Construction of knowledge about the theme performance evaluation of communication in public organs: an analysis of international literature

Leonardo Ensslin, Luiz Antonio Giardino Graziano, Ademar Dutra, Vinicius Dezem

Abstract


The goal of this study is to analyze the characteristics of the international scientific researches that approach the fragment of the literature on the subject of Evaluation of Performance Communication in public agencies. The methodology is exploratory, descriptive and quali-quantitative approach and uses as instrument the Knowledge Development Process–Constructivist (ProKnow-C) to define the Bibliographic Portfolio and Bibliometric Analysis. The results highlight: (i) The selection of a Bibliographic Portfolio composed of 29 articles; (ii) The most prominent journals are “Public Performance & Management Review” and “Public Administration Review”; (iii) Among the papers, 63% use performance measurement systems and 37% performance management systems; and, (iv) The majority (55%) is in an evolutionary stage of "transition from operations to the strategic orientations". The adoption of realistic evaluation models is noticeable, obtained in a generic form, without taking into consideration the particularities of the contexts and the actors involved in the decision process.


Keywords


Performance Evaluation; Public Management; ProKnow-C.

References


Beuren, I. M. (2003). Trajetória da construção de um trabalho monográfico em contabilidade. Como elaborar trabalhos monográficos em contabilidade: Teoria e prática, 2: 46-75.

Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2010). Strategic management and public service performance: The way ahead. Public Administration Review, accounting research, 11: 281-306.

:185-s192.

Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (2000). An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector’. Management

Castro, C. D. M. (1977). A prática da pesquisa. McGraw-Hill.

Creswell, J. W. (2010). Projeto de pesquisa métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. In Projeto de pesquisa métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. Artmed.

Dutra, A., Ripoll-Feliu, V. M., Fillol, A. G., Ensslin, S. R., & Ensslin, L. (2015). The construction of knowledge from the scientific literature about the theme seaport performance evaluation. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64: 243-269.

Ensslin, L., Giffhorn, E., Ensslin, S. R., Petri, S. M., & Vianna, W. B. (2010). Avaliação do desempenho de empresas terceirizadas com o uso da metodologia multicritério de apoio à decisão-construtivista. Pesquisa Operacional, 30: 125-152.

Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., & Pinto, H. D. M. (2013). Processo de investigação e Análise bibliométrica: Avaliação da Qualidade dos Serviços Bancários. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 17: 325-349.

Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., Ensslin, S. R., Chaves, L. C., & Dezem, V. (2015). Research Process for Selecting a Theoretical Framework and Bibliometric Analysis of a Theme: Illustration for the Management of Customer Service in a Bank. Modern Economy, 6: 782.

Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., Martins, R. P., & Dezem, V. (2016). Modelo Construtivista para Apoiar o Processo de Gestão da Universidade Federal de Tocantins. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia, 15: 122.

Fleisher, C. S., & Mahaffy, D. (1997). A balanced scorecard approach to public relations management assessment. Public Relations Review, 23: 117-142.

Jan van Helden, G., Johnsen, Å. & Vakkuri, J. (2008). Distinctive research patterns on public sector performance measurement of public administration and accounting disciplines. Public Management Review, 10: 641-651.

Johnsen, Å. (2005). What does 25 years of experience tell us about the state of performance measurement in public policy and management? Public Money and Management, 25: 9-17.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2005). The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard business review, 8: 172.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system.

Kivimäki, M., Länsisalmi, H., Elovainio, M., Heikkilä, A., Lindström, K., Harisalo, R., & Puolimatka, L. (2000). Communication as a determinant of organizational innovation. R&D Management, 30: 33-42.

Melkers, J. (2006). On the road to improved performance. Public Performance & Management Review, 30: 73-95.

Melnyk, S. A., Bititci, U., Platts, K., Tobias, J., & Andersen, B. (2014). Is performance measurement and management fit for the future? Management Accounting Research, 25: 173-186.

Neely, A., Gregory, M., & Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design: a literature review and research agenda. International journal of operations & production management, 15: 80-116.

Palttala, P., Boano, C., Lund, R., & Vos, M. (2012). Communication gaps in disaster management: Perceptions by experts from governmental and non‐governmental organizations. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 20: 2-12.

Pulakos, E. D., & O’LEARY, R. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken?. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4: 146-164.

Radebe, P. Q. (2015). Managers’ Perceptions of the Performance Appraisal System in the Local Municipality of Gauteng Province in South Africa. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6: 175.

Rosa, M. M., Ensslin, S. R., Petri, S. M., & Ensslin, L. (2015). Avaliação de Desempenho de Políticas Públicas: Construção do Conhecimento com Base na Literatura Internacional. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia, 14: 110.

Roy, B. (1993). Decision science or decision-aid science? European journal of operational research, 66: 184-203.

Sinclair, D., & Zairi, M. (2001). An empirical study of key elements of total quality-based performance measurement systems: A case study approach in the service industry sector. Total Quality Management, 12: 535-550.

Srimai, S., Radford, J., & Wright, C. (2011). Evolutionary paths of performance measurement: an overview of its recent development. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60: 662-687.

Triviños, A. N. S. (2015). Introdução à pesquisa em ciências sociais: a pesquisa qualitativa em educação. O positivismo; a fenomenologia; o marxismo. In Introdução à pesquisa em ciências sociais: a pesquisa qualitativa em educação. O positivismo; a fenomenologia; o marxismo. Atlas.

Tasca, J.E., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S.R., & Alves, B. M. (2010). An approach for selecting a theoretical framework for the evaluation of training programs. Journal of European Industrial Training, 34: 631-655.

Zhang, J. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2015). Enhancing open government information performance: a study of institutional capacity and organizational arrangement in China. Chinese Journal of Communication, 8: 160-176.

Whiteley, P., Clarke, H. D., Sanders, D., & Stewart, M. (2016). Why Do Voters Lose Trust in Governments? Public Perceptions of Government Honesty and Trustworthiness in Britain 2000–2013. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18: 234-254.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Iberoamerican Journal of Strategic Management  e-ISSN: 2176-0756

Licença Creative Commons
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença
Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0 Internacional