Using Data to Manage for Performance at Public Universities

• Published date: 01 March 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12185
• Date: 01 March 2014

Thomas M. Rabovsky is assistant

professor in the School of Public and

Environmental Affairs at Indiana University

Bloomington, where he teaches public man-

agement. His research largely focuses on

accountability, performance management,

managerial values and decision making,

and higher education policy.

E-mail: rabovsky@indiana.edu

260 Public Administration Review • March | April 2014

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 74, Iss. 2, pp. 260–272. © 2014 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12185.

Thomas M. Rabovsky

Indiana University Bloomington

As performance-oriented reforms have become more

commonplace in recent years, questions about the factors

that drive organizational adoption and use of perform-

ance systems for internal management are of central

importance.  is article uses data taken from a sur-

vey of presidents at public universities to advance our

understanding about the use of data and performance

management strategies within public organizations.  e

central research question is, why do public administrators

choose to employ performance management strategies? In

addition, the author also explores variation in the extent

to which public universities use performance manage-

ment strategies for three tasks that are central to public

management: (1) strategic planning, (2) evaluating

employees, and (3) interacting with external stakehold-

ers. Findings indicate that public universities often use

performance data to help manage, but many of the causal

factors that lead to data use vary across management

functions.

As performance-oriented reforms have become

more commonplace in recent years, questions

about the factors that drive organizational

adoption and use of performance systems for internal

management are of central importance (Kroll 2012;

Moynihan 2010). Despite the increasing prevalence

of performance management within public agen-

cies throughout government at all levels over the last

couple of decades, there is still substantial variation

in the extent to which organizations use data to

inform decision making and improve management

(Behn 2008; Julnes 2008; Kroll and Vogel 2013;

Moynihan and Hawes 2012; Moynihan and Pandey

2010; Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012a, 2012b;

Poister, Pasha, and Edwards 2013; Pollitt 2006).  is

discussion about organizational use of performance

data has recently become prominent within higher

education policy, where there has been considerable

ef‌f ort to explore important questions about the ways

that quantitative data and internal performance diag-

nostics can be employed to promote better student

learning outcomes, contain rising costs and tuition

increases, identify opportunities for external funding

from alumni and private donors, and be more ef‌f ective

in ef‌f orts to expand capacity for research and develop-

ment (Coburn and Turner 2012; Colyvas 2012; Ewell

2011; McLaughlin and McLaughlin 2007; Weisbrod,

Ballou, and Asch 2008).

Using data taken from a survey of presidents at public

universities, this article makes several important con-

tributions to the literature on performance manage-

ment and information use within organizations. First,

I explore the role of administrative values, and politi-

cal ideology in particular, as a driver of performance

management within public organizations. Despite the

fact that performance management is often touted

as a value-neutral reform that seeks to overcome and

negate irrational decisions made through the political

process, there is considerable evidence that, at least

within the context of external accountability poli-

cies, ideological and partisan factors shape the way

that actors use and interpret performance informa-

tion (Dull 2006; Gilmour and Lewis 2006; Lavertu

and Moynihan 2013; Moynihan 2006).  is article

extends this line of research to examine the impact

of political ideology on performance management

techniques within public organizations.

Second, I evaluate the extent to which external

accountability policies, such as the performance

funding policies that have been implemented in many

states for institutions of higher education, inf‌l uence

administrative behavior with respect to performance

information use. Despite the fact that many exter-

nal policies are designed, at least in part, to prompt

changes in administrative behavior, there is little

evidence that these policies have had their desired

ef‌f ects (Melkers and Willoughby 2004; Radin 2006;

 urmaier and Willoughby 2001; U.S. Government

Accountability Of‌f‌i ce 2005). I f‌i nd that these con-

cerns are valid with respect to performance funding

policies, but it is unclear whether this is the result

of failures in policy design and implementation or

whether it suggests a failure in the underlying theory

of these external accountability policies.

Using Data to Manage for Performance at Public Universities