There’s a lid for every pot! The relationship between performance measurement and administrative activities in Italian ministries

Figures & data

Table 1. Interventions to favour performance measurement in Italian public administrations

	Provisions of Legislative Decree 150/2009	Elements added in 2017
Rational/Technocratic point of view
Staff with measurement skills and information on performance measurement	The Independent Assessment Body (in Italian OIV) is required to have a high level of professionalism Creation of a national agency to accompany the reform	OIV members only enrolled from the national register (selective criteria for enrolment and obligation of continuous training) Reconfiguration of the national agency to accompany the reform
Goal orientation	The entire process of performance measurement is aimed at verifying the objectives	Strengthened ability of the National Agency to set out guidelines for the performance cycle
External requirements	When documents of the performance cycle are absent performance bonuses and staff hiring are prohibited to the defaulting administrations	The mandatory nature of the performance cycle is reaffirmed and strengthened
Political/Cultural point of view
Internal interest groups	Attempt to implement incentives to involve the staff Approval of key documents by elected bodies
External interest groups and unions		Participation of trade unions in the definition of the criteria for the differentiation of evaluations (art. 19) and participation of citizens in the measurement of performance (art. 19-bis)
Risk taking and attitudes	Introducing a top-down change in the way public administration works by steering it towards results	–

Table 2. Objectives and indicators in the performance plan

Ministry	No. indicators	No. indicators
Foreign Affairs	98	From 14 to 111
Cultural Heritage	188	From 212 to 299
Labour and Social Policy	77	From 300 to 376
Environment	96	From 377 to 472
Economy and Finance	225	From 473 to 794
Interior	102	From 9 to 13 and from 478 to 785
Education, Universities and Research	156	From 795 to 950
Defence	48	From 951 to 998
Justice	71	From 1 to 8 and from 999 to 1061
Health	52	From 1062 to 1113
Infrastructure and Transport	152	From 1114 to 1265
Agricultural Policies	41	From 1266 to 1306
Economic Development	205	From 1307 to 1511
Total	1,511

Table 3. Analysis phases and classification of objectives/indicators

Phase	Description	Primary references
1	Classification of objectives/indicators into Output control focuses on the results of the administrative action, not on the process and the behaviours that necessary to achieve them Process control not focus on the output but on the performance of administrative activities by verifying the compliance with rules, procedures and obligations	Weber (1978); Ouchi (1979); Eisenhardt (1985); Frey et al. (2013)
2	Classification of objectives/indicators into • Relevant output indicator: 1. Reference to an activity representing the administrative action carried out, providing a relevant representation of the output achieved 2. Good performance measurability• Not relevant output indicator1. Reference to a marginal activity, providing a not relevant representation of the output achieved2. Low-performance measurability	Smith (1995); Mari (2003); Caglio and Dittilo (2008); Frey et al. (2013); Chevauchez (2014); Speklé et al. (2014); Ditillo et al. (2015); Rebora, G., R. Ruffini and M. Turri (2017)
3	Classification of objectives/indicators into• highly ambiguous activities:1. Not routine activity (weak degree of standardisation and low repetitiveness of the processes)2. Two-side interactions between producers and consumers, where customers and citizens are co-producers and actively influence the service and the nature of the routine production process• Low ambiguous activities:1. Routine activity (strong degree of standardisation and high repetitiveness of the processes)2. Produce a predefined output through a one-side interaction between producers and consumers by introducing a routine production process	Ouchi (1979); Abma and Noordegraaf (2003); Speklé et al. (2014)

Table 4. Process and output indicators and ministries

Ministry	Output indicators	Process indicators
Foreign Affairs	20	78
Cultural Heritage	20	168
Labour and Social Policy	21	56
Environment	29	67
Economy and Finance	12	213
Interior	18	84
Education, Universities and Research	29	127
Defence	16	32
Justice	21	50
Health	18	34
Infrastructure and Transport	106	46
Agricultural Policies	17	24
Economic Development	49	156
Total	376	1,135

Table 5. Output indicators including ministry and distinction between relevant and not relevant indicators

Ministry	Output indicators	Of which relevant	Of which not relevant
Foreign Affairs	20	4	16
Cultural Heritage	20	12	8
Labour and Social Policy	21	9	12
Environment	29	12	17
Economy and Finance	12	9	3
Interior	18	6	12
Education, Universities and Research	29	17	12
Defence	16	14	2
Justice	21	19	2
Health	18	4	14
Infrastructure and Transport	106	13	93
Agricultural Policies	17	4	13
Economic Development	49	17	32
Total	376	140	236

Table 6. Indicators related to low/high ambiguity activities by ministries

Ministry	Low ambiguity activities	High ambiguity activities
Foreign Affairs	34	64
Cultural Heritage	110	78
Labour and Social Policy	12	65
Environment	24	72
Economy and Finance	40	185
Interior	82	20
Education, Universities and Research	121	35
Defence	43	5
Justice	67	4
Health	21	31
Infrastructure and Transport	151	1
Agricultural Policies	13	28
Economic Development	50	155
Total	768	743

Table 7. List of relevant output indicators referring to ambiguous activities

Immigration and entry visa requests to Italy processed within 25 days	57
Occurrence of extreme poverty	#301
Percentage of children aged 0–3 who have accessed childcare services (crèches, daily nurseries or innovative and integrative services), out of the total population aged 0–3	#302
degree of coverage of the survey of the services of the EURES Advisers	#356
Effectiveness of dispute resolution processes	#358
Mapping databases of public sector bodies for communication to the European Union	#433
Coverage of operating costs of Carabinieri Corps for the protection of environment	#466
Reduction of risk by stabilising/extending the average life of debt	#579
Coverage of public debt securities auctions	#580
Organisation/participation in joint return charter flights under the coordination of FRONTEX	#628
Average time to send the device to parts	#706
Planning and defining the teacher evaluation system	#837
Rate of increase of first level enrolments in scientific disciplines compared to the previous academic year	#872
increase in the number of sheep participating in the plan (subsequent years)	#1275
number of farms participating in the plan to control and eradicate IBR in cattle	#1277
Shows the percentage variation of offences in the area	#1284
Increase in the volume of exports in the agri-food sector compared with the average for the previous three years	#1291
Percentage of increase of the gas transportation network through methane pipelines (authorised km on request of operators)	#1325
Optimising the use of frequency resources	#1375
Reduction of the wholesale price gap of electric energy compared with EU countries	#1393
Variation in the impact of fossil fuels on primary energy consumption	#1394
Annual trend in car insurance rates	#1401
Growth rate of enterprises	#1422
Increase of value of exports to signatory countries to free trade agreements with the EU	#1447
Growth rate of Small Medium Enterprises	#1454
Growth rate of Italian FDI abroad	#1491
Growth rate of Italian exports	#1493

Table 8. Subdivision between output and process indicators in relation to activities with a low/high level of ambiguity for each ministry

Ministry	L P	H P	L O*	H O*	Overall indicators
Foreign Affairs	30	48	4 (3)	16 (1)	98
Cultural Heritage	93	75	17(12)	3 (0)	188
Labour and Social Policy	5	51	7 (5)	14 (4)	77
Environment	14	53	10 (10)	19 (2)	96
Economy and Finance	33	18	7 (6)	5 (3)	225
Interior	71	13	11 (5)	7 (1)	102
Education, Universities and Research	105	22	16(15)	13 (2)	156
Defence	29	3	14(14)	2 (0)	48
Justice	46	4	21 (19)	0	71
Health	15	19	6 (4)	12 (0)	52
Infrastructure and Transport	45	1	106 (13)	0	152
Agricultural Policies	8	16	5 (0)	12 (4)	41
Economic Development	31	125	19 (7)	30 (10)	205
Total	525	610	243 (113)	133 (27)	1,511

L: Low ambiguity; H: high ambiguity; P: process indicators; O: output indicators.

*Number of significant indicators in brackets.

Figure 1. Matrix for the examination of the degree of diffusion of PM in relation to the type of activity detected.

Figure 2. Indicators in Italian ministries according to activity type.

Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkely and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

 Google Scholar

Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25(9), 833–848. doi:10.1287/mnsc.25.9.833

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1985). Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management Science, 31(2), 134–149. doi:10.1287/mnsc.31.2.134

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Frey, B. S., Homberg, F., & Osterloh, M. (2013). Organizational control systems and pay-for-performance in the public service. Organizational Studies, 34(7), 949–972. doi:10.1177/0170840613483655

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Smith, P. (1995). On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 18(2–3), 277–310. doi:10.1080/01900699508525011

 Google Scholar

Mari, L. (2003). Epistemology of measurement. Measurement, 34(1), 17–30. doi:10.1016/S0263-2241(03)00016-2

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Caglio, A., & Ditillo, A. (2008). A review and discussion of management control in inter‐firm relationships: Achievements and future directions. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7/8), 865–898. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2008.08.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chevauchez, B. (2014). The use of performance information in resource allocation. In S. Lanau, A. Tuladhar, B. Chevauchez, G. Esposito, N. Jassaud, & S. Segal (Eds.), Italy: Selected issues paper, Country report no. 14/284 (pp. 61–70). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.

 Google Scholar

Ditillo, A., Liguori, M., Sicilia, M., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Control patterns in contracting‐out relationships: It matters what you do. Not Who You are Public Administration, 93(1), 212–229. doi:10.1111/padm.12126

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abma, T. A., & Noordegraaf, M. (2003). Public managers amidst ambiguity: towards a typology of evaluative practices in public management. Evaluation, 9(3), 285–306. doi:10.1177/13563890030093004

 Google Scholar