Responsive Evaluation and Performance Management

Abstract

Worldwide, governments are under increasing pressure to deliver results. There is general recognition of the importance of performance measurement and a results-oriented focus for effective public management. The shift from inputs to outputs and outcomes is accompanied by an increased use of performance indicators and policy targets. Critics point to the negative effects of static forms of performance-measuring and governance: simplification, resistance to change and a strategic use of indicators. They stress the need for an approach to governance that respects and is responsive to diversity and dynamism. Such an approach to public policy should recognize the importance of stakeholders’ opinions and motives and, hence, dialogue. Herein, policy evaluation can help by systematically questioning the validity of policy goals and performance indicators. Based upon recent experiences with results-oriented budgeting in the Netherlands, this article outlines a possible approach to a responsive, ‘verifying’ policy evaluation. Against the background of the traditional functions of evaluation in results-oriented management (assessing efficiency and effectiveness), the paradoxical nature of performance indicators is considered: on the one hand they are ‘frozen ambitions’, yet on the other they must facilitate dialogue and learning. Building on these attributes, a dynamic perspective on evaluation is put forward. In this, using information and insights from stakeholders, policy evaluation should explicitly question the validity of the policy objectives and performance indicators without compromising their value and significance altogether. In this way, the evaluator may fulfil the ambition of the ‘argumentative turn’ in policy evaluation: to help to raise the quality of dialogue and decision-making between stakeholders.