Why Measure Performance?

The article written by Robert D. Behn, entitled "Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures" really brought to light the issues discussed by Deborah Stone in her book Policy Paradox about numbers and the Polis. First off all the article suggested that performance measures be used for specific purposes: to evaluate, to control, to budget, to motivate, to promote, to celebrate, to learn and to improve. (Behn, 2003). According to the article, these specific purposes are common political activities that precipitate further action. This position conforms to Stone's position that "measures imply a need for action." (Stone, 2002, pg. 167). This makes sense when you look at each of the purposes listed by the article. For example, when you use performance measures to evaluate an employee's performance, the results of the evaluation will be used to make adjustments to the employee's training, pay or rank and position.

The next suggestion made by the article in regards to performance measures was that measures needed to be selected for each purpose based on what made sense for the item or action being measured. (Behn, 2003). What this means is that the public manager needs to determine what units of measures need to be used as well as what pieces of data need to be evaluated. This selection process forces the manager to identify similarities and differences between items, (Stone, 2002, pg. 167) as well as prioritize items, in order to determine what should be included in their analysis and what should be excluded. (pg. 176). For example, if you again look at the employee evaluation example, the public manager would want to look at factors that directly related to their job performance. For example, they may look at productivity, timeliness, behavior, and incident reports.