Author:
de Waal André,Goedegebuure Robert,Geradts Patricia
Abstract
PurposeIn recent years many organizations have implemented performance management because this technique leads to better organizational results as reported in many articles and case studies. However, often the reported improvement relates to qualitative performance and there is little solid empirical evidence of the actual effects performance management has on the quantitative results of organizations. This article aims to describe the results of a study that explored the quantitative impact of performance management on the results of a non‐profit organization.Design/methodology/approachQuantitative performance data of the organization, before and after the introduction of performance management, were collected and linked to key activities and events that occurred in the organization during and after the implementation.FindingsThe research shows that several key activities related to the introduction of performance management have an impact on the results of an organization although not always in an expected positive way.Research limitations/implicationsA research limitation is that it is always difficult to isolate the effects of a particular event on the overall results of an organization. Although the effects of other events have been taken into account, it cannot be ruled out that unlisted events and factors are in play.Practical implicationsThe results support managers who want to introduce performance management to improve the results of their non‐profit organisation. At the same time, the research indicates that introducing and using performance management needs continuous attention of management in order to become and stay successful in the long run.Originality/valueThis article contributes to the literature as it is one of the few longitudinal research studies into the effects of performance management, specifically in non‐profit organizations.
Subject
Strategy and Management,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference48 articles.
1. Adcroft, A. and Willis, R. (2005), “The (un)intended outcome of public sector performance measurement”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 386‐400.
2. Ahn, H. (2001), “Applying the balanced scorecard concept: an experience report”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 34, pp. 441‐61.
3. Andersen, H.V. and Lawrie, G. (2002), “Examining opportunities for improving public sector governance through better strategic management”, in Neely, A., Walters, A. and Austin, R. (Eds), Performance Measurement and Management: Research and Action, Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield.
4. Armstrong, M. and Baron, A. (1998), Performance Management, the New Realities, Institute of Personnel and Development, London.
5. Banker, R.D., Potter, G. and Srinivasan, D. (2000), “An empirical investigation of an incentive plan that includes non‐financial performance measures”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 75 No. 1, pp. 65‐92.
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献