The widespread use of performance measurement and program evaluation in public administrations worldwide has been met with varying degrees of success, in terms of increased transparency and effectiveness. In many cases, the lack of impact of these functions is attributed to insufficient organizational knowledge and capacity to implement proper monitoring and evaluation systems. Both of these management tools are recognized in their own right as having the potential to contribute to ongoing decision-making and budgetary allocations within public organizations; however, they have complementary roles in terms of producing ongoing versus periodic information, and focusing on outputs and early outcomes versus longer-term program objectives. This paper attempts to bridge these two functions by proposing that performance measurement can act as a precursor to the development of organizational evaluation capacity, by providing some of the building blocks required to develop an evaluative culture within an organization. Five models of organizational evaluation capacity were analyzed to identify the extent to which performance measurement contributes to evaluation capacity building.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmoC., & CousinsJ. B. (2007). Going through the process: An examination of the operationalization of process use in empirical research on evaluation.New Directions for Evaluation, 116, pp. 5–26.
2.
AucoinP. (2012). New political governance in Westminster systems: Impartial public administration and management performance at risk.Governance, 25(2), pp. 177–199. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01569.x
3.
BorisE. T., & Kopczynski WinklerM. (2013). The emergence of performance measurement as a complement to evaluation among US foundations.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 69–80
4.
BourgeoisI., & CousinsJ.B. (2013). Understanding dimensions of organizational evaluation capacity.American Journal of Evaluation, 34(3), pp. 299–319.
5.
BourgeoisI., HartR.E., TownsendS.H., & GagnéM. (2011). Using Hybrid Models to Support the Development of Organizational Evaluation Capacity: A Case Narrative.Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(3), pp. 228–235.
6.
BoyleR., LemaireD., & RistR.C. (1999). Introduction: Building evaluation capacity. In BoyleR., & LemaireD. (Eds.), Building effective evaluation capacity: Lessons from practice (pp. 1–19). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
7.
CoplinW. D., MergetA. E., & BourdeauxC. (2002). The professional researcher as change agent in the government-performance movement.Public Administration Review, 62(6), pp. 699–711. doi: 10.1111/1540-6210.00252
8.
CousinsJ.B., & BourgeoisI. (2014). Organizational capacity to do and use evaluation.New Directions for Evaluation, 141.
9.
CousinsJ. B., GohS.C., ClarkS., & LeeL.E. (2004). Integrating evaluative inquiry into the organizational culture: A review and synthesis of the knowledge base.Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 19, pp. 99–141.
10.
De Lancer JulnesP. (2013). Citizen-driven performance measurement : Opportunities for evaluator collaboration in support of the new governance.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 81–92.
11.
Diaz-PuenteJ. M., YaguëJ. L., & AfonsoA. (2008). Building evaluation capacity in Spain: A case study of rural development and empowerment in the European Union.Evaluation Review, 32(5), pp. 478–506.
12.
HaeffeleL., HoodL., & FeldmanB. (2011). Evaluation capacity building in a school—university partnership grant program.Planning and Changing, 42(1/2), pp. 87–100
13.
HatryH. P. (2010). Looking into the crystal ball: Performance management over the next decade.Public Administration Review, 70, s208–s211. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02274.x
14.
HatryH. P. (2013). Sorting the relationships among performance measurement, program evaluation, and performance management.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 19–32.
15.
HoodC. (1991). A public management for all seasons?Public Administration, 69(1), pp. 3–19.
16.
HunterD. E. K., & NielsenS. B. (2013). Performance management and evaluation: Exploring complementarities.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 7–17.
17.
JohnsenA. (2013). Performance management and evaluation in Norwegian local government: Complementary or competing tools of management?New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 93–101.
18.
JorjaniH. (1998). Demystifying results-based performance measurement.Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 13, pp. 61–95.
19.
LabinS. N., DuffyJ. L., MeyersD. C., WandersmanA., & LesesneC. A. (2012). A research synthesis of the evaluation capacity building literature.American Journal of Evaluation, 33(3), pp. 307–338.
20.
LabinS. N. (2014). Developing common measures in evaluation capacity building: An iterative science and practice process.American Journal of Evaluation, 35(1), pp. 107–115. doi: 10.1177/1098214013499965
21.
LaheyR., & NielsenS.B. (2013). Rethinking the relationship among monitoring, evaluation, and results-based management: Observations from Canada.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 45–56
22.
LawrenzF., ThomasK., HuffmanD., & ClarksonL. (2008). Evaluation capacity building in the schools: Administratorled and teacher-led perspectives.Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(3), pp. 61–82.
23.
MayneJ. (2007). Challenges and lessons in implementing results-based management.Evaluation, 13(1), pp. 87–109.
24.
MelkersJ., & WilloughbyK. (2005). Models of performance-measurement use in local governments : Understanding budgeting, communication, and lasting effects.Public Administration Review, 65(2), pp. 180–190.
25.
MoynihanD. P. (2005). Goal-based learning and the future of performance management.Public Administration Review, 65(2), 203–216. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00445.x
26.
NielsenS. B., & EjlerN. (2008). Improving performance? Exploring the complementarities between evaluation and performance management.Evaluation, 14(2), pp. 171–192.
27.
NielsenS. B., & HunterD. E. K. (2013). Challenges to and forms of complementarity between performance management and evaluation.New Directions for Evaluation, 137, pp. 115–123
28.
NielsenS. B., LemireS., & SkovM. (2011). Measuring evaluation capacity—results and implications of a Danish study.American Journal of Evaluation, 32(3), pp. 324–344.
29.
PreskillH., & BoyleS. (2008). A multidisciplinary model of evaluation capacity building.American Journal of Evaluation, 29(4), pp. 443–459.
30.
RistR. C. (2006). The ‘E’ in monitoring and evaluation — Using evaluative knowledge to support a results-based management system. In RistR. C., & StameN., From studies to streams. Managing evaluative systems (pp. 3–22). London: Transaction Publishers
31.
SandersJ. R. (2003). Mainstreaming evaluation.New Directions for Evaluation, 99, pp. 3–6.
32.
StockdillS. H., BaizermanM., & ComptonD. (2002). Toward a definition of the ECB process: A conversation with the ECB literature.New Directions for Evaluation, 93, pp. 7–25.
33.
Suarez-BalcazarY., Taylor-RitzlerT. (2010). Evaluation capacity building: A cultural and contextual framework. In BalcazarF., Suarez-BalcazarY., Taylor-RitzlerT., KeysC. (Eds.) Race, culture and disability: Rehabilitation science and practice (Chapter 15). Jones & Bartlett Publishers, Inc.
34.
Taylor-RitzlerT., Suarez-BalcazarY., Garcia-IriarteE., HenryD. B., & BalcazarF. E. (2013). Understanding and measuring evaluation capacity: A model and instrument validation study.American Journal of Evaluation, 34(2), pp. 190–206.
35.
YangK., & HolzerM. (2006). The performance-trust link: Implications for performance measurement.Public Administration Review, 66(1), pp. 114–126.
