Factors Affecting the Internal Use of Performance Information
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examines empirically what factors affect the internal use of Performance Information (PI) in South Korean public agencies. In order to do this, this paper has identified dimensions of the internal use of PI and examined the role of institutional, individual, data quality, and external factors to be correlated with the internal use of PI. Data from 333 public managers from four different South Korean public agencies participating in the survey were used to test the relationship. The results show that public officials’ use of PI for managerial and organizational decision making is affected by several factors. Particularly, individual perception about Performance Management (PM) have significant relationships with the internal use of PI (both managerial and organizational use), suggesting that the individual-level factors may results in differences in the uses of PI. However, this study highlights that different factors have affect the different use of PI. On the one hand, institutional factors (the quality of PMS and gatekeeping), group and development culture, and role of stakeholder have significant relationship with managerial use. On the other hand, data quality, rational culture, and grade is significantly and positively related to organizational use of PI. This result implies that PMS should be carefully constructed and implemented, in order to enlarge the use of PI for the internal decision making. It is needless to say that purposes of PI use should be considered.
Abstract
This paper examines empirically what factors affect the internal use of Performance Information (PI) in South Korean public agencies. In order to do this, this paper has identified dimensions of the internal use of PI and examined the role of institutional, individual, data quality, and external factors to be correlated with the internal use of PI. Data from 333 public managers from four different South Korean public agencies participating in the survey were used to test the relationship. The results show that public officials’ use of PI for managerial and organizational decision making is affected by several factors. Particularly, individual perception about Performance Management (PM) have significant relationships with the internal use of PI (both managerial and organizational use), suggesting that the individual-level factors may results in differences in the uses of PI. However, this study highlights that different factors have affect the different use of PI. On the one hand, institutional factors (the quality of PMS and gatekeeping), group and development culture, and role of stakeholder have significant relationship with managerial use. On the other hand, data quality, rational culture, and grade is significantly and positively related to organizational use of PI. This result implies that PMS should be carefully constructed and implemented, in order to enlarge the use of PI for the internal decision making. It is needless to say that purposes of PI use should be considered.
참고문헌 (44)
- Albert, S., "Organizational identity and identification: Charting new waters and building new bridges", Academy of Management Review, 25(1), pp.13~17 (2000)
- Ammons, D.N., "Factors Influencing the Use of Performance Data to Improve Municipal Services: Evidence from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project", Public Administration Review, 68(2), pp.304~318 (2008)
- Askim, J., "How Do Politicians Use Performance Information? An Analysis of the Norwegian Local Government Experience", International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(3), pp.453~472 (2007)
- Barney, Jay B., "The expressive organization", pp.36~47 (2000), Oxford University Press
- Bang, M. K., "Analysis of the Evaluation Results of the Program Review in 2006", Paper presented at the 2006 Winter KAPA Conference (2006), South Korea Association for Public Administration
- Behn, R. D., "Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures", Public Administration Review, 63(5), pp.586~606 (2003)
- Bogt, H. J., "Politicians in Search of Performance Information? Survey Research on Dutch Aldermen’s Use of Performance Information", Financial Accountability and Management, 20(3), pp.221~252 (2004)
- Boyne, G.A., "Public management and Performance: research directions", pp.207~226 (2010), Cambridge University Press
- 최형준, "공공조직 성과정보 활용에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 연구", 정부학연구, 22(1), pp.51~81 (2016), 정부학연구소
- 국경복, "관리제도의 수용성과 효과성 인식에 관한 경험적 연구: 사례를 중심으로", 정책분석평가학회보, 17(3), pp.31~53 (2007), 한국정책분석평가학회
- De Lancer Julnes, P., "Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations; An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation", Public Administrative Review, 61(6), pp.693~708 (2001)
- 하미승, "정부 성과관리시스템의 문제점 진단과 개선방향: 통합화의 시각", 한국행정연구, 13(1), pp.235~273 (2004), 한국행정연구원
- Hammerschmid G., "Internal and External Use of PI in Public Organizations: Results from and International Executive survey", Public Money and Management, 33(4) (2013)
- Hammersley, M., "Enthnography: Principles in Practice" (1995), Routledge
- Ho, Alfred, "Accounting for the Value of Performance Management from the Perspective of Midwestern Mayors", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(2), pp.217~237 (2006)
- Hur M. H., "2012 Modularization of Koreas’ Development Experience: Korea’s Government Performance Evaluation System and Operating Experience", Prime Minister’s Office and Ministry of Strategy and Finance, Republic of Korea, ~ (2013)
- Jin, Y. G., "Financial Performance Management in 2006", Evaluation Review, 2006, pp.20~37 (2006)
- Kluvers, R., "The Development and Use of Performance Indicators in Victorian Local Government", Accountability and Performance, 4(2), pp.61~77 (1998)
- Kroll, A., "Why Public Managers Use Performance: Information Concepts, Theory, and Empirical Analysis", Doct, pp.2012
- Kroll, A., "Drivers of Performance Information Use: Systematic Literature Review and Direction for Future Research", Public Performance and Management Review, 38(3), pp.459~486 (2015)
- Kroll, A., "The PSM-leadership fit: A model of Performance Information use", Public Administration, 92(4), pp.974~991 (2013)
- 이광희, "A Study of Performance Information Use and Credibility in Performance Management Systems:Focusing on the Self-Evaluation System", The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 30(2), pp.23~45 (2015), 서울대학교행정대학원
- Martin, S., "Multiple public service performance indicators: Towards an integrated statistical approach", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, pp.599~613 (2006)
- Melkers, J., "Models of Performance-Measurement Use in Local Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects", Public Administrative Review, 65(2), pp.180~190 (2005)
- Moynihan, Donald P., "What Do We Talk About When We Talk About Performance? Dialogue theory and Performance Budgeting", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(2), pp.151~168 (2006)
- Moynihan, D. P., "The Influence of Environment on Performance Information Use", Public Administration Review, 72(S1), pp.95~105 (2010)
- Moynihan, D. P., "Integrative leadership in the public sector: A model of performance information use", Administration & Society, 36, pp.427~453 (2004)
- Moynihan D. P., "The Big Question for Performance Management: Why Do Managers use Performance Information?", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(4), pp.849~866 (2010)
- Moynihan, D., "Setting the table: How transformational leadership fosters Performance Information use", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), pp.143~164 (2012)
- 오영민, "우리나라 성과주의 예산제도의 재정성과정보 활용에 대한 실증연구 - 재정성과목표관리제도 성과정보 활용의 효과성 분석을 중심으로 -", 한국정책학회보, 25(1), pp.551~576 (2016), 한국정책학회
- 박해육, "성과정보 활용의 영향요인에 관한 실증분석", 지방행정연구, 27(3), pp.353~384 (2013), 한국지방행정연구원
- Poister, T. H., "Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the Practice", Public Administrative Review, 59(4), pp.325~335 (1999)
- Pollitt, C., "Performance Management in Practice: A comparative Study of Executive Agencies", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), pp.25~44 (2006)
- Pollitt, C., "PI for Democracy: The Missing Link?", Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 12(1), pp.38~55 (2006)
- Rivenbark, W.C., "Performance Measurement: A Local Government Response", Journal of Public Budgeting Accounting & Financial Management, 12(1), pp.74~86 (2000)
- Rouse, J., "Public Management in Britain", pp.76~93 (1999), Macmillan
- Sherif, M., "The psychology of attitudes", Psychology Review, 52, pp.295~319 (1945)
- Song, J. K., "The Direction of the New Government Performance Evaluation", Evaluation Review, 2006(Summer), pp.8~19 (2006)
- Stivers, Camilla, "Governance in dark times: Practical philosophy in public service" (2008), Georgetown Univ. Press
- Sulle. A., "The Use of Performance Measurement Information in the Tanzanian Public Sector: The Case of National Housing Corporation", International Journal of Management and Organizational Studies, 3(2), pp.38~47 (2014)
- Taylor, J., "Factors influencing the use of PI for decision making in Australian State Agencies", Public Administration, 89(4), pp.1316~1334 (2011)
- Making Better Use of Information to Drive Improvement in Local Public Services, "Van de Walle, Steven", Audit Commission, Institute of Local Government Studies, University of Birmingham, ~ (2007)
- Van de Walle, S., "Oxford Handbook on Public Accountability" (2013), Oxford University Press
- Van Dooren, Wouter, "Performance management in the public sector" (2010), Rutledge