Performance Management and Performance Appraisal: Czech Self-Governments

• Authors: Dagmar Špalková , David Špaček , Juraj Nemec
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Managing and measuring performance became an important part of administrative reforms motivated by the New Public Management ideology. However, a badly implemented system designed for measuring and managing performance may distort the behaviours of actors. The goal of this paper is to outline the preliminary picture of the current situation of performance management generally and particularly of performance appraisal at the level of the Czech local and regional self-governments. The presented data, despite the fact that our field research covers only a non-representative samples of the “best” self-government bodies, show first that performance and quality management is not a neglected area in the Czech Republic. Its practice is rather decentralized, and the central government focuses on methodical support and coordination rather than on being strict and requiring certain tools to be implemented. The core problems revealed by the interviews are that the implementation of new instruments is usually based on a trial-and-error approach in its beginnings and that the implementation is award- and project-driven. Our preliminary data clearly indicate that the performance-appraisal situation is even more problematic - they indicate that performance-appraisal systems are introduced in only a limited number of self-government authorities. The set of criteria used in the evaluation is problematic, and the objectives of the performance appraisal are unclear for managers. As a general rule, a performance-appraisal system is not directly linked with implemented performance management and especially not with a payment system.

Keywords

EN

performance measurement; performance management; performance appraisal; Czech Republic; local and regional government

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 8
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 69-88

Dates

published

2015-12-01

online

2016-01-29

Contributors

author

Dagmar Špalková

author

David Špaček

author

Juraj Nemec

References

• Andrews, R., G. A. Boyne and R. M. Walker. 2006. “Subjective and Objective Measures of Organizational Performance: An Empirical Exploration.” In G. A. Boyne, K. J. Meier, L. J. O’Toole Jr. and R. M. Walker (eds.). Public Service Performance: Perspectives on Measurement and Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 14 - 34.
• Armstrong, M. 2009. Armstrong’s Handbook of Performance Management. London: Kogan Page.
• Blalock, A. B. 1999. “Evaluation Research and the Performance Management Movement: From Estrangement to Useful Integration ?” Evaluation 5(2), 117 - 149.
• Bouckaert, G., J. Nemec, V. Nakrošis, G. Hajnal and K. Tonisson (eds). 2008. Public Management Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee.
• Boyne, G. A., K. J. Meier, L. J. O’Toole and R. M. Walker. 2006. Public Service Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Daley, Dennis M. 2005. “Designing Eff ective Performance Appraisal Systems.” In S. E. Condrey (ed.). Handbook of Human Resource Management in Government. 2nd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 499 - 527.
• Halligan, J. 2011. “Reform Design and Performance in Australia and New Zealand.” In T. Christensen and P. Lagreid (eds). Transcending New Public Management. Farnham: Ashgate, 43 - 64.
• Jacko, T. 2015. “Performance Measurement and Performance-Related Pay in Slovak Local Government.” In J. Nemec and M. S. De Vries (eds). Implementation of New Public Management Tools: Experiences from Transition and Emerging Countries. Brussels: Bryulant, 251 - 266.
• Kellough, Edward J. 2012. “Managing Human Resources to Improve Organizational Productivity: The Role of Performance Evaluation.” In N. M. Riccucci (ed.). Public Personnel Management: Current Concerns, Future Challenges. Glenview: Pearson Education, 173 - 185.
• Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. and T. Veen. 2012. “Governing the Post-Communist State: Government Alternation and Senior Civil Service Politicisation in Central and Eastern Europe.” East European Politics 28(1), 4 - 22.
• Ministry of Regional Development of the Czech Republic. 2005. Hodnocení zaměstnanců ve veřejné správě, metodicka doporučeni [Evaluation of Employees in Public Administration, methodical recommendations]. Project No. 102 / 2004 - 52 of the MRD CR.
• Moynihan, D. P. and S. K. Pandey. 2010. “The Big Question for Performance Management: Why Do Managers Use Performance Information ?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20, 849 - 866.
• Nemec, J. and M. S. De Vries (eds). 2015. Implementation of New Public Management Tools: Experiences from Transition and Emerging Countries. Brussels: Bryulant.
• Noe, R. A., J. R. Hollenbeck, B. Gerhart and P. M. Wright. 2009. Fundamentals of Human Resource Management. 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Pilařová, I. 2008. Jak efektivně hodnotit zaměstnance a zvyšovat jejich výkonnost. Praha: Grada.
• Špaček, D. 2009. “Quality Rhetoric and Citizens’ Satisfaction Measurement: Selected Practice of the CAF Instrument in Czech Municipal Public Administration.” The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management 8(10), 91 - 104.
• Van Dooren, W., G. Bouckaert and J. Halligan. 2010. Performance Management in the Public Sector. Oxon: Routledge.
• Verheijen, T. J. G. 2012. “Comprehensive Reform and Public Administration in Post-Communist States.” In B. G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Public Administration. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 590 - 601.
• Veselý, A. 2013. “Accountability in Central and Eastern Europe: Concept and Reality.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 79(2), 310 - 330.
• Zikmunda, M. and D. Špaček. 2010. Očekávané a reálné přínosy implementace řízení kvality ve veřejné správě. Brno: Masaryk University.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/nispa-2015-0009