Performance Measurement and Global Governance

The Experience of the World Bank

Bibliographic Data

ID6189526
AuthorsBeryl A Radin (corresponding author)
Year2007
Volume13
Issue1
Pages25-33
Publication date2007-08-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueGlobal Governance A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1075-2846 • E-ISSN: 1942-6720
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1163/19426720-01301003
OpenAlexW2149713386
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited2

Performance management and performance measurement have become central topics in public sectors across the globe. Dissatisfaction with the performance of government organizations has become a pervasive element in the world we live in. Increasingly citizens are unwilling to blindly accept the level of work of a range of institutions within their societies. These include not only government institutions but also organizations in the health sector, education, foundations, and other areas. Yet it is not always clear why these concerns occur. There is an array of possible explanations. Some citizens worry about the expenditure of funds and are skeptical about the way that limited fiscal resources are allocated. Other citizens are dissatisfied with the results of the decisions made by various organizations and seek to modify or even eliminate those programs and projects that make up organization agendas. Still others believe that organizations are not responsive to those who are the beneficiaries of their work and, instead, have devised processes that insulate staff of those organizations from those who are supposed to be served by them. And yet others simply want to make sure that institutions are able to adapt to the changing circumstances of the twenty-first century. All of these developments have led to a belief that assessing the outcomes of organizations is a way to improve their activity. Various methods have been adopted to make that assessment; these have been termed performance measurement activities. Some of the methods emerge from an attempt to encourage governments to create market conditions within countries; others focus on the role played by civil society groups within those settings. They occur in national government settings as well as local and regional jurisdictions. It is not surprising that they are also surfacing within the multinational institutions concerned about global governance. Assessment of performance of public sector entities and contractors is linked to concerns about accountability, transparency, decentralization, and good governance. This discussion focuses on such activity within the World Bank but clearly has wider implications for other multinational organizations both within their own management structures and in their expectations for countries that receive their support. The World Bank Context As the concept is applied to developing countries, there is a clear challenge: How can one link the concerns of public sector management reforms with the values of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society advocates. There is increasing attention to the role of NGOs and civil society advocates in addressing development needs. This was the challenge faced by the World Bank as it attempted to support performance activities within the context of its relationships with developing countries. (1) The Bank actually supported two types of activities related to performance. One was called civic engagement and focused on a bottom-up process by which NGOs defined performance outcomes and were involved in assessing the achievement of those outcomes. The other drew from the experience in New Zealand and was a top-down effort that emphasized efficiency outcomes and market-based solutions. This discussion illustrates two faces of the performance movement and uses examples of activities within the World Bank (or recommended by the Bank) that are viewed as part of that movement. The two approaches within the Bank rarely interact with one another. At the same time, the Bank has adopted techniques such as report cards and budget analysis without acknowledging that there are different values that undergird the use of these techniques. For example, when a government agency devises report cards to compare different program settings with one another, that agency focuses on program implementation within the government structure. By contrast, when a civil society group advocates use of report cards, it is often attempting to show how the government does not serve a particular citizen or client group

Accountability · Business · Civil society · Corporate governance · Globe · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Public sector · Skepticism · Law · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research · Public-Private Partnership Projects · Finance

Tools

Open DOI