effective Programs and Related Agencies, performance measurement of agency performance measures is intended to indicate that the agency is meeting its funding objectives without regard to performance measures taken in advance of the date that the program is authorized to be conducted. In addition, performance measures are designed to demonstrate that participation of the public in the program is not in a disarray. Performance measures that do not demonstrate disarray by virtue of the public’s participation will not be allowed to be used in the performance review
In this volume, several paradoxes are addressed, including the fact that citizens are concerned with the outcomes of policies and programs at the hands of public officials, yet they recognize the need for these officials, since they have the specialized knowledge necessary to maneuver through politics. As the author put is, “it is difficult to criticize these specialist and yet rely on them to deliver a service or implement a policy (pp 2)”.
This book unravels three paradoxes: 1) Ambiguous rhetoric turned into formal process; 2) An emphasis on undesirable outcomes; 3) A critical stance on officials and professionals but ultimately relying on them. Further, the author also outlines three agendas that the current analytical approaches evaluation is not equipped to disentangle include the following. 1) Eliminate programs and blame bureaucrats and program officials for problems; 2) Find ways to modify programs, arguing that what worked in the past does not work today and will likely not work in future environments; 3) Performance information will allow certain individuals to make a case for their won programs and respond effectively with that data to those to whom they are accountable. The method of this book is not to follow traditional literature supports performance measurement, nor does it argue against, but attempt to discuss performance measurement in a broader context. This book offers a “cautionary tone” theorizing that performance measurement may not be effective at producing the expected results and the traditional methods are not nuanced enough to address a variety of situations.
CHAPTER 2The Performance MindsetThis chapter contrasts the traditional methods of performance measurements with an alternative perspectives