Exploring the Roles of Citizens in Performance Measurement

Abstract

This article discusses why citizens should be involved in performance measurement of government and introduces a model of citizen-initiated performance assessment (CIPA). Based on the experiences of a few Iowa cities and a survey of Iowa local officials, it shows how citizen involvement has impacted the practice of performance measurement, increased the likelihood of integrating performance information in the decision-making and planning process by elected officials, stimulated different thinking about public service delivery, and opened up new opportunities to build a stronger partnership between the government and the citizenry. The article concludes by discussing the limitations of the Iowa experiment, and suggests directions for future research and experimentation to advance the understanding and adoption of citizen-based performance measurement.

Keywords:

• citizen participation
• performance measurement
• performance

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the generous support of an officer grant for this research by the Program of Performance Assessment of Municipal Governments, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. All errors remain the responsibilities of the author.

Notes

1. Broom, C., Jackson, M., Harris, J., and Vera Vogelsang-Coombs. (1998). Performance measurement: Concepts and techniques (3rd ed.) Washington, D.C.: Center for Accountability and Performance, the American Society for Public Administration. See also Hatry, H. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

2. Caiden, N. (1998). Public service professionalism for performance measurement and evaluation. Public Budgeting and Finance, 18(1), 35–52. Please also see Larkey, P. & Devereux, E. (1999). Good budgetary decision processes. In Frederickson, G. and Johnston, J., eds., Public management reform and innovation: Research, theory, and applications; Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

3. Helgason, S. International Benchmarking: Experiences from OECD Countries. Conference paper on international benchmarking organized by the Danish Ministry of Finance. Paris: Organizational for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1997. Please also see. Jordan, M. and Hackbart, M. (1999). Performance budgeting and performance funding in the states: A status assessment. Public Budgeting and Finance, 19(1), 68–88. Leithe, J. (1997). Implementing performance measurement in government: Illustrations and resources. Chicago: Government Finance Officers Association. Melkers, J., & Willoughby, K. (2001). Budgeters views of state performance budgeting systems. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 54–64. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2002). Developing performance measures for public financial management. Paris: OECD. Perrin, B. (2003). Implementing the vision: Addressing challenges to results-focused management and budgeting. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Poister, T., and Streib, G. (1999). Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review, 59(4), 325–335. Wang, X. (2000). Performance measurement in budgeting: A study of county governments. Public Budgeting and Finance, 20(3), 102–118.

6. Bouckaert, G. (1990). The history of the productivity movement. Public productivity and management Review, 14(1), 53–89. Williams, D. (2003). Measuring government in the early twentieth century. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 643–659.

9. Please refer to Broom, et al., 1998, op cit. See also Hatry, H., Blair, L., Fisk, D., Greier, J., Hall, Jr., J., and Schaenman, P. (1977). How effective are your community services? Procedures for monitoring the effectiveness of municipal services. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute and the International City Management Association. Hatry, H., Clarren, S., Houten, T., Woodward, J., and DonVito, P. (1979). Efficiency measurement for local government services B some initial suggestions. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Tique, P., and Greene, Jr., J. (1994). Performance measurement: The link to effective government. Chicago: Government Finance Officers Association. Urban Institute and the International City Management Association. (1974). Measuring the effectiveness of basic municipal services: Initial report. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute and the International City Management Association.

14. Hatry, 1999, op cit.

15. Ammons, D. (2001). Municipal benchmarks. Assessing local performance and establishing community standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. International City/County Management Association. (2001). Comparative Performance Measurement: FY2000 Data Report. Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association. See also Helgason, 1997, op cit.

16. King, C. S., and Stivers, C. (1998). Government is us. Public administration in an anti-government era. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schachter, H. L. (1997). Reinventing government or reinventing ourselves. The role of citizen owners in making a better government. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

18. Ho, 2003, op cit.

19. Ho and Coates, 2004, op cit.