Explaining Performance Measurement Utilization and Benefits: An Examination of Performance Measurement Practices in Local Governments

performance based budgeting;service efforts and accomplishment reporting;performance measurement;local governments;results based management

Rogers, Martha Kinney ; Charles K. Coe, Committee Chair,Rogers, Martha Kinney ; Charles K. Coe ; Committee Chair

University:North Carolina State University

关键词: performance based budgeting;    service efforts and accomplishment reporting;    performance measurement;    local governments;    results based management;   

Others  :  https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.16/5310/etd.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

美国|英语

来源: null

【 摘 要 】

Performance measurement (PM) has been used in management, budgeting, and reporting to stakeholders.Although local governments' use of PM has grown considerably over the past two decades, little empirical evidence explains variation in usage and benefits.Most research has been normative or descriptive, with the exception of a few multivariate models.Using structural equation modeling and a survey administered by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, this dissertation tests three models used to explain PM utilization and benefits in local governments: (1) Kong's 1998 model examined differences in factors that influence PM utilization in management and budgeting.The influential factors are organizational culture, rewards and sanctions, leadership, involvement of the central budget office, citizen/elected official participation, measurement capacity, and data quality. (2) Wang's 2002 model proposed differences in impacts from PM utilization in management, budgeting, and reporting.The impacts are improved communication, decision-making, coordination, efficiency, and effectiveness.(3) Ammons and Rivenbark 2005 research showed that a comprehensive PM approach (using PM in budget decisions, managing contracts, strategic planning, comparative benchmarking, and evaluating results) had a stronger effect on service improvement than PM utilization in reporting alone.Testing these models revealed important differences between PM utilization in management, budgeting, and reporting.Rewards and sanctions were significantly associated with increased PM utilization in management (not budgeting or reporting).Participation by the central budget office most strongly influenced PM utilization in budgeting.The existence of high quality data most influenced PM utilization in reporting.PM utilization in management was more related to long-term benefits of efficiency and effectiveness than budgeting or reporting.PM utilization in budgeting was strongly associated to the short-term benefit of improved decision-making but only moderately associated with improved efficiency.PM utilization in reporting was strongly related with improved decision-making and improved effectiveness.Finally, a comprehensive PM approach including management, benchmarking, budget decision-making, and strategic planning shows a higher relationship with improved service improvement than using PM in reporting alone.