Performance Management Policies in Local Administrations? : UK Case

“

Performance management is one of the important tools used to increase economic rationality in public administration. Performance management aims to provide efficiency and effectiveness in public institutions and increases professional accountability. Performance management requires defining organizational goals and objectives, establishing performance targets, and measuring individual and organizational performance. Identification of performance indicators and audit standards in the design of the performance management system, especially in public administration, are important for achieving strategic results. Short-term targets should also be reviewed while performance indicators are set. Performance data should be recorded objectively. An organizational culture that encourages flexibility and innovation should be adopted. In the UK, local reflections of performance management are based on performance measurement systems supported by the central administration. The Best Value in 1999 was put into effect for local governments in UK and Wales. The best value requires that the local governments establish their performance targets and maintain efficiency according to these goals. This process is supported by the audit committee controlling local service delivery. In Scotland, the Best Value Practice was accepted in 2003 with Local Governments Act. The best value in Wales was implemented between 2000 and 2002. However, the best value has not been able to solve the problems of the local administrations holistically. The audit process focuses on bureaucratic issues rather than pursuing innovative developments. Due to deficiencies in the best value system, comprehensive performance assessments were introduced in 2002, which evaluated the institutional capacity and performance of local councils annually. In this system, evaluation scores improved, but the local people approached performance reports sceptically. Upon this, in 2009, comprehensive area assessments were launched, aiming at the holistic assessment of local service performance by central and local actors. However, after 2010, this practice was abolished and local governments decided to measure performance through voluntary programs. This practice is based on a governance approach. Administrative performance is guided democratically by the common negotiations of local actors. In Wales, comprehensive performance assessments were rejected for reasons such as the publication of score tables, the disclosure, and condemnation of weak performers. Later, it became possible to explain performance data through the local administration act 2009. In Wales, holistic administrative evaluations and a self-assessment system are at the forefront in assessing the performance of local administrations. Generally, the local performance model in the UK is based on effective leadership mechanisms and strong performance management systems. It focuses on system outputs and is focused on sustainable development. Performance systems applied at the local scale seem to make a positive contribution to administrative accountability. The publication of best value audit reports has increased transparency and has allowed the public to establish direct control over local authorities. Comprehensive performance assessments have increased the professional and managerial accountability of ministers and local authorities. In Wales, the performance of local administrations is assessed objectively through risk assessments. It can be said that frequent changes in performance evaluation systems negatively affects the stability of the system. Another problem experienced in practice is to ensure that performance systems based on different standards achieve consistent results. The following conclusions can be drawn from the UK example: Centralized performance measurement systems at local level performance measures have not developed consistently. The frequent intervention of the central audit agency in the process of assessing the performance of local administrations has led to bureaucratization and inefficiency. In assessing performance at local scale, it is necessary for local actors to agree on performance criteria together. Whether the performance targets have been achieved should be assessed directly by the local people's view. The expectations and evaluations of local people for the quality of local service provided will ensure the accountability of the local councils in professional and administrative terms. It is important that all actors in the system take part in the success of performance management in local administrations. For this, a strategic plan should be prepared in line with local values. Regular training should be provided to the staff who will implement the performance system. The participation of local people and non-governmental organizations in administrative processes should be ensured in determining performance criteria and evaluating performance outcomes.

”