Sammenlign metoder
Gjennomgå de valgte metodene side om side; rader som avviker, er uthevet.
| Government Performance Measurement× | Balanced Scorecard for Public Sector× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fagfelt | Public Administration | Public Administration |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Opprinnelsesår≠ | 2003 | 1992 |
| Opphavsperson≠ | Robert D. Behn & Harry P. Hatry | Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton |
| Type≠ | Performance management framework | Strategic performance management framework |
| Opprinnelig kilde≠ | Behn, R. D. (2003). Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606. DOI ↗ | Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard—Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79. link ↗ |
| Alias | Public Sector Performance Measurement, Government Performance Management, Public Performance Metrics, Agency Performance Measurement | Public Sector Balanced Scorecard, Government Balanced Scorecard, Public BSC, Strategy-Linked Scorecard |
| Relaterte | 4 | 4 |
| Sammendrag≠ | Government performance measurement is the systematic, ongoing collection of quantitative and qualitative indicators about what public agencies put in, do, and achieve. Rather than treating measurement as a single number that grades an agency, the discipline — crystallised by Robert Behn's argument that different managerial purposes require different measures — asks first what a measure is for: evaluating, controlling, budgeting, motivating, promoting, celebrating, learning or improving. It draws heavily on Harry Hatry's practical handbook tradition of distinguishing inputs, outputs and outcomes and building measurement into routine operations. The output is not a verdict but a feedback system that ties day-to-day activity to public results. | The Balanced Scorecard is a strategic management framework that translates an organisation's mission and strategy into a coherent set of performance measures spread across multiple perspectives, so that managers see the business from more than the financial angle alone. Introduced by Robert Kaplan and David Norton in their 1992 Harvard Business Review article and expanded in their 1996 book, it was conceived for firms but has been widely adapted to government and non-profit settings. In the public-sector adaptation the perspectives are reordered: the mission and the citizen or stakeholder outcome sit at the top, while financial resources become an enabling constraint rather than the ultimate goal. |
| ScholarGateDatasett ↗ |
|
|