Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance measurement, cognitive dissonance and coping strategies: exploring individual responses to NPM-inspired output control

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Management Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The potential of increasing effectiveness and efficiency via performance measurement practices seems clear for scholars and practitioners alike. At the same time, it is often argued that quantitative performance measures fail to do justice to the complex environment of public sector organizations. This paper takes a first step toward incorporating and operationalizing cognitive dissonance theory to make sense of the different beliefs that public workers hold regarding performance measurement practices that are inspired by the New Public Management movement. We analyze a dataset of 34 interviews with employees working in policy departments, and we identify various indications of cognitive dissonance regarding the use of performance measurement at the individual level. Furthermore, we find that employees aim to reduce this dissonance by changing their behavior and by avoiding tasks that do not yield quantifiable results. This paper contributes to the management control literature by exploring how individuals with complex tasks respond to performance measurement practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlof, G. A., & Dickens, W. T. (1982). The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance. American Economic Review, 72(3), 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, S. B., & Sonnenstuhl, W. J. (1996). The organizational transformation process: The micropolitics of dissonance reduction and the alignment of logics of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 477–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnberg, J. G., Luft, J., & Shields, M. D. (2007). Psychology theory in management accounting research. In C. S. Chapman, A. G. Hopwood, & M. D. Shields (Eds.), Handbook of management accounting research (pp. 113–135). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnes, B., & James, H. (1995). Culture, cognitive dissonance and the management of change. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(8), 14–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronqvist, A., Theorell, T., Burns, T., & Lützen, K. (2001). Dissonant imperatives in nursing: A conceptualization of stress in intensive care in Sweden. Intensive & Critical Care Nursing, 17(4), 228–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach, T. (2009). New public management in public sector organizations: The dark sides of managerialistic enlightenment. Public Administration, 87(4), 892–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston: Row, Peterson & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foran, M. F., & DeCoster, D. T. (1974). An experimental study of the effects of participation, authoritarianism, and feedback on cognitive dissonance in a standard setting situation. The Accounting Review, 49(4), 751–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco-Santos, M., Kennerley, M., Micheli, P., Martinez, V., Mason, S., Marr, B., et al. (2007). Towards a definition of a business performance measurement system. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(8), 784–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco-Santos, M., Lucianetti, L., & Bourne, M. (2012). Contemporary performance measurement systems: A review of their consequences and a framework for research. Management Accounting Research, 23(2), 79–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of new public management. International Public Management Journal, 4(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halachmi, A. (2005). Performance measurement: Test the water before you dive in. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(2), 255–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2016). Realising the richness of psychology theory in contingency-based management accounting research. Management Accounting Research, 31, 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon-Jones, E., & Harmon-Jones, C. (2002). Testing the action-based model of cognitive dissonance: The effect of action orientation on postdecisional attitudes. Personality and Social, Psychological Bulletin, 28(6), 711–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henri, J. F. (2006). Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(6), 529–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoggett, P. (1996). New modes of control in the public service. Public Administration, 74(1), 9–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3), 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, C. (1994). Reflecting on attempts to develop a financial management information system for the probation service in England and Wales: Some observations on the relationship between the claims of accounting and its practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19(2), 147–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jermias, J. (2001). Cognitive dissonance and resistance to change: The influence of commitment confirmation and feedback on judgment usefulness of accounting systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(2), 141–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen, Å., & Lapsley, I. (2005). Reinventing public sector accounting. Financial Accountability & Management, 21(3), 259–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapsley, I. (2008). The NPM Agenda: Back to the future. Financial Accountability & Management, 24(1), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapsley, I. (2009). New public management: The cruellest invention of the human spirit? Abacus, 45(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menasco, M. B., & Hawkins, D. I. (1978). A field test of the relationship between cognitive dissonance and state anxiety. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(4), 650–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, K. A., & van der Stede, W. A. (2007). Management control systems (2nd ed.). Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R. E., Egger-Peitler, I., Höllerer, M. A., & Hammerschmid, G. (2014). Of bureaucrats and passionate public managers: Institutional logics, executive identities, and public service motivation. Public Administration, 92(4), 861–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. California: Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modell, S. (2001). Performance measurement and institutional processes: A study of managerial responses to public sector reform. Management Accounting Research, 12(4), 437–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan, D. P., & Lavertu, S. (2012). Cognitive biases in governing: Technology preferences in election administration. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 68–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, V. L. (2006). Are street-level bureaucrats compelled or enticed to cope? Public Administration, 84(4), 861–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, R. (2002). Managing through measurement or meaning? Lessons from experience with New Zealand’s public sector performance management systems. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 68(4), 619–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2014). Realizing the potential of interdisciplinarity in accounting research. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 27(8), 1227–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25(9), 833–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, S. (2005). What’s new about the new public management? Administrative change in the human services. Public Administration Review, 65(6), 713–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (1995). Justification by works or by faith? Evaluating the New Public Management. Evaluation, 1(2), 133–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform—A comparative analysis (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ron, P. (2007). Elderly people’s attitudes and perceptions of aging and old age: The role of cognitive dissonance? International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 22, 656–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shultz, T. R., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint satisfaction. Psychological Review, 103(2), 219–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. (1995). Control in an age of empowerment. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 80–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloane, P. J., & Williams, H. (1996). Are “overpaid” workers really unhappy? A test of the theory of cognitive dissonance. Labour, 10(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speklé, R. F., & Verbeeten, F. H. M. (2014). The use of performance measurement systems in the public sector: Effects on performance. Management Accounting Research, 25(2), 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J. (2006). Value conflict and policy change. Review of Policy Research, 23(1), 183–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, E., & Zecher, C. (2013). Management control systems: A review. Journal of Management Control, 23(4), 233–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stritch, J. M., & Christensen, R. K. (2014). Looking at a job’s social impact through PSM-tinted lenses: Probing the motivation-perception relationship. Public Administration, 92(4), 826–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teelken, C. (2008). The intricate implementation of performance measurement systems: Exploring developments in professional-service organizations in the Dutch non-profit sector. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74(4), 615–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ter Bogt, H. J. (2008). Management accounting change and new public management in local government: A reassessment of ambitions and results—An institutionalist approach to accounting change in the Dutch public sector. Financial Accountability and Management, 24(3), 209–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ter Bogt, H. J., van Helden, G. J., & van der Kolk, B. (2015). Challenging the NPM ideas about performance management—Selectivity and differentiation in outcome-oriented performance budgeting. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(3), 287–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiller, M. G. (1983). The dissonance model of participative budgeting: An empirical exploration. Journal of Accounting Research, 21(2), 581–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Kolk, B. (2016) Management control packages in public sector organizations. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Groningen, Groningen.

  • van der Kolk, B., & Schokker, T. (2016). Strategy implementation through hierarchical couplings in a management control package: An explorative case study. Journal of Management Control, 27(2), 129–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Kolk, B., ter Bogt, H. J., & van Veen-Dirks, P. M. G. (2015). Constraining and facilitating management control in times of austerity: Case studies in four municipal departments. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 28(6), 934–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, P. A., & Kirk, A. (2007). Being somebody else: Emotional labour and emotional dissonance in the context of the service experience at a heritage tourism site. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 14(2), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tiel, S., & Leeuw, F. L. (2002). The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review, 25(3), 267–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Veen-Dirks, P. M. G. (2010). Different uses of performance measures: The evaluation versus reward of production managers. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(2), 141–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Catherine Needham, Tiina Tuominen, Thomas Werner Günther and the two anonymous reviewers for constructive feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript. The paper was presented at the 9th conference on Performance Measurement and Management Control in Nice (2017) and at a Public Administration seminar at the University of Leiden (2016). We would like to thank the participants of these events for their useful feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IE Business School, IE University, Calle Pedro de Valdivia 21, 28006, Madrid, Spain

    Berend van der Kolk

  2. Tilburg Law School, Tilburg Institute of Governance, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Wesley Kaufmann

Authors
  1. Berend van der Kolk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wesley Kaufmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Berend van der Kolk.

Appendices

Appendix A: Interview information

Interviewee

Function title

Date

Department A

Supervisor A1

Team leader

18-11-2013

Supervisor A2

Team leader

28-12-2013

Supervisor A3

Department head

6-12-2013

Supervisor A4

Municipal director

12-2-2014

Policy Advisor A5

Policy advisor

11-11-2013

Policy Advisor A6

Senior policy advisor

14-11-2013

Policy Advisor A7

Policy advisor

11-12-2013

Policy Advisor A8

Program leader

13-12-2013

Policy Advisor A9

Policy advisor

30-12-2013

Policy Advisor A10

Program leader

4-2-2014

Policy Advisor A11

Policy advisor

5-3-2014

Department B

Supervisor B12

Assistant manager

13-5-2014

Supervisor B13

Team leader

9-5-2014

Supervisor B14

Department head

25-4-2014

Supervisor B15

HRM advisor

13-5-2014

Supervisor B16

Team leader

22-4-2014

Supervisor B17

Team leader

19-4-2014

Supervisor B18

Municipal director

20-5-2014

Policy Advisor B19

Policy advisor

9-4-2014

Policy Advisor B20

Policy advisor

10-4-2014

Policy Advisor B21

Policy advisor

9-4-2014

Policy Advisor B22

Policy advisor

14-4-2014

Policy Advisor B23

Policy advisor

9-4-2014

Policy Advisor B24

Policy advisor

15-4-2014

Department C

Supervisor C25

Municipal director

3-10-2013

Supervisor C26

Financial controller

9-10-2013

Supervisor C27

HRM advisor

9-10-2013

Supervisor C28

Department head

16-10-2013

Supervisor C29

HRM advisor

31-10-2013

Policy Advisor C30

Policy advisor

26-9-2013

Policy Advisor C31

Policy advisor

26-9-2013

Policy Advisor C32

Senior policy advisor

1-10-2013

Policy Advisor C33

Policy advisor

3-10-2013

Policy Advisor C34

Senior policy advisor

9-10-2013

Appendix B: Main codes used

Code

Description

Counta

BELIEF_A_PF_USABLE

Indication that interviewee appreciates performance measurement practices and/or acknowledges it can be used for controlling policy advisors

49 (34)

BELIEF_B_PF_UNUSABLE

Indication that interviewee finds performance measurement practices problematical and/or acknowledges it should not be used for controlling policy advisors

39 (27)

COPING_CHANGING

Indication that results are being measured, even though it is acknowledged that these results are distorted and tell a flawed story about ‘performance’

56 (20)

COPING_AVOIDING

Indication that more attention was being paid to ‘measurable’ results than to other (important) aspects of the job

3 (2)

  1. aNumber of quotations of this code. In brackets we reported the number of unique interviews in which the code was identified

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van der Kolk, B., Kaufmann, W. Performance measurement, cognitive dissonance and coping strategies: exploring individual responses to NPM-inspired output control. J Manag Control 29, 93–113 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-018-0265-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-018-0265-1

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation