The failed implementation of performance management in Irish central government

• Author: Francis McGeough,Matthias Beck
• Published date: 01 August 2018
• Date: 01 August 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12155

Received: 16 February2016 Revised: 11 July 2016 Accepted:14 November 2016

DOI: 10.1111/faam.12155

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The failed implementation of performance

management in Irish central government

Francis McGeough1Matthias Beck2

1Instituteof Technology,Blanchardstown,

Dublin,Ireland

2Queen'sUniversity Belfast, Belfast, Ireland

Correspondence

FrancisMcGeough, Institute of Technology,

BlanchardstownRd N, Blanchardstown, Dublin

15,Ireland.

Email:Francis.mcgeough@itb.ie

Currentaddress: Matthias Beck, University

CollegeCork, Cork, Ireland.

Abstract

Ireland's Strategic Management Initiative was launched in 1994

and aimed to improve public services delivery. In line with pub-

lic sector reforms in other countries, it placed strong emphasis on

performance management in public sector organisations. Initiatives

stressed the need for strategic planning and performance monitor-

ing. The overall impact of these reforms was disappointing, with the

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report-

ing in 2008 that the Irish public sector lacked a performance cul-

ture. This paper utilizes a series of interviews with senior managers

in order to identify why performance management did not gain trac-

tion and our contribution highlights the complex contextual factors

which undermined this agenda.

KEYWORDS

performance management, public services, rational planning, strate-

gic management, Strategic Management Initiative, target setting

1INTRODUCTION

The public sector plays a crucial role in a modern economy and it has been argued that nations not only compete on

costs but also on the quality of their infrastructure such as transport, health care and education (Lapsley & Skærbæk,

2012, p. 357). However, governmentsworldwide are under pressure to balance their budgets while maintaining ser-

vices. This has led to an emphasis on value for money (Brusca & Montesinos, 2013, p. 374), with Arnaboldi, Lapsley,

and Steccolini (2015, p. 2) suggesting that “[t]he global financial crisis has accentuated the longstanding need for effec-

tive performance management of public services.” Indeed, today's policy makers are more likelyto make their names

by “streamlining, repackaging, marginally modifying, or actually downsizing …existingprogrammes” rather than intro-

ducing new programmes (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011, p. 163). Performance management, as one of the key strands of

New Public management/NPM (Hood, 1991, pp. 4–5), typically plays a key role in processes seeking to enhance the

efficiency and effectiveness of public services delivery.This is particularly so when policy makers assume that lack of

confidence in government can be addressed through performance measurement and its public reporting (Boston &

Pallot, 1997; Pallot,2001).

Irish governments formally embraced notions of performance management from the early 1990s onwards. The

Strategic Management Initiative (SMI) was launched as a reform package which emphasized the delivery of quality

226 c

2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/faam FinancialAcc & Man. 2018;34:226–239.