The Evolution of Performance Evaluation Research in the Public Sector: From Traditional Models to Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approache

Authors

https://doi.org/10.22105/aaa.v2i2.69

Abstract

Since the 1980s, performance measurement and management have been considered as one of the fundamental pillars of modern public management reforms. This study aims to provide a comprehensive picture of the current state of research and identify future research opportunities in performance measurement and management in the public sector. Using two main methods namely: 1) performance analysis, and 2) scientific mapping techniques, a comprehensive bibliometric review was conducted to examine the publication trends, conceptual structure, and developments in the field. The results show that research on performance measurement and management in public organizations has grown significantly in recent years and has established strong links with the management, accounting, and economics literature. The study also analyzed the conceptual structure of the existing literature and identified areas for further development. The findings suggest that to respond more effectively to the needs of public organizations in performance evaluation, future research should pay particular attention to developing key concepts and analytical frameworks in this area. In addition to reviewing the current state of the art, this article offers suggestions for the field's future development. 

Keywords:

Performance measurement, Performance management, Performance analysis, Modern public management, Balanced scorecard

References

  1. [1] Kroll, A., & Moynihan, D. P. (2015). Does training matter? Evidence from performance management reforms. Public administration review, 75(3), 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12331
  2. [2] Neely, A., Gregory, M., & Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design: A literature review andresearch agenda. International journal of operations & production management, 15(4), 80–116. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579510083622
  3. [3] Spekle, R. F., & Verbeeten, F. H. M. (2009). The use of performance measurement systems in the public sector: Effects on performance. Management accounting research, 25(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1162242
  4. [4] Bracci, E., Maran, L., & Inglis, R. (2017). Examining the process of performance measurement system design and implementation in two Italian public service organizations. Financial accountability & management, 33(4), 406–421.https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12131
  5. [5] Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial accountability & management, 31(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12049
  6. [6] Saliterer, I., & Korac, S. (2013). Performance information use by politicians and public managers for internal control and external accountability purposes. Critical perspectives on accounting, 24(7–8), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.08.001
  7. [7] Greiling, D. (2006). Performance measurement: a remedy for increasing the efficiency of public services? International journal of productivity and performance management, 55(6), 448–465. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400610682488
  8. [8] Behn, R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public administration review, 63(5), 586–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00322
  9. [9] Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2005). Testing how management matters in an era of government by performance management. Journal of public administration research and theory, 15(3), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui016
  10. [10] Kubo, S., Shimakawa, Y., Yamano, H., & Kotake, S. (2011). Safety design requirements for safety systems and components of JSFR. Journal of nuclear science and technology, 48(4), 547–555. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/18811248.2011.9711732
  11. [11] Atkinson, H. (2006). Strategy implementation: a role for the balanced scorecard? Management decision, 44(10), 1441–1460. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740610715740
  12. [12] Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part 1. Accounting horizons, 15(1), 87–104. https://B2n.ir/ut6930
  13. [13] Shahin, A., Dolatabadi, H. R., & Kouchekian, M. (2012). Proposing an integrated model of BSC and EFQM and analyzing its influence on organizational strategies and performance the case of isfahan municipality complex. International journal of academic research in economics and management sciences, 1(3), 41. https://B2n.ir/xh3217
  14. [14] Kiarazm, A. (2014). Prioritization governmental insurance company according to BSC procedure by AHP group technique. New marketing research journal, 4(3), 25-36. (In Persian). https://B2n.ir/rf7406
  15. [15] Prouty, K. E. (2002). From Storyville to state university: The intersection of academic and non-academic learning cultures in post-secondary jazz education. University of Pittsburgh. https://B2n.ir/yf6217
  16. [16] Self, J. (2004). Metrics and management: applying the results of the balanced scorecard. Performance measurement and metrics, 5(3), 101–105. https://doi.org/10.1108/14678040410570111
  17. [17] Davis, S., & Albright, T. (2004). An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard implementation on financial performance. Management accounting research, 15(2), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2003.11.001
  18. [18] Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Strategic learning & the balanced scorecard. Strategy & leadership, 24(5), 18–24 .https://doi.org/10.1108/eb054566
  19. [19] Martín‐Castilla, J. I., & Rodríguez‐Ruiz, Ó. (2008). EFQM model: knowledge governance and competitive advantage. Journal of intellectual capital, 9(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930810845858
  20. [20] Kazazi, A. ., & Sholl, A. (2013). The effect of total quality management on innovation performance: The moderating effect of organizational learning. Improvement and transformation management studies, 22(71), 1–17. https://jmsd.atu.ac.ir/article_214.html
  21. [21] Reid, R. D., & Sanders, N. R. (2019). Operations management: an integrated approach. John Wiley & Sons. https://B2n.ir/rj8085
  22. [22] Demirbag, M., Lenny Koh, S. C., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, S. (2006). TQM and market orientation’s impact on SMEs’ performance. Industrial management & data systems, 106(8), 1206–1228. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570610710836
  23. [23] Deming, W. E. (1991). W. Edwards Deming. Madonna University. https://B2n.ir/rs1780
  24. [24] Juran, J. M. (2003). Juran on leadership for quality. Simon and Schuster. https://B2n.ir/zf5091
  25. [25] Karzabi, I. (2017). The private is political: public action and associative activism in favor of gender equality in post-Soviet countries: Ukraine and Belarus (1990-2013). https://sciencespo.hal.science/tel-03653827.
  26. [26] Ishikawa, K., & Loftus, J. H. (1990). Introduction to quality control (Vol. 98). Springer. https://B2n.ir/kr8197
  27. [27] Eccles, R. G. (1991). The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard business review, 69(1), 131–137. https://B2n.ir/eu3250
  28. [28] Weaver, G. R., Trevino, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: Management commitments, external pressures, and corporate ethics practices. Academy of management journal, 42(5), 539–552. https://doi.org/10.5465/256975
  29. [29] Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public administration review, 67(6), 1059–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00797.x
  30. [30] De Julnes, P. L., & Holzer, M. (2001). Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations: An empirical study of factors affecting adoption and implementation. Public administration review, 61(6), 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00140
  31. [31] Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (2000). An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector.’ Management accounting research, 11(3), 281–306. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.2000.0136
  32. [32] Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & society, 47(6), 711–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601
  33. [33] Moynihan, D. P. (2006). Managing for results in state government: Evaluating a decade of reform. Public administration review, 66(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00557.x
  34. [34] Poister, T. H. (2010). The future of strategic planning in the public sector: Linking strategic management and performance. Public administration review, 70, s246--s254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02284.x
  35. [35] Modell, S. (2001). Performance measurement and institutional processes: a study of managerial responses to public sector reform. Management accounting research, 12(4), 437–464. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.2001.0164
  36. [36] Jaaskelainen, A. (2010). Identifying factors affecting public service productivity. International journal of services technology and management, 14(4), 360–375. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTM.2010.035784
  37. [37] Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2010). The big question for performance management: Why do managers use performance information? Journal of public administration research and theory, 20(4), 849–866. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq004
  38. [38] Babajani, J., Barzideh, F., & Naeimi, A. (2018). Investigating the relationship between corporate governance model and its performance in Iranian banks. Journal of money and economy, 13(4), 443–469. https://B2n.ir/wu2107
  39. [39] Azar, A., & Nozari, A. K. (2015). Performance appraisal of iranian municipalities by DEA method. International journal of management, accounting & economics, 2(9). https://B2n.ir/kj5192
  40. [40] Ballantine, J., Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (1998). Performance measurement and management in public health services: a comparison of UK and Swedish practice. Management accounting research, 9(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1997.0067
  41. [41] Jaaskelainen, A., & Laihonen, H. (2014). A strategy framework for performance measurement in the public sector. Public money & management, 34(5), 355–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2014.945807
  42. [42] Jaaskelainen, A. (2013). Implementing a component approach to productivity measurement in a large public service organisation. International journal of business performance management, 14(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2013.052941
  43. [43] Jaaskelainen, A., Lonnqvist, A., & Kulmala, H. I. (2015). Designing a performance measurement system to support outsourcing decisions in a Finnish university. International journal of public sector performance management, 2(3), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPSPM.2015.067814
  44. [44] Bellamy, C., & Taylor, J. A. (1998). Governing in the information age. Open University press, Buckingham. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2025105
  45. [45] Hood, C. (2007). Public service management by numbers: Why does it vary? Where has it come from? What are the gaps and the puzzles? Public money and management, 27(2), 95–102. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2007.00564.x
  46. [46] Linhart, L., Lettl, J., & Bauer, J. (2011). Comparison of different filter types for grid connected inverter. PIERS Proceedings, Marrakesh, Morocco. https://B2n.ir/tz8896
  47. [47] Gendron, Y., Cooper, D. J., & Townley, B. (2007). The construction of auditing expertise in measuring government performance. Accounting, organizations and society, 32(1–2), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.005
  48. [48] Klenk, T., & Reiter, R. (2019). Post-new public management: reform ideas and their application in the field of social services. International review of administrative sciences.85(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852318810883
  49. [49] McAdam, R., Reid, R., & Saulters, R. (2002). Sustaining quality in the UK public sector: Quality measurement frameworks. International journal of quality & reliability management, 19(5), 581–595. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710210427548
  50. [50] Bititci, U., Garengo, P., Dörfler, V., & Nudurupati, S. (2012). Performance measurement: challenges for tomorrow. International journal of management reviews, 14(3), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00318.x
  51. [51] Büchner, V. A., Hinz, V., & Schreyögg, J. (2015). Cooperation for a competitive position: The impact of hospital cooperation behavior on organizational performance. Health care management review, 40(3), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000027
  52. [52] O’leary, R., & Vij, N. (2012). Collaborative public management: Where have we been and where are we going? The american review of public administration, 42(5), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012445780
  53. [53] Faezi, B., & Bagherzadeh, A. (2024). Investigating the impact of corporate social responsibility and information transparency on improving the financial performance of banks (study case: western branches of Mazandaran Bank of Mehr Iran). Financial and banking strategic studies, 2(3), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.22105/fbs.2024.477656.1111
  54. [54] Mateos-Ronco, A., & Hernández Mezquida, J. M. (2018). Developing a performance management model for the implementation of TQM practices in public education centres. Total quality management & business excellence, 29(5–6), 546–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1216309
  55. [55] Di Mascio, F., & Natalini, A. (2013). Context and mechanisms in administrative reform processes: Performance management within Italian local government. International public management journal, 16(1), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.796263
  56. [56] Micheli, P., & Mura, M. (2017). Executing strategy through comprehensive performance measurement systems. International journal of operations & production management, 37(4), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2015-0472
  57. [57] Dixon, M. A. (2002). The relationship between human resource management and organizational effectiveness in non-profit sport organizations: A multi-level approach. The Ohio State University. https://B2n.ir/jz9199
  58. [58] Jacobs, S. P., Parsons, M., Rouse, P., Parsons, J., & Gunderson-Reid, M. (2018). Using benchmarking to assist the improvement of service quality in home support services for older people -In touch (integrated networks towards optimising understanding of community health). National institue of health , 67, 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.12.008
  59. [59] Williamson, W., & Parolin, B. (2012). Review of web-based communications for town planning in local government. Journal of urban technology, 19(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2012.626702
  60. [60] Bowin, J. (2011). Aristotle on various types of alteration in De Anima II 5. Phronesis, 56(2), 138–161. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852811X558456
  61. [61] Bianchi, C., & Xavier, J. A. (2017). The design and execution of performance management systems at state level: A comparative analysis of Italy and Malaysia. International journal of public administration, 40(9), 744–755. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1191034
  62. [62] Birdsall, C. (2017). The synthetic control method for comparative case studies: an application estimating the effect of managerial discretion under performance management. International public management journal, 20(1), 49–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2015.1121178
  63. [63] Cardinal, L. B., Sitkin, S. B., & Long, C. P. (2004). Balancing and rebalancing in the creation and evolution of organizational control. Organization science, 15(4), 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0084
  64. [64] Moynihan, D. P., & Lavertu, S. (2012). Does involvement in performance management routines encourage performance information use? Evaluating GPRA and part. Public administration review, 72(4), 592–602. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02539.x
  65. [65] DeNisi, A., & Smith, C. E. (2014). Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-level performance: A review, a proposed model, and new directions for future research. Academy of management annals, 8(1), 127–179. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.873178
  66. [66] Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (2005). The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance (Vol. 70). Harvard Business Review Boston, MA, USA. https://B2n.ir/jk1984
  67. [67] Brown, A. D. (2004). Authoritative sensemaking in a public inquiry report. Organization studies, 25(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038182
  68. [68] Sisson, K. (1990). Introducing the human resource management journal. Human resource management journal, 1(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.1990.tb00213.x
  69. [69] Amin, M., Khairuzzaman, W. I., W., Zaleha, A. R. S., & Daverson, A. S. R. (2014). The impact of human resource management practices on performance: Evidence from a Public University. The tqm journal, 26(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2011-0062
  70. [70] Brewer, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2013). Personnel constraints in public organizations: The impact of reward and punishment on organizational performance. Public administration review, 73(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02681.x
  71. [71] Daley, D. M., & Vasu, M. L. (2005). Supervisory perceptions of the impact of public sector personnel practices on the achievement of multiple goals: Putting the strategic into human resource management. The american review of public administration, 35(2), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074004272846
  72. [72] Nielsen, P. A., & Jacobsen, C. B. (2018). Zone of acceptance under performance measurement: Does performance information affect employee acceptance of management authority? Public administration review, 78(5), 684–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12947
  73. [73] Smith, M., & Bititci, U. S. (2017). Interplay between performance measurement and management, employee engagement and performance. International journal of operations & production management, 37(9), 1207–1228. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-06-2015-0313
  74. [74] Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. The american review of public administration, 38(2), 130–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074008314203

Downloads

Published

2025-06-28

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Accounting and Auditing with Applications

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Accounting and Auditing with Applications

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Safarzadeh, M. H. ., Houshmand Kashani, S. A. ., & Gholami Fatideh, A. . (2025). The Evolution of Performance Evaluation Research in the Public Sector: From Traditional Models to Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approache. Accounting and Auditing With Applications , 2(2), 136-156. https://doi.org/10.22105/aaa.v2i2.69

Similar Articles

1-10 of 31

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.