The North Carolina Benchmarking Project has been in existence for approximately 20 years, functioning under the benchmarking category of comparison of performance statistics as benchmarks. This form of benchmarking, however, is diagnostic, requiring subsequent analytical steps before local officials can actually use comparative data for improving service delivery. This article presents lessons learned from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project to advance our understanding of why local governments participate in these types of benchmarking initiatives and how they review and make decisions regarding the comparative data. They include that local governments participate more for the purpose of greater internal accountability rather than performance management and that local governments use benchmarking data both for excellence and satisficing when responding to departmental rankings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmmonsD. N. (1999). A Proper Mentality for Benchmarking. Public Administration Review. 59(2): 105–109.
2.
AmmonsD. N. (2000). Benchmarking as a Performance Management Tool: Experiences among Municipalities in North Carolina. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. 12(1): 106–124.
3.
AmmonsD. N., CoeC., & LombardoM. (2001). Performance-Comparison Projects in Local Government: Participants' Perspectives. Public Administration Review. 61(1): 100–110.
4.
AmmonsD. N. & RivenbarkW. C. (2008). Factors Influencing the Use of Performance Data to Improve Municipal Services: Evidence from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project. Public Administration Review, 68(2): 304–318.
5.
AmmonsD. N. & RoenigkD. J. (2015). Benchmarking and Interorganizational Learning in Local Government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25 (1): 309–335.
6.
BovairdT. & LofflerE. (2002). Moving from Excellence Models of Local Service Delivery to Benchmarking “Good Local Governance.” International Review of Administrative Sciences. 68(1): 9–24.
7.
ClowF. R. (1896). Suggestions for the Study of Municipal Finance. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 10: 455–466.
8.
CoeC. (1999). Local Government Benchmarking: Lessons from Two Major Multigovernment Efforts. Public Administration Review, 59 (2): 110–115.
9.
DavisP. (1998). The Burgeoning of Benchmarking in British Local Government. Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, 5 (4): 260–270.
10.
FewP.K. & VogtA. J. (1997). Performance and Cost Data: Phase I City Services. Chapel Hill, NC: Institute of Government.
11.
FolzD. H. (2004). Service Quality and Benchmarking the Performance of Municipal Services. Public Administration Review, 64 (2): 209–220.
12.
HoogenboezemJ. (2004). Local Government Performance Indicators in Europe: An Exploration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 70 (1): 51–64.
13.
KellyJ. M. & RivenbarkW. C. (2011). Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
14.
KuhlmannS. (2010). Performance Measurement in European Local Governments: A Comparative Analysis of Reform Experiences in Great Britain, France, Sweden, and Germany. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76 (2): 331–345.
15.
KuhlmannS. & JakelT. (2013). Competing, Collaborating or Controlling? Comparing Benchmarking in European Local Government. Public Money & Management, 33 (4): 269–276.
16.
MarchJ. G. & SimonH. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley Sons.
17.
MoynihanD. P. (2008). The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
18.
OsborneD. & GaeblerT. (1992). Reinventing Government. New York: Penguin Group.
19.
RivenbarkW. C. & CarterK. L. (2000). Benchmarking and Cost Accounting: The North Carolina Approach. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. 12(1): 125–137.
20.
RivenbarkW.C. (2001). The Guide to the North Carolina Local Government Performance Measurement Project. Chapel Hill, NC: Institute of Government.
21.
RoenigkD.J. (2015). Final Report on City Services for Fiscal Year 2013–2014. Chapel Hill, NC: School of Government.
22.
Rondo-BrovettoP. & SalitererI. (2007). Comparing Regions, Cities, and Communities: Local Government Benchmarking as an Instrument for Improving Performance and Competitiveness. The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 12 (3): 1–18.
23.
SangerM. B. (2013). Does Measuring Performance lead to Better Performance?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 32(1): 185–203.
24.
WalkerR. M. & AndrewsR. (2015). Local Government management and Performance: A Review of the Evidence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 25(1): 101–133.
25.
YasinM. M. (2002). The Theory and Practice of Benchmarking: Then and Now. Benchmarking: An International Journal. 9(3): 217–243.
