| This dissertation reports on case studies of local governments with extensive experience in developing and using performance measures. Case study sites include Multnomah County and Portland, Oregon; Prince William County, Virginia; Tucson, Arizona; and Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The qualitative research included: review of 112 documents from the public administration, accounting, and management literature; discourse analysis of interviews with seventy-seven local government elected and appointed officials, government managers and staff, media, and citizens; and review of 134 local government documents that incorporated performance measures or described development and use of measures.; Research questions addressed local government performance measurement approaches to support use for decision-making, program monitoring and service performance, and communication and reporting; government officials' perception of the usefulness and quality of performance measures; barriers that interfere with effective local government use of performance measures; and practices that support effective use.; All sites used performance measures to support governmental operational processes, including managing-for-results. Program and performance monitoring was the most frequently cited use. In all cases performance measurement was not static, but rather evolved over time. The support of senior elected and appointed government officials was critical to the success of performance measurement efforts. Turnover of officials was a critical determinant of changes in the focus and use of performance measures.; Interviewees perceived that performance measures should be results-oriented, useful, valid and accurate, clear and understandable, and comparable. Barriers to effective use of performance measures included: the time and cost of collecting performance measures; perceived fear of exposure and accountability; and the difficulty of getting performance measurement to be owned by both employees and management. Perceptions of effective practices included: the importance of involving stakeholders; creating a climate and conceptual framework to support performance measurement; alignment of performance measures with mission, goals, and objectives; the importance of leadership in sustaining measurement efforts; creating linkages to other government operations (e.g., budgeting, strategic planning, and public reporting); and use of an iterative approach to allow measures to be refined based on experience and utility. |
