Managing for Results in Six States

Abstract

This article examines managing for results (MFR) activities in the six states considered front runners in internal reinvention efforts according to a December 1994 report (GAO/GGD-95-22). Many of these states are now enjoying greater use of the performance information produced by the systems they developed. The article also considers linking systems and aligning activities, particularly in linking information systems, management controls, and governance procedures. Review of the states that have not succeeded in their MFR efforts makes evident that the lack of a champion in the executive or legislative branch who supports and promotes the MFR effort may drastically affect its progress; benchmark systems are especially vulnerable, as seen in Florida and Oregon. Legislation does not ensure success or sustainability. Despite the existence of legal mandates compelling performance management efforts, the lack of official championing of MFR implementation has resulted in setbacks.

Keywords:

• managing for results
• performance management
• state government