• Welcome
  • Welcome
  • Welcome from the Student Association
  • Mission Statement
• Calendar
  • Public Affairs Calendar
  • Campus Events Calendar
• For Prospective Students
  • For Prospective Students
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Admissions
  • Costs and Financial Aid
  • International Students
  • Career Statistics
  • Welcome from the Student Association
• For Students
• Degree Programs
  • Degree Programs
  • Courses
  • Master of Public Affairs
  • Master of International Public Affairs
  • Accelerated Program
  • Joint Programs
  • Focus Fields
• Faculty and Staff
  • Faculty
  • Staff
  • Faculty Affiliates
  • Directors of the
    La Follette School
• Research
  • Research
  • Publications
  • Mission Statement
• Public Service and Outreach
  • Public Service and Outreach
  • Publications
  • Mission Statement
• Career Development
  • Career Development
  • Handouts
  • Career Statistics
  • Internships, Grants and Employment
  • Alumni Jobs
  • Alumni Network
  • Job Listings
• For Alumni and Friends
  • For Alumni and Friends
  • Support the La Follette School
  • Alumni Profiles
  • Alumni Network and News to Share
  • La Follette Notes Newsletter
• News
  • News
  • La Follette Notes Newsletter
  • Archives
  • For Media
• Contact Us

Public Service: Performance Information Project

The most ubiquitous governmental reform in recent decades has been the requirement for agencies to track and strategic goals, targets, and achievements. Citizens, elected officials, and public managers have more performance information now than at any point in the past. But scholars and policymakers give relatively little attention to encouraging the use of performance information or to understanding the factors that lead to use.

Launched by professor Donald Moynihan in 2009, the Performance Information Project (PIP) aggregates contemporary empirical research on how performance data are used in public services. The primary goals of PIP are to a) facilitate an international network of scholars interested in advancing knowledge on performance information use, and b) inform practitioners who are seeking to foster data-driven management.

The list of papers here inevitably will be incomplete. If you know of any other work that you believe should be included, or any other feedback about the site, please contact Professor Moynihan. 

Published Research

Ammons, D. N. and W. C. Rivenbark. 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.

Arndt, Christiane and Charles Oman. Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators.  OECD: Paris

Askim, Jostein, Åge Johnsen, and Knut-Andreas Christophersen.  2008. Factors behind organizational learning from benchmarking: Experiences from Norwegian municipal benchmarking networks.  Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18:297-320.

Askim, Jostein. 2007. How Do Politicians Use Performance Information? An
Analysis of the Norwegian Local Government Experience. International Review of
Administrative Sciences 73 (3):453–472.

Barnow, Burt S., and Carolyn J. Heinrich. 2010.   "One Standard Fits All? The Pros and Cons of Performance Standard Adjustments." Public Administration Review 70(1): 60-71.  La Follette School Working Paper No. 2008-023.

Bernstein, D.J. (2001). Local government measurement use to focus on
performance and results. Evaluation and Program Planning, 24(1), 95-101.

Braadbaart, O. 2007. Collaborative benchmarking, transparency and performance: Evidence from the Netherlands water supply industry. Benchmarking: An International Journal 14(6): 677-692.

Behn, Robert D.  2007. What all mayors would like to know about Baltimore’s CitiStat performance strategy. Washington D.C.: IBM Center for the Business of Government. 

Bevan, Gwyn, and Christopher Hood.  2005.  What's measured is what matters: Targets and faming in the English public health care system. Public Administration 84(3): 517-38. 

Bourdeaux, Carolyn, and Grace Chikoto.  2008.  Legislative influences on performance management reform.  Public Administration Review 68:253-65. 

Boyne, G. A. 1996.  Scale, performance and the new public management: An empirical analysis of local authority services. Journal of Management Studies 33(6): 809-826.

Can, Y.C.L.  2004.  Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecards: A survey of municipal governments in the USA and Canada.  International Journal of Public Sector Management 17(3): 204-221. 

de Lancer Julnes, Patria, and Marc Holzer.  2001.  Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations: An empirical study of factors affecting adoption and implementation. Public Administration Review 61:693-708. 

Dull, Matthew.  2009.  Results-model reform leadership: Questions of credible commitment.  Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19:255-84.

Fernandez, Sergio, Yook Jik Cho, and James L. Perry.  2010.  Exploring the link between integrated leadership and public sector performance.  The Leadership Quarterly. 

Folz, David, Reem Abdelrazek and Yeonsoo Chung. 2009. Adoption and Use of
Performance Measures in Medium-Sized Cities. Public Performance and
Management Review. Vol. 33: 63-87. Prepublication version.

Frey, Kathrin. 2010.  Revising Road Safety Policy: The Role of Systematic Evidence in Switzerland.  Governance 23(4): 667-690. Pre-publication version here.

Gill, Derek (ed). 2011. The Iron Cage Recreated: The Performance Management
of State Organizations in New Zealand. Wellington, NZ: The
Institute of Policy Studies. 

Heinrich, Carolyn and Gerald Marschke. 2010.  Incentives and Their Dynamics in
Public Sector Performance Management Systems. Journal of
Policy Analysis and Management 29(1): 183–208.

Ho, Alfred Tat-Kei.  2003. Perceptions of performance measurement and the practice of performance reporting by small cities.  State and Local Government Review 35(3): 161-173.

Kelman, Steven, and Friedman, John N. 2009. Performance improvement and performance dysfunction: An empirical examination of distortionary impacts of the emergency room wait time target in the English national health service. Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory 19 (4): 917-946.

Heinrich, Carolyn J. 2007. “False or Fitting Recognition? The Use of High Performance Bonuses in Motivating Organizational Achievements.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26(2): 281-304.

Heinrich, Carolyn J. and Youseok Choi. 2007. “Performance-based Contracting in Social Welfare Programs.” The American Review of Public Administration 37(4): 409-435.

Heinrich, Carolyn J. 1999. Do Governments Make Effective Use of Performance Information? Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory 9 (3): 363-394

James, Oliver.  2010. Performance Measures and Democracy: Information Effects on Citizens in Field and Laboratory Experiments.  Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Advance Access.

Jansen, E. Pieter. 2008. New Public Management: Perspectives on Performance
and the Use of Performance Information. Financial Accountability & Management 24 (2):169-191.

Johansson, Tobias, and Sven Siverbo. 2009. Explaining the Utilization of
Relative Performance Evaluation in Local Government: A Multi-Theoretical
Study Using Data From Sweden. Financial Accountability & Management 25 (2):197-224.

Langbein, L. 2008. Management by results: Student evaluation of faculty teaching and the mis-measurement of performance. Economics of Education Review 27(4): 417-428. .

LeRoux, Kelly and Nathaniel S. Wright. Forthcoming. Does Performance Measurement Improve Strategic Decision Making? Findings From a National Survey of Nonprofit Social Service Agencies. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

Lewis, David. 2007. Testing Pendleton's premise: Do political appointees make worse bureaucrats? Journal of Politics 69 (4): 1073-88.

Lindblad, Mark Richard. 2006. Performance Measurement in Local Economic
Development Urban Affairs Review 41 (5):646-672.

Lu, Yi. 2007. Performance Budgeting: The Perspective of State Agencies Public Budgeting & Finance 27 (4):1-17.

Melkers, Julia, and Katherine Willoughby. 2005. Models of performance-measurement use in local governments. Public Administration Review 65:180-90.

Moynihan, Donald. 2012, February. "Performance Management in U.S. State Governments.” PREMNotes. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network, World Bank.

Moynihan, Donald P.; Sergio Fernandez; Soonhee Kim; Kelly M. LeRoux; Suzanne J. Piotrowski; Bradley E. Wright; Kaifeng Yang. 2011. "Performance Regimes Amidst Governance Complexity." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21: i141-i155.

Moynihan, Donald, and Lavertu, Stéphane. 2011. "Does Involvement in Performance Management Routines Encourage Performance Information Use? Evaluating GPRA and PART." La Follette School Working Paper No. 2011-017. Forthcoming in Public Administration Review.

Moynihan, Donald P., Wright, Bradley, and Sanjay Pandey.  “Setting the Table: How Transformational Leadership Fosters Performance Information Use.” Forthcoming at Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.

Moynihan, Donald P. and Pamela Herd.  2010. “Red Tape and Democracy: How Rules Affect Citizenship Rights.” American Review of Public Administration 40(6): 654-670.

Moynihan, Donald P. and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2010. "The Big Question for Performance Management: Why Do Managers Use Performance Information?" Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20(4): 849-866

Moynihan, Donald P. 2009. “The Politics Measurement Makes: Performance Management in the Obama Era.” The Forum. 7(4): article 7.

Moynihan, Donald P. and Noel Landuyt. 2009. “How do Public Organizations Learn? Bridging Structural and Cultural Divides.” Public Administration Review. 69(6): 1097-1105.

Moynihan, Donald P. 2009. “Through a Glass Darkly: Understanding the Effects of Performance Regimes.” Public Performance & Management Review 32(4): 586-598. Available through ejournals and as La Follette School Working Paper 2009-020.

Moynihan, Donald P. 2006. Managing for Results in State Government: Evaluating a Decade of Reform. Public Administration Review 66(1): 78-90.

Moynihan, Donald P. 2005. Why and How Do State Governments Adopt and Implement 'Managing for Results' Reforms? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(2): 219-243. Available through Proquest.

Moynihan, Donald P. 2005. Goal-Based Learning and the Future of Performance Management. Public Administration Review 65(2):203-216.

Moore, A., James Nolan, and Geoffrey F. Segal. 2005. Putting out the trash: Measuring municipal service efficiency in U.S. cities. Urban Affairs Review 41(2): 237-259.

Partnership for Public Service and Grant Thornton LLP. 2011. A Critical Role at a Critical Time: A Survey of Performance Improvement Officers.

Radin, Beryl. 2006. Challenging the performance movement: Accountability, complexity, and democratic values. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Rogers, Martha Kinney. 2006. Explaining Performance Measurement Utilization
and Benefits: An Examination of Performance Measurement Practices in Local
Governments. Department of Public Administration, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC.

Schulz, Martin. 2001. The uncertain relevance of newness: Organizational learning and knowledge flows. Academy of Management Journal 44:661-81.

Steinberg, Harold. 2009. State and local governments’ use of performance measures to improve service delivery. Advancing Government Accountability. Corporate Partner Advisory Group Research Series: Report No. 23.

Van Dooren, Wouter.  Forthcoming. Better Performance Management: Some Single and Double Loop Strategies. Public Performance & Management Review.

Van Dooren, Wouter, Geert Bouckaert, John Halligan. 2010. Performance Management in the Public Sector. Routledge.

Van Dooren, Wouter and Steven Van de Walle (eds). 2008. Performance Information in the Public Sector: How it is Used. Palgrave Press.

Walker, Richard M., Fariborz Damanpour, and Carlos A. Devece. 2010. Management Innovation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Effect of Performance Management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Advance Access.

Wang, Xiahou 2000. Performance Measurement in Budgeting: A Study of County
Governments. Public Budgeting and Finance 20(3): 102-118

Wichowsky, Amber and Donald P. Moynihan. 2008. “Measuring How Administration Shapes Citizenship: A Policy Feedback Perspective on Performance Management.” Public Administration Review. 68(5): 908-920.

Willis, James J., Stephen D. Mastrofski, and David Weisburd. 2007. Making sense of COMPSTAT. Law & Society Review 41:147-188.

Yang, Kaifeng, and Jun Yi Hsieh. 2006. Managerial effectiveness of government performance measurement: Testing a middle range model. Public Administration Review 67:861-79.

Zaltsman, Ariel. 2009. The Effects of Performance Information on Public
Resource Allocations: A Study of Chile's Performance-Based Budgeting System.
International Public Management Journal 12 (4):450-483.

New Research

Beerkens, Maarja. 2009. The effectiveness of management practices in the knowledge sector: Evidence from Australian universities. The Public Service: Service Delivery in the Information Age. Presented at the EGPA Conference 2009: St.Julian’s, Malta.

Kroll, Alexander.  2011. “Systematic And Unsystematic Performance
Information: How Is It Related And Why Is It Used?” Paper Prepared for the
15th Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public
Management April 11-13, 2011, Dublin, Ireland

Moynihan, Donald P., Sanjay Pandey and Bradley E. Wright.  “Prosocial Values
and Performance Management Theory: The Link between Perceived Social Impact
and Performance Information Use,” La Follette School Working Paper No. 2011-010. Forthcoming at Governance.

Taylor, Jeanette. Forthcoming. ‘Factors Influencing the Use of Performance Information for Decision Making in Australian State Agencies’, Public Administration.

Related Research

The ESRC’s Public Services Programme provides research on performance incentives, performance management, and performance metrics.

The Performance Management, Measurement and Information (PMMI) project provides cases studies of performance management in local government in the United Kingdom.

Governmental Accounting Standards Board. Service Efforts and Accomplishments Case Studies

Performance Management in California State Government

IBM Endowment for the Business of Government Performance Improvement Reports