Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Shifting from Output to Outcome Measurement in Public Administration-Arguments Revisited Read chapter Read first chapter

2018 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

14. Performance Measurement Systems in Universities: A Critical Review of the Italian System

Authors : Natalia Aversano, Francesca Manes-Rossi, Paolo Tartaglia-Polcini

Published in: Outcome-Based Performance Management in the Public Sector

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This research focuses on the development of performance measurement systems (PMS) in universities and discusses a possible move toward international harmonization. To this end, the case of Italy is examined. In particular, the new regulation issued by the national Agency (ANVUR) is examined and compared with the guidelines provided by the IPSASB, in the aim of shedding light on the gap between the Italian guidelines and the approach proposed at international level by the IPSASB. IPSASB guidelines represent a good reference for a harmonized PMS across EU member-States. Results evidence that the Italian guidelines fall short of the approach followed on the international scene, reducing international comparability and transparency.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Analysing Corruption: Effects on the Transparency of Public Administrations
next chapter Performance-Based Funding and Internal Resource Allocation: The Case of Italian Universities
Literature
Ammons, D., & Rivenbark, W. (2008). Factors influencing the use of performance data to improve municipal services: Evidence from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 304–318.CrossRef
Arnaboldi, M., & Azzone, G. (2010). Constructing performance measurement in the public sector. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21(4), 266–282.CrossRef
Barrados, M., & Blain, J. (2013). Improving program results through the use of predictive operational performance indicators: A Canadian case study. American Journal of Evaluation, 34(1), 45–56.CrossRef
Behn, R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606.CrossRef
Benito, B., Brusca, I., & Montesinos, V. (2007). The harmonization of government financial information systems: The role of IPSASs. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(2), 293–317.CrossRef
Beyle, H. C., & Parratt, S. D. (1938). Public attitudes and government efficiency. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 199, 26–32.CrossRef
Bianchi, C., & Rivenbark, W. C. (2012). A comparative analysis of performance management systems: The cases of Sicily and North Carolina. Public Performance & Management Review, 35(3), 509–526.CrossRef
Bologna Working Group on Qualifications Frameworks. (2005). A Framework for the Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area. Copenhagen.
Bouckaert, G., & Balk, W. (1991). Public productivity measurement: Diseases and cures. Public Productivity & Management Review, 15(2), 229–235.CrossRef
Broadbent, J., & Laughlin, R. (2009). Performance management systems: A conceptual model. Management Accounting Research, 20, 283–295.CrossRef
Brusca, I., Manes Rossi, F., & Aversano, N. (2015). Performance measurement in Italian and Spanish local governments: Comparative policy analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. doi:10.​1080/​13876988.​2015.​1094892.
Cavalluzzo, K. S., & Ittner, C. D. (2004). Implementing performance measurement innovations: Evidence from government. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(3), 243–267.CrossRef
Christopher, J., & Leung, P. (2015). Tensions arising from imposing NPM in Australian public universities: A management perspective. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(2), 171–191.CrossRef
Cosenz, F. (2011). Sistemi di governo e di valutazione della performance per l’azienda « Università» (Vol. 51). Milano: Giuffrè Editore.
Cuganesan, S., Guthrie, J., & Vranic, V. (2014). The riskiness of public sector performance measurement: A review and research agenda. Financial Accountability & Management, 30(3), 279–302.CrossRef
de Lancer, Julnes P., & Holzer, M. (2001). Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations: An empirical study of factors affecting adoption and implementation. Public Administration Review, 61(6), 693–708.CrossRef
Esposito, V., De Nito, E., Pezzillo, Iacono M., & Silvestri, L. (2013). Dealing with knowledge in the Italian public universities: The role of performance management systems. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(3), 431–450.CrossRef
European Consortium for Accreditation (ECA). (2009). Position paper on the BFUG—“Bologna beyond 2010” Report.
Ferreira, A., & Otley, D. (2009). The design and use of performance management systems: An extended framework for analysis. Management Accounting Research, 20(4), 263–282.CrossRef
GASB. (2010). Suggested guidelines for voluntary reporting. GASB: SEA Performance Information.
Greiling, D. (2005). Performance measurement in the public sector: The German experience. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54(7), 551–567.CrossRef
Higgins, J. C. (1989). Performance measurement in universities. European Journal of Operational Research, 38(3), 358–368.CrossRef
Hood, C. (1995). The ‘New Public Management’ in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93–109.CrossRef
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(1), 9–17.
Jones, C. S. (1991). Power, politics and the Jarratt proposals for accounting in British universities. Financial Accountability and Management, 7(3), 142–158.CrossRef
Kallio, K. M., & Kallio, T. J. (2014). Management-by-results and performance measurement in universities—Implications for work motivation. Studies in Higher Education, 39(4), 574–589.CrossRef
Kallio, K. M., Kallio, T. J., Tienari, J., & Hyvönen, T. (2016). Ethos at stake: Performance management and academic work in universities. Human Relations, 69(3), 685–709.CrossRef
King, Alexander F. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 17(4), 411–431.
Kloot, L., & Martin, J. (2000). Strategic performance management: A balanced approach to performance management issues in local government. Management Accounting Research, 11(2), 231–251.CrossRef
Kuah, C. T., & Wong, K. Y. (2011). Efficiency assessment of universities through data envelopment analysis. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 499–506.CrossRef
Lapsley, I. (2008). The NPM agenda: Back to the future. Financial Accountability & Management, 24(1), 77–96.CrossRef
Lapsley, I., & Miller, P. (2004). Foreword: Transforming universities: The uncertain, erratic path. Financial Accountability & Management, 20(2), 103–106.CrossRef
Leitner, K. H. (2004). Intellectual capital reporting for universities: Conceptual background and application for Austrian universities. Research Evaluation, 13(2), 129–140.CrossRef
Manes, Rossi F., & Aversano, N. (2015). Advancing performance measurement Italian local government vis-à-vis the IPSASB project. The International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64, 76–93.CrossRef
Modell, S. (2003). Goals versus institutions: The development of performance measurement in the Swedish university sector. Management Accounting Research, 14(4), 333–359.CrossRef
OECD. (2009). Roadmap for the OECD Assessment of Higher Education Learning Outcomes Frasibility Study (2nd version).
Pettersen, I. J. (2014). A tale of diverse qualities—Reflections on performance measures in higher education. In A. Bourmistrov & O. Olson (Eds.), Accounting, management control and institutional development (pp. 201–216). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Poister, T. H. (2003). Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pollitt, C. (2013). The logics of performance management. Evaluation, 19(4), 346–363.CrossRef
Sanderson, I. (2001). Performance management, evaluation and learning in modern local government. Public Administration, 79(2), 297–313.CrossRef
Schaik, F. (2010). Materiality in government auditing. International Journal on Governmental Financial Management, 10(2), 2–12.
Smith, P. (1995). On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 18, 277–310.CrossRef
Sotirakou, T., & Zeppou, M. (2006). Utilizing performance measurement to modernize the Greek public sector. Management Decision, 44(9), 1277–1304.CrossRef
Sousa, C. A., de Nijs, W. F., & Hendriks, P. H. (2010). Secrets of the beehive: Performance management in university research organizations. Human Relations, 63(9), 1439–1460.CrossRef
ter Bogt, H. J., & Scapens, R. W. (2012). Performance management in universities: Effects of the transition to more quantitative measurement systems. European Accounting Review, 21(3), 451–497.
Torres, L., Pina, V., & Yetano, A. (2011). Performance measurement in Spanish local governments. A cross‐case comparison study. Public administration, 89(3), 1081–1109.
van Dooren, W., & Van de Walle, S. G. J. (2008). Performance information in the public sector: How it is used. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRef
van Dooren, W., Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2015). Performance management in the public sector. New York: Routledge.
van Helden, G. J., Johnsen, Å., & Vakkuri, J. (2012). The life-cycle approach to performance management: Implications for public management and evaluation. Evaluation, 18(2), 159–175.CrossRef
Van Thiel, S., & Leeuw, F. L. (2002). The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review, 25(3), 267–281.CrossRef
Yang, K., & Holzer, M. (2006). The performance–trust link: Implications for performance measurement. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 114–126.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Performance Measurement Systems in Universities: A Critical Review of the Italian System
Authors
Natalia Aversano
Francesca Manes-Rossi
Paolo Tartaglia-Polcini
Copyright Year
2018
Book
Outcome-Based Performance Management in the Public Sector

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57017-4

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-57018-1

Copyright Year: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57018-1_14

Premium Partner

    Image Credits