Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Performance Systems: An Assessment

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance

Synonyms

Evaluation; Organizational performance; Performance assessment; Evaluation systems

Definition

The term “performance” originates from old French parfornir, which means “to do, carry out, complete, accomplish.” A comparative performance system (CPS) is a set of elements and processes to assess the capability of individuals, organizations, and other subjects to achieve strategic goals using, as benchmark, the performance of similar subjects and/or the previous performance of the unit itself. A CPS supports decision-making of management directed to accomplish strategic targets and satisfy stakeholders in competitive contexts.

Introduction

In the context of public organizations, performance systems are based on units of analysis, measures of inputs, processes, and outputs (cf., Talbot 2010; Coccia 2001, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008; Coccia and Benati 2018b). In particular:

  • The unit of analysis of a performance system can be individuals, teams, activities, projects, and/or organizations...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrews R, Boyne GA, Moon MJ, Walker RM (2010) Assessing organizational performance: exploring differences between internal and external measures. Int Public Manag J 13(2):105–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967491003766533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird M (1998) The role of evaluation. In: Mackay K (ed) Public sector performance – the critical role of evaluation, selected proceedings from a World Bank Seminar. World Bank Operations Evaluation Department, Evaluation Capacity Development, Washington, DC, pp 7–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnsley J, Lemieux-Charles L, Baker GR (1996) Selecting clinical outcome indicators for monitoring quality of care. Healthc Manag Forum 9(1):5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Management Advisory Board (1997) Beyond bean counting: effective financial management in the APS-1998 & beyond. Public Service Merit and Protection Commission, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Buenger V, Daft RL, Conlon EJ, Austin J (1996) Competing values in organizations: contextual influences and structural consequences. Organ Sci 7(5):557–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron K (1980) Critical questions in assessing organizational effectiveness. Organ Dyn 9(2):66–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleverly WO (1985) Predicting hospital failure with the financial flexibility index. Healthc Financ Manage 39(5):29–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleverly WO, Nilsen K (1980) Assessing financial performance with 29 key ratios. Hosp Financ Manage 34(1):30–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M (2001) A basic model for evaluating R&D performance: theory and application in Italy. R&D Manag 31(4):453–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M (2004) New models for measuring the R&D performance and identifying the productivity of public research institutes. R&D Manag 34(3):267–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2004.00338.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M (2005) A scientometric model for the assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes. Scientometrics 65(3):307–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0276-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M (2006) Analysis and classification of public research institutes. World Rev Sci Technol Sustain Develop 3(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1504/WRSTSD.2006.008759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M (2008) Measuring scientific performance of public research units for strategic change. J Inform 2(3):183–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M, Benati I (2017) What is the relation between public manager compensation and government effectiveness? An explorative analysis with public management implications. Quaderni Ircres-CNR 2(2):1–36. http://doi.org/10.23760/2499-6661.2017.001

  • Coccia M, Benati I (2018a) The Relation between Public Managers’ Compensation and Governance. J Public Admin Govern 8(1):279–300. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v8i1.12469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia M, Benati I (2018b) Comparative evaluation systems. In: Farazmand A (ed) Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance. Springer International Publishing AG, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1210-1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Donabedian A (1966) Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q 44(2):166–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drury C (2008) Management and cost accounting, 7th edn. Thomson, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood AB, Shortell SM, Scott WR (1994) Organizational performance: managing for efficiency and effectiveness. In: Kaluzny AD, Shortell SM (eds) Health care management: organization design and behavior. Delmar, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison RH, Noreen EW (2000) Managerial accounting, 9th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatry HH (1999) Performance measurement. Getting results. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanji GK (2002) Measuring business excellence. Routledge, London/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanji GK (2002a) Performance measurement system. Total Qual Manag 13(5):715–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954412022000002090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter RM, Brinkerhoff D (1981) Organizational performance: recent developments in measurement. Annu Rev Sociol 7(1):321–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev 69(1):71–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazandjian VA, Lawthers J, Cernak CM, Pipesh FC (1993) Relating outcomes to processes of care: the Maryland hospital association’s quality indicator project (QI Project). Jt Comm J Qual Improv 19(11): 530–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin R, Broadbent J, Sheam D, Willgtherton H (1994) Absorbing LMS: the coping mechanism of a small group. Account Audit Account J 7(1):59–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SF, Lo KK, Leung FR, Andrew Sai OK (2002) Strategy formulation framework for vocational education: integrating SWOT analysis, balanced scorecard, QFD methodology and MBNQA education criteria. Manag Audit J 15(8):407–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leggat SG, Narine L, Lemieux-Charles L, Barnsler J, Baker GR, Sicotte C, Champagne F, Bilodeau H (1998) A review of organizational performance assessment in health care. Health Serv Manag Res 11(1):3–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luttman EJ, Siren PB, Laffel GL (1994) Assessing organizational performance. Qual Manag Health Care 2(4):44–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner JB (1980) Theories of organizational behavior. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins LJ (1999) Management and organizational behavior, 5th edn. Financial Times, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura AO, Warburton WP (1998) Performance measurement in the public sector. Can Bus Econ 6(2): 37–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Neely A, Adams C, Crowe P (2001) The performance prism in practice. Meas Bus Excell 5(2):6–13. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040110385142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely A, Adams C, Kennerley M (2002) The performance prism: the scorecard for measuring and managing business success. Prentice, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Osseo-Asare AE, Longbottom D (2002) The need for education and training in the use of the EFQM model for quality management in UK higher education institutions. Qual Assur Educ 10(1):26–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880210416085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummler GA, Brache AP (1995) Improving performance: how to manage the withe space on the organization chart. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampaio P, Saeaiva P, Monteiro A (2012) A comparison and usage overview of business excellence models. TQM J 24(2):181–200. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542731211215125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sicotte C, Champagne F, Contandriopoulos AP, Barnsley J, Béland F, Leggat SG, Denis JL, Bilodeau H, Langley A, Brémond M, Baker GR (1998) A conceptual framework for the analysis of health care organizations’ performance. Health Serv Manag Res 11(1):24–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/095148489801100106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S, Darwish TK, Potočnik K (2016) Measuring organizational performance: a case for subjective measures. Br J Manag 27(1):214–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talbot C (2010) Theories of performance, organizational and service improvement in the public domain. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tampoe M (2005) Developing reward strategies to motivate and compensate knowledge worker. In: Mullins LJ (ed) Management and organisational behaviour, 7th edn. Pearson Education, Harlow, pp 504–505

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Treasury (2001) Choosing the right FABRIC-A framework for performance information. HM Treasury, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Peursem KA, Pratt MJ, Lawrence SR (1995) Health management performance. A review of measures and indicators. Account Audit Account J 8(5):34–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman N, Ramanujan V (1986) Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Acad Manag Rev 11(4):801–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman HS, Kaluzny AD, Ricketts TC (1995) Alliances in health care: what we know, what we think we know, and what we should know. Health Care Manag Rev 20(1):54–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNR – National Research Council of Italy, Torino, Italy

    Igor Benati & Mario Coccia

  2. Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

    Mario Coccia

Authors
  1. Igor Benati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Coccia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Igor Benati .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

    Ali Farazmand

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Benati, I., Coccia, M. (2019). Comparative Performance Systems: An Assessment. In: Farazmand, A. (eds) Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3820-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3820-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31816-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31816-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation