The Importance of Performance Management A case Study in UK`s Public Sector

TheImportance of Performance Management: A case Study in UK’s PublicSector

(University)

TheImportance of Performance Management: A case Study in UK’s PublicSector

of Research

Theconsolidation of performance related pay schemes is an aspect ofreform that is presently witnessed in the public service.Nevertheless, such changes have prompted divergent debates for andagainst this approach. The main issues raised focuses on theobjectivity, novelty and compatibility of such an approach to whichthis study addresses. This paper proposes that the effectiveness ofthe management policy is an attribute of the organizationalenvironment, equality, and objectivity of performance evaluation. Assuch, the research draws its findings through in-depth questionnairesand interviews, relating to performance related schemes in UK’slocal authorities.

Thefindings present a strong support for market type managerial reforms,against the performance pay thesis. Divergent issues are met insetting, evaluating and compensation performance. Tentatively, thefindings suggest that performance-related pay approaches aresusceptible to ineffectiveness since they are consolidated as asupplementary approach, as opposed to organization orientedmotivations structures.

Recently,UK’s public service has witnessed continuous reforms in themanagement through the consolidation of market type managerialinitiatives into the public regime. These approaches have beengarnered towards the improvement of quality performance in the publicservice, which has fronted new links between the private and privatesector organizations. Tentatively, the management reforms havedirectly affected the development of the state systems (Milne, 2007).

Literaturethat pertains to this issue highlights various factors that havecontributed to such realization alteration in the economic theory,changes in the private sector, technological advancement andglobalization (Milliman, 1991). New public management is focusedtowards the consolidation of market-type approach and culture ofperformance integration in the public sector organizations. Noreen(1991) advocatesthat this approach is aimed towards reducing the cost of servicequality, at the same time increase the level of accountability withinthe organizations. Despite a dissimilar impression, the perceivedimpression suggest that the new public management approach is aninstrumental part of organizational implementation. The mainobjective of this paper for this reason is to evaluate theinstrumentality of motivation theory, with respect to the performancemanagement through the consolidation of the performance affiliatedreforms in UK.

ResearchProblem

Essentially,this research evaluates the role of motivation theory in the publicsector regimes, given the integration of a market type approach inmanaging performance. Simply put, the main problem addressed in thispaper is to evaluate the appropriateness of market type motivationalapproach for the performance of public institutions.

ResearchGap

Thereis little research regarding the performance measurement and theaccountability systems in the UK’s local market. Accountabilitysystems, control perspective, and performance measurements arefashioned to review the implementation of an organization’sobjectives, as well as, realize when the plans are ineffective andachievable. Additionally, improved organization’s success relies onthe firm’s capability to learn and innovate. This necessitates ashift from a bureaucratic regime to an innovative approach. A gapexists between what is thought to be important to what can beevaluated.

SupportingFacts

Thetheories of motivation are an imperative aspect of defining theattributes of an effective reward system (Snape, 2010). Through thepersonality theory, Milakovich (1991) proposes that the motivationalprocess is imperative since it can significantly improve humanbehavior towards work functions (Milliman,1991).Motivations theories are issues that are instrumental in theaddressing the structures of designing effective reward systems. Aneffective reward system is linked towards the inclusion of variouscorporate values that are explicitly propelled by businessrequirements (Macduffie, 1995). A proffered approach offer resultsand behaviors that are in line with the organizational goals, hencesupporting the proffered behaviors (Milakovich, 1991).

Evidently,with the government’s inability to manage its resources, they werecompelled to adopt a different approach to reward, otherwise knownas, IMF. Hence, it was imperative to address performance managementin the public sector, in order to cope with the public demand. Theseled to the creation of market-oriented practices (Noreen,1991).

Methodology

Thestudy used data gathered from the survey questionnaires that weresubmitted through a Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). Three attributes were quantified and derived from the hypothesisnamely accountability and performance measurement, organizationalcapacity and the quality perception. From a performance managementaspect, open ended questions were formulated, where each wasnumerically labeled in suiting the requirements. Questionnaires andinterviews were administered to the local authorities in UK for aperiod of three months.

Findings

Fromthe findings, it was evident that motivation plays a significant rolein developing reward systems. Evidently, it was realized that anevaluation systems that explicitly met the employee’s requirementsdictated the overall performance of the workforce. Tentatively, theproblematic approach to performance related bonus approach raisespertinent questions regarding the fairness of the systems used. Thedangers affiliated to the disconnection between pay and efforts areevidenced in Performance management systems. The civil servicemanagement advocated that in the case of a performance regimeextension they will evidently install adequate evaluation mechanisms.

Conclusion

Itis evident that performance-related pay approach are a contributoryaspect of the increasing performance. Nevertheless, it is importantto identify the attributes of the plan. Tentatively, the performancemanagement approach presents a significant management approach toachieving proffered results. However, further research needs to beconducted in the response of management accounting regarding newinformation in the public sector. In-depth and revised informationof management needs to be created in the evaluating and rewardingemployees’ performance in public sectors.

References

Milne,P. (2007). Motivation, Incentives and Organizational Culture.Journal of Knowledge

Management,11(6), 28-38.

Snape E., &amp Redman, T. (2010). HRM practices, organizationalcitizenship behaviour, and

Performance.Journalof Management Studies,41, 1219-1247.

Macduffie,J.P. (1995). Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance:Flexible

ProductionSystems in the World Auto Industry, IndustrialRelations and Labor Review,48: 197–221.

Milakovich,M. E. (1991). Total Quality Management in the Public Sector,”National

ProductivityReview, 10, 195-213.

Milliman,J., Von Glinow, M. A., &amp Nathan, M. (1991). Organizational lifecycles and strategic

internationalhuman resource management in multinational companies: Implicationsfor congruence theory, Academyof Management Review,16, 318-339.

Noreen,E. (1991). Conditions. under which activity-based cost systemsprovide relevant costs,”

Journalof Management Accounting Research,3, 159-168.

Related Posts

© All Right Reserved