| The Government Accounting Standards Board and Government Finance Officers Association actively promote performance measure utilization as part of a local government's performance-based budgeting process. Local governments are struggling with whether performance measure utilization produces the benefits of interest to their stakeholders. Currently, there is no agreement in the optimal way of using performance measures, and empirical researchers have found mixed results in actual beneficial effects of performance measure utilization in local governments since the recession. The purpose of the current quantitative cross-sectional study was to determine differences in perceived benefits (communication, decision-making, coordination, efficiency, and effectiveness) based upon the way United States county governments are using performance measures (sub-constructs of management, budgeting, and reporting). The researcher surveyed county managers who have used performance measures and been awarded the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. The survey was developed by the Government Accounting Standards Board to collect descriptive data on local government use of performance measures. Researchers performed content analysis on the survey questions and identified highly correlated questions around three ways performance measures were being used and five benefits of performance measure utilization. The current researcher used the same empirical method to score the variables and then conducted a MANOVA statistical method to test the hypotheses. The results of the MANOVA determined there were no statistically significant differences in perceived benefits (communication, decision-making, coordination, efficiency, and effectiveness) based upon performance measure utilization for management or performance measure utilization for budgeting p > 0.05. Statistically significant differences were found in perceived benefits between those who had responded as utilizing performance measures for reporting and those who did not respond as utilizing performance measures for reporting. The respondents who responded as not utilizing performance measures for reporting had a higher mean perceived benefit scores than those who did utilize performance measures for reporting. These findings are consistent with other researchers who found minimal measurable benefits associated with PM utilization (Ammons, 2013). The significant results of the study agreed with other researchers (Cuganesan, Guthrie, & Vranic, 2014; Micheli & Mari, 2014) that in some the cases PM utilization could have a negative impact on the organization. The current study revealed that PM utilization for reporting produced lower benefits to the organization than not using PM utilization for reporting. |
