Advertisement

An Overview of the Trends in the Evaluation System for the Public Management Performance

  • Bucur Iulian Dediu
  • Liliana Mihaela Moga
  • Stefania Cristina Mirica
Conference paper
Part of the Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics book series (EBES, volume 11/1)

Abstract

The evaluation of the public management performance is the support for the public administration strategies and reforms. The paper reviews the trends in the management of the public administration which conduct to the New Public Management acceptation and implementation and explores the implication on the structure of the evaluation systems used to measure the performance of the public services. The research is focused on the theoretical and practical aspects and reviews the literature and the case studies in order to argue the necessity, the incentive factors and the general structure of an updated system of indicators for the public management performance who reflects the point of view of all the stakeholders as beneficiary of the public services and the influence of the new public management. The main influence factors that reshape the evaluation system are the change in the role of government in society and in the relationship between government and citizens, and the increasing importance given to the beneficiaries.

Keywords

New public management Characteristics Performance Incentive factors Necessity Evaluation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was partially financed by the Programme P1—The Development of the National System of Research and Development of the National Plan for Research, Development and Innovation (PN III), funded by the Ministry of Research and Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (MESR—UEFISCDI), Contract no. 286/8.12.2017.

References

  1. Boston, J., Martin, J., Pallot, J., & Walsh, P. (1996). Public management: The New Zealand model. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2002). Moving from excellence models of local service delivery to benchmarking of good local governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67(I), 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cuganesan, S., Jacobs, K., & Lacey, D. (2014). Beyond new public management: Does performance measurement drive public value in networks? In J. Guthrie, G. Marcon, S. Russo, & F. Farneti (Eds.), Public value management, measurement and reporting (Studies in public and non-profit governance) (pp. 21–42). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dahler-Larsen, P. (2000). Surviving the routinization of evaluation: The administrative use of evaluations in Danish municipalities. Administration & Society, 32(1), 70–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dahler-Larsen, P. (2007). Evaluation and public management. In E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn Jr., & C. Pollitt (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 615–639). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dediu, B. I., Moga, L. M., & Neculita, M. (2017). Quality in the public administration management. Quality Access to Success, 18(159), 105–111.Google Scholar
  7. Department for International Development. (2013). Summary report of public sector governance evaluation; a study commissioned. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/199777/Public-sector-gov-reform-eval-summary.pdf
  8. General Secretariat of the Government Order 400/2015 for the approval of the Code of Internal/Managerial Control of Public Entities of 22 June 2015. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www.ub.ro/files/scim/Ordin_400_2015.pdf
  9. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hughes, O. E. (2003). Public management and administration. An introduction (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Khademian, A. M. (1998). What do we want public managers to be? Comparing reforms. Public Administration Review, 58, 269–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lo Schiavo, L. (2000). Quality standards in the public sector: Differences between Italy and the UK in the citizen’s charter initiative. Public Administration, 78(3), 679–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MITEAPL. (2008). Elaborarea unui model inteligent şi transparent pentru administraţia public locală în relaţia cu cetăţenii (Romanian) [Developing a smart and transparent model for local public administration in relation to citizens] [pdf]. Bucharest. Retrieved February 20, 2018, from http://www.miteapl.ro/r1/studiu-9.pdf
  14. Nuti, S., Seghieri, C., & Vainieri, M. J. (2013). Assessing the effectiveness of a performance evaluation system in the public health care sector: Some novel evidence from the Tuscany region experience. Journal of Management & Governance, 17(1), 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Plumb, I., & Androniceanu, A. (2003). Modern elements in public management. In O. Nicolescu, I. Plumb, M. Pricop, I. Vasilescu, & I. Verboncu (Eds.), Modern approaches in the organization management and economics. Bucharest: Economica.Google Scholar
  16. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Voghouei, H., & Jamali, M. A. (2018). Determinants of government efficiency: Does information technology play a role? Eurasian Business Review, 8(3), 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wollmann, H. (2003). Evaluation in public sector reform: Towards a ‘third wave’ of evaluation? In H. Wollmann (Ed.), Evaluation in public-sector reform (pp. 1–11). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Wu, M. L. (2014). Cross-border comparative studies of service quality and consumer satisfaction: Some empirical results. Eurasian Business Review, 4(1), 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bucur Iulian Dediu
    • 1
  • Liliana Mihaela Moga
    • 2
  • Stefania Cristina Mirica
    • 3
  1. 1.The School for Doctoral Studies in the Socio-Humanities, Dunarea de Jos University of GalatiGalatiRomania
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsDunarea de Jos University of GalatiGalatiRomania
  3. 3.Department of Juridical SciencesThe School for Doctoral Studies in the Socio-Humanities, Dunarea de Jos University of GalatiGalatiRomania

Personalised recommendations