Distinctive research patterns on public sector performance measurement of public administration and accounting disciplines

Abstract

This article explores distinctive research patterns of public administration and accounting disciplines concerning public sector performance measurement (PSPM). Our review shows that accounting researchers from Europe investigate reasons for limited PM use and factors explaining a rational or symbolic PM use, inspired by organization theory and institutional theory and conducting case/field studies. Public administration researchers from Europe and the USA prefer to study PM design and PM impact respectively, mainly using surveys in combination with various theories, like political theory. Public administration research from the USA examines the types of performance indicators in PM systems and contingent factors for PM design. Public administration research from Europe shows an interest in evaluating public sector reforms like Best Value and explaining learning processes for improvement. We argue that PSPM research could benefit from interdisciplinary efforts and intensified mutual communication between public administration and accounting.

Key words:

• Accounting
• performance measurement
• public administration
• research patterns

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the constructive comments received when earlier versions of this article were presented at the Second Transatlantic Dialogue: A Performing Public Sector, Leuven, 1–3 June 2006, and at the Fourth EIASM International Conference on Accounting, Auditing and Management in Public Sector Reforms, Siena, 7–9 September 2006. The authors are indebted to Bob Scapens and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this article.

Notes

The list of articles in the review is available on request from the corresponding author.

Classification results of all articles in the review are available on request from the corresponding author.