Chapter «State administration»

CHAPTER «STATE ADMINISTRATION»

THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

IN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

Tatiana Furculița1

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-310-1-20

Abstract. The performance of public services is a current and

continuously expanding topic, debated both by academic researchers and
practitioners, being a complex concept that can be defined from several
perspectives, because a large number of activities must be managed, which
to match users' interests. The concept of performance has gone through a
remarkable evolution in the last decades, because, at the beginning, the
definitions attributed to performance referred to financial indicators, but
over time, non-financial indicators were also taken into account, which
proved to be indispensable for good functioning of the organization,
but, above all, for public sector institutions that must demonstrate social
responsibility. The performance of services is viewed differently from public
sector institutions, because there are different management, objectives,
needs and costs. The increase in competitiveness between institutions,
the decrease in funding from public sources and the pressure exerted by
interested parties on public sector organizations led the management of
institutions to the careful and periodic monitoring of internal processes and
the results obtained. The definition of performance in the context of public
institutions cannot be dissociated from the measurement process, being an
activity of collecting, analyzing, reporting and using information regarding
the inputs, outputs and results of the public institution. Demonstrating
the assumed responsibility of the institution towards internal and external
users is achieved with the help of the performance measurement process.
Information on the performance of the public institution is provided with the
help of financial and non-financial indicators, and the identification of the
1
PhD Student,
State University of Moldova, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova

© Tatiana Furculița 507

 Tatiana Furculiţa

most relevant indicators for each activity is an important step. The reporting
of information on the performance of services is a component of assumed
public responsibility, through which the efficiency of management, the way
of allocating public resources and spending public funds is demonstrated.
The use of information on the performance of services helps to improve the
processes of the public institution and to establish objectives. The present
research is positioned in the public sector, in the area of public services,
at the intersection of the fields of control, accounting and management, in
a niche segment, less explored, namely the performance of public sector
services. The research ends with the exposition of the main conclusions
drawn from the scientific approach carried out and the own contributions
brought to the state of knowledge for the studied field are presented, and
at the end we have surprised the limits of the research and future research
perspectives. The main objective of this paper is the theoretical analysis of
the performance measurement process in the public sector, at the current
stage of scientific research. The research ends with the exposition of the
main conclusions drawn from the scientific approach carried out and the
own contributions brought to the state of knowledge for the studied field are
presented, and at the end we have surprised the limits of the research and
future research perspectives.

1. Introduction
Public management is a dynamic, flexible system, through which the
general and specific public interests of society members are achieved. Public
management studies existing management processes and relationships
between the components of the administrative system, but also within
them in order to discover general principles and legalities, methods and
techniques for improving forecasting, organization and coordination,
resource administration and control-evaluation of activities with the aim of
increasing the degree of satisfaction of the public interest [13, p. 35]. The
fundamental objective of public management is to increase the degree of
satisfaction of the public interest, being determined by general and specific
needs. Public management believes that governments and public institutions
are similar, in many respects, to organizations in the private sector.
As a result, there are some managerial tools that can be successfully used
in both the private and public spheres, especially managerial tools that relate

508
 Chapter «State administration»

to increasing organizational effectiveness and efficiency. This interpretation

overturns the traditional approach to public management which argued that,
through its social and cultural components, public institutions (and, in this
case, government) are so different from private sector organizations.

2. New public management (NPM)

Since the 80s, with the public sector reforms brought by the Margaret
Thatcher government in Great Britain and the Ronald Regan administration
in the United States, a new approach in public administration begins to take
shape [10, p. 285]. Based on the wider participation of citizens in public
decisions and theoretically supported by the liberal currents developed by
the big business schools, the NPM seeks to improve the efficiency of the
public sector and the control that the government has over it.
The main idea behind the NPM claims that a better orientation of the
public sector to the needs of the market and citizens leads to increased
efficiency of government costs, without having negative side effects on other
objectives or areas. In fact, the NPM reflects a change in attitude, based on
the idea that institutions in the public system can and should function like
organizations in the private sector. Efficiency and effectiveness in the public
sector must be improved, public management in public institutions must be
oriented towards objectives and results, and public managers must be valued
according to their ability to solve general and specific social problems.
Features of NPM [7, p. 440]:
1. The catalytic role of governance – Governance should have a
catalytic role or be a steering mechanism for different service providers,
such as the public sector, the private sector and various non-governmental
organizations.
2. Empowerment of citizens – The Government should promote and
facilitate the empowerment of citizens and communities, so that they can
solve their own problems.
3. Efficiency and economy based on performance – The performance
of public sector agencies must be efficient. Thus, agencies should focus on
their results.
4. Focusing on goals rather than rules – The NPM perspective advocates
goal-oriented administration. The administration's approach should not be
an over-emphasis on rules and regulations.

509
 Tatiana Furculiţa

5. Customer-oriented governance – The NPM perspective defines

customers as "interested buyers" and advocates giving them choice by
providing convenient services and being interested in customer suggestions.
6. Competitive governance – Governance should promote a competitive
environment between different services in both the public and private
sectors, which would generate efficiency and a solid economy.
7. Anticipatory approach – This means that the government must
anticipate as much as possible the problems that may arise, rather than
designing and applying treatments afterwards, in an aggravated situation.
8. Entrepreneurial Governance (Entrepreneurial Government) – The
NPM perspective suggests that governance should focus on earning and
saving money, rather than spending. Monetary resources can be mobilized
through savings, user fees, etc.
9. Decentralization of authority – The authority structures of
government should be decentralized to avoid the negative consequences
of hierarchy. The decentralized authority should promote participative
management and teamwork.
10. Focus on the market mechanism – Being influenced by the neo-
liberal philosophy and the public option approach, the NPM perspective
advocates the adoption of the market mechanism rather than the
bureaucratic mechanism.
In essence, the NPM perspective includes [15, p. 51] increasing
productivity and improving the cost-efficiency ratio in public services, the
adoption of market strategies by the public sector, customer orientation,
decentralization of authority structures, and the distinction between policy
making and its implementation.
The practical implications of these principles are: emphasizing
managerial skills in policy making, adopting appropriate management
practices, establishing standards for performance measurement, preference
for deregulation of private property and promotion of competition,
contracting external services appropriate for governance, responsiveness
and efficiency in delivery public services, etc.
NPM considers the beneficiaries of public services as customers, and
citizens are assimilated to the shareholders of a private organization – these
being other similarities with the private environment. Some authors consider
that the NPM is in a continuous change and development, entering what they

510
 Chapter «State administration»

call the "digital era of governance" (digital era governance) through which
communication between citizens and public institutions, as well as many of
the services offered by these institutions are made through the internet and
digital media. Efficiency and effectiveness in public institutions To determine
how well or poorly an operation works, we need certain performance criteria.
One of the models based on which we can start identifying these
performance criteria is the theory of the 4Es: Economy; Efficiency;
Effectiveness; Ethics [16, p. 225].
By economy we mean obtaining the resources at the lowest price, under
the conditions of compliance with the specifications.
Efficiency means doing what you do well, while effectiveness means
doing what needs to be done. If efficiency describes how well the organization
manages to transform its inputs (resources) into outputs (results), then
effectiveness shows the extent to which the organization achieves its goals.
If the first three criteria existed and were put into practice for a very long
time, the fourth criterion – ethics – appeared later as a pressing necessity
introduced, first at the level of private organizations, but very quickly taken
over by public institutions.
Ethics represents the extent to which the behavior of an organization and
its members rises to the moral standards accepted by society [1, p. 535]. This
criterion is all the more important as it is closely related to the phenomenon
of corruption.

Table 1
Model of the 4 E performance criteria
The 4 E Meaning of terms
Effectiveness Doing the Right Thing (What)
Efficiency Doing what you do well (How)
Economy Doing what you do cheaply (without compromising quality)
Ethics Doing what you do morally
Source: developed by the author

The 4Es are used as performance evaluation criteria [9, p. 191].

Starting from the institution's mandate and the objectives it proposes,
criteria can be established, measurement indicators can be defined, and
then performance standards.

511
 Tatiana Furculiţa

Table 2
Comparative analysis of performance indicators
Classical New Public Modern Public
administration Management Management
Characteristics of the
Legality, Results obtained
Performance process: transparency,
compliance with (predominantly
indicators representativeness,
procedures quantitative terms)
participation
Closed:
Open: management Natural: governance is
administration
is focused on focused on serving citizens
System type is focused on
producing results and must ensure their
following its own
for clients access and participation
rules
Source: developed by the author

3. Performance in the public sector

Performance can be defined both by results and by behavior. The word
"performance" reflects a progressive approach, characterized by voluntary
effort, the orientation to make things better. The developments of the last
20 years in public management have generalized the orientation towards
performance and towards obtaining measurable results [2, p. 305].
There is today in modern administration management a complex set
of tools, methods and techniques through which performance orientation
is not a simple slogan, but the main framework in which decisions are
grounded, implemented and then the results obtained and the distance from
the expected ones are measured. In the context of public administration,
performance represents the continuous improvement of the parameters of
the public service provided both in terms of effectiveness and efficiency,
but also ensuring a high degree of satisfaction of citizens in relation to their
needs and expectations.
The idea of performance means the adoption of a set of quality standards,
the continuous refinement and improvement of the methods and procedures
used, respectively the involvement of beneficiaries, staff and higher
hierarchical levels. The performance includes all the elementary logical
stages of the action, from the intention to the actual result [5, p. 591]. This
must not only be tracked and measured but must be managed considering
four variables: cost, quality, time and organization.

512
 Chapter «State administration»

Performance management involves obtaining the best results from

the organization, teams and individuals, by knowing and managing
performance. It is a systematic approach based on permanent processes of
planning, evaluation and measurement of results, in accordance with its
strategic objectives. The basic premise is that achieving the desired results
leads to the fulfillment of the organization's objectives and to ensuring
its performance. Performance management must be understood as a
continuous process, reflecting normal management practices, and not as
special techniques imposed on managers.
Its conceptual framework includes terms such as: "performance
management", "performance", "performing organization". Since
management is the set of methods and processes for defining objectives,
training and control in the service of the quality of external services and
internal functioning methods, management is of interest to the public
organization.
According to some specialists, there is a strong managerial movement
that seeks to more or less transform the public sector, through the following
four major changes [11, p. 96]:
– from a central administration on its own to an open administration;
– from an administration of procedure and obedience to an administration
of responsibility;
– from a vertical administration, where everything is ordered by the
hierarchical pyramid, to a transversal administration, existing in the
network;
– from administration with expenses to an administration with results.
Performance can be evaluated by reference to standards established at
national level and applicable to all providers of a certain service or to local
standards, used only by the local administration in question.
Performance management involves adopting a systematic approach to
improving individual and team performance and is based on the following
two assumptions [20, p. 1585]:
1. People are expected to work well when they know what is expected of
them and when they have participated in setting those expectations.
2. The ability to meet these expectations depends on the level of
individual competence and motivation, as well as the leadership and support
they receive from managers.

513
 Tatiana Furculiţa

Performance management involves, on the one hand, the ability of

managers to establish strategic direction, to establish clear and relevant
objectives, and on the other hand, the effectiveness of staff in fulfilling
them. It seeks to obtain the best performance from staff and managers,
motivating them in order to achieve the organization's objectives. In
addition to staff evaluation, performance management uses a range of
other techniques to encourage performance; these include team-building,
quality circles, benchmarking, total quality management systems, as well
as a variety of "quality standards" (some of which are internationally
recognized). Performance management systems include ways to integrate
employees as well as techniques for evaluating and measuring performance
and controlling poor performance.
Features of performance management include [12, p. 96]:
– Clear connections with the organization's objectives;
– Clear connections with job requirements;
– Rigorous and objective evaluation processes;
– Emphasis on individual development plans;
– Continuous evaluation;
– Evaluation-based reward systems.
The connections with the organization's objectives. The objectives of
teams and people derive from the overall strategic objectives, so that they
understand what they need to do to contribute to the effectiveness of the
organization. In addition to individual performance, team effectiveness
is also important; team objectives are established, and performances are
evaluated and reviewed. Good communication and engagement is an
essential aspect of performance management. The organization's mission
and objectives must be equally understood. Communication must not be
done only from top to bottom, but there must also be communication from
bottom to top and also horizontally.
Connections to the job description. In performance management
systems, job descriptions are reviewed regularly, with managers and
employees agreeing on them. The job requirements must be clearly
formulated and easy to understand. Complex requirements are less likely
to be reviewed, and very cumbersome ones are unlikely to be met.
Rigorous and objective assessment. The manager and the employees
define the objectives together and propose clear, measurable targets that

514
 Chapter «State administration»

contribute to individual development, represent a challenge and contribute

equally to the overall goals. Teams or working groups may also have
goals and objectives to achieve. Performance indicators can be used to
set standards and measure effectiveness; for example, all correspondence
will be acknowledged in no more than 2 working days. The system needs
procedures to control, monitor and evaluate the activity. Techniques for
measuring and evaluating low performance are also used, including Pareto
analysis, fishbone diagrams, SWOT analysis, etc.
Individual development plans. Each individual can have a personal
development plan, intended to provide goals and activities that allow the
individual to achieve a series of objectives and develop his professional
career. This fits the quality standard as well as the modern concept of
"lifelong learning organization". Organizations are increasingly dynamic,
subject to change. This is why employees need the ability to develop new
skills and abilities.
Continuous evaluation. As with the staff review, there will be an annual
review, but usually the review is much more frequent. This evaluation
process is likely to involve teams, individuals and managers to help them
focus on performance and ways to improve it. In this context, communication
is important. Reward systems. In performance management systems, the
annual evaluation is often linked to remuneration and intends to reward
those who have managed to achieve their objectives [14, p. 18]. There are
issues regarding the link between performance and pay, namely: are we
aiming to reward results achieved or effort expended? There may also be a
conflict between staff's need to speak openly about their performance and
their fear of doing so if it could affect their pay. For this reason appraisal
meetings are usually held separately from salary reviews.
General and specific managerial performances
a. Methodological-managerial performances.
The most important performance is the quality of managerial tools. This
is highlighted by:
– the opportunity to call and use a certain managerial tool (management
system, method or technique);
– the integrity of the system, method or management technique called
for, in the sense of the appropriate use of all its components, any truncated
approach being doomed, sooner or later, to failure;

515
 Tatiana Furculiţa

– compliance with the specific operationalization methodology of the

chosen managerial tools;
– synchronization between the requirements and demands of the
system, method or managerial technique chosen for promotion and use, on
the one hand, and the competence of the managers and executors directly
involved in their operationalization;
– the synchronization between the managerial tools used and the
management functions in the exercise of which he directly participates.
The second methodological-managerial performance is the quality of
the design, operation and maintenance methodologies of management and
its components. This is reflected by:
– respecting the specific stages and phases of managerial design/redesign,
as a fundamental premise of the success of such a complex approach, of a
strategic nature and with a pronounced innovative character;
– taking into account the specifics of the application environment (the
organization or the procedural and structural components at which it is
operationalized);
– the correspondence between the content of the methodology, the
requirements and demands imposed by its application and the competence
of those who operationalize it; it is very important that the methodology,
regardless of complexity, be understood by managers and executors, so that
the application proceeds smoothly towards performance;
– the appropriateness of the design/redesign methodology,
highlighted by the period requested for application; it is very important
to operationalize the methodology in an optimal time interval, when
the change, modernization or fundamental improvement of an area is
necessary.
b. Decision-making performance.
The most important performance is the quality of managerial decisions.
This can be highlighted by:
– scientific substantiation – ensured, on the one hand, by the existence
and utilization of relevant information regarding the problems to be solved
and, on the other hand, especially in the case of strategic decisions, by the
use of appropriate managerial tools for the substantiation and adoption
decisions, depending on the decision-making situation in which the problem
to be solved is included;

516
 Chapter «State administration»

– empowering the decision – given by the effective involvement of the

person or persons who have the necessary authority (the decision-making
power or the right to decide in a certain field);
– decision-making competence – it assumes that those who adopt
decisions have the necessary knowledge, qualities and skills to capitalize
on the official authority conferred on the position, that is, they have the
personal authority required to solve the problems they face;
– the appropriateness of the decision – respectively, the adoption
and application of the decision in a time interval considered optimal;
any exceeding of it renders the adopted decision useless. Thus, a less
substantiated decision adopted during the optimal period is preferable to a
superior substantiated decision, adopted outside of it;
– the integration into the whole of microeconomic decisions implies,
first of all, the outline of some objectives, which belong to the organization's
categorical system of objectives (fundamental, derived or specific). Secondly,
a horizontal correlation is necessary, in the sense of harmonizing the decisions
adopted by managers located on the same hierarchical level, regarding complex
decision-making problems, which require the presence of several departments;
– the appropriate wording of the decision, i.e. finding, in its text (the
decision-maker is responsible for it), the following parameters: the
decision-maker (explicitly expressed), the decision-making objectives, the
implementation methods, the necessary resources, the date of adoption, the
date of application, the place of application and the person responsible with
the application of the decision.
Also, the quality of the decision-making mechanisms (acts and decision-
making processes) is of particular importance:
– the opportunity of substantiating, adopting and applying decisions
based on documents or decision-making processes. The premise of such a
qualitative parameter is the typological framing of the adopted decisions.
Only the current decisions are the consequence of the decision-making acts,
in their adoption being necessary, with priority, the experience, flair, talent,
intuition of the manager (the decision-maker);
– respecting the specific methodology of strategic-tactical decision-
making processes, that is, finding some representative stages, without
which the quality of the "finished product", that is, of the adopted decisions
and its efficiency, suffers;

517
 Tatiana Furculiţa

– the quality of the parameters of the documents and decision-making

processes, ensured by: the competence of the decision-makers, individual
and group; with reference to their knowledge, qualities and skills (personal
authority); the realism of the decision-making objectives; the accuracy of
the decision criteria; substantiation of the decision options; the realism of
decisional consequences/results;
– the synchronization between the hierarchical position of managers
(decision-makers) and the types of decisions adopted, the extremely high
variety of adopted decisions and the equally diverse decision-making
involvement of managers being known;
– the correspondence between the decision-making requirements of
each management function and the adopted decisions (the decision-making
intensity per function of the management processes).
– correspondence of the organization's functions – adopted decisions
(decisional intensity by functions). Given the fact that the exercise of
managerial functions affects the procedural components (work processes,
found in different aggregation formulas, from tasks to attributions, activities
and functions), it is very important to give them a distributive attention, in
relation to their importance in the economy of the organization and with the
contribution to the achievement of various types of objectives.
– correspondence official authority – personal authority (granted
competence – actual competence);
– the correspondence between the typology of decisions and the content
of some trends in management and its major components.
c. Information performance. The quality of information is a fundamental
requirement, which is ensured by:
– realism, respectively, the use of information that faithfully reflects the
situation of the organization and its contextual environment;
– multilateralism, ensured by approaching phenomena and processes
from the perspective of economic, technical, social, etc. aspects. and finding
them in the information;
– dynamism, in the sense of highlighting work processes in their
evolution;
– timeliness, meaning the collection, recording, transmission and
processing of information in a timely manner, thus ensuring effective
decision-making and operational processes;

518
 Chapter «State administration»

– adaptability. The quality of information circuits and flows is evaluated

according to the length, content and costs regarding the transmission of
information.
The quality of the informational procedures can be highlighted by:
the quality of the information processing means and the quality of the
informational situations (documents).
d. Organizational performances.
These performances refer especially to procedural organization and
structural organization. The procedural organization can be evaluated by the
accuracy of the delimitations and dimensions of the procedural components
(tasks, attributions, activities, functions). The structural organization can
be evaluated by: the accuracy of the delimitation and dimensioning of
the structural components. Practically, the work processes, delimited in
tasks, attributions, activities and functions, cannot be exercised, and the
fundamental objectives, derived I, derived II, specific and individual, cannot
be achieved if the structural-organizational components are not properly
defined and dimensioned: positions, functions, departments, hierarchical
levels, hierarchical weights or organizational relationships.
Significant are the positions and compartments (regardless of their
name), where work processes take shape.
The correspondence hierarchical levels – hierarchical weights, implies
the outline of dimensions of management norms as balanced as possible for
managers located on the same hierarchical level.
The flattening of the organizational structure, which calls for the
most reasonable number of hierarchical levels, which allow a fluency of
information (circuits and informational flows as short as possible) and, on
this basis, a quick information of the managers and executors involved in
the foundation and adoption of decisions and actions.
The quality of organizational relations is dependent on the constructive
and functional characteristics of the organization and the type of
organizational structure adopted. It would be desirable for the structure of
organizational relations to be oriented towards cooperation and authority
relations of a functional type, much closer to participative management.
The degree of functional specialization of positions and departments is
another criterion of organizational performance, which implies a certain
procedural endowment of these two structural components. An exaggerated

519
 Tatiana Furculiţa

specialization, especially at the level of positions, can generate their

occupants routine in everything they do and, over time, even inefficiency.
The quality of organizational documents is another important qualitative
parameter in the assessment of the organizational system. It assumes
that the organization and operation regulation, the organizational chart,
job descriptions and job descriptions faithfully reflect, procedurally and
structurally, the organization, departments, functions and management and
execution positions.
The mobility-stability correspondence is an asset of any type of
organizational structure, to the extent that it allows the operation of changes
whenever needed, without, however, substantially disturbing the normal
functioning of the organization.

4. Management by objectives (MBO)

The process of establishing the objectives of an institution is a part of
the strategic planning system, which should be implemented at the level of
every public or private organization. Planning by setting objectives involves
terms that classify objectives [3, p. 275]:
– long term – over 10 years;
– medium term – over 5 years;
– short-term – under 1 year.
In their planning activity, managers actually start from the 6 fundamental
questions: Who? What the? How? Where? When? Why? In practice,
planning involves a number of procedural steps, which can be adapted to all
planning activities at all organizational levels:
Step 1: Setting goals and objectives. The planning function begins by
establishing goals and objectives, without which the organization may fail
to set priorities and allocate resources.
Step 2: Defining the current situation. Only after the management has
established the company's competitive position in relation to its competitors,
plans can be made regarding the future direction. In this analysis, it is
important to identify the weak and strong points of the organization and the
resources that can be used to achieve the goals.
Step 3: Establishing assumptions about future conditions. In this stage,
managers evaluate the internal and external environment in an attempt to
identify those factors that could create problems in the attempt to achieve

520
 Chapter «State administration»

the objectives. Managers then forecast future trends based on these factors
because, although difficult, anticipating problems and opportunities is an
essential part of the planning process. Each alternative must be carefully
evaluated from the point of view of the assumptions taken into account for
that alternative to be effective.
Step 4: Creating alternatives and setting direction. During this stage,
managers develop alternatives and choose the option that seems most
appropriate. The evaluation also includes a critique of the premises on
which the respective alternative is based, those alternatives that are based
on unrealistic assumptions being eliminated. Decisions are made regarding
future actions.
Step 5: Implementation of plans and evaluation of results. Planning
is the first of the elementary functions of management and is the basis
of the other functions. This stage of the planning process emphasizes the
relationship between planning and control: action plans are the basis of the
control process. The MPO makes the connection between the organization's
purpose and individual performance through the participative involvement
of managers at all levels and in all planning, organizing, directing and
controlling activities in order to execute the work. Management by
objectives (MBO) is the most used method of evaluating the performance of
managers. The MBO system is the deepest of the three standard approaches
to personnel evaluation and requires the evaluator to have experience,
reasoning and foresight. Thus, management by objectives through its
evaluation component appreciates the achievements in quantitative and
qualitative terms of the goals or objectives agreed upon by the two parties
(boss + subordinate). Management by objectives is suitable for middle-
level managerial positions (heads of sectors, workshops, services).
Objectives and indicators are established in agreement with the
subordinate, with a fixed period of time before the evaluation (usually one
year) [8, p. 930]. It is assumed that these managers are well trained regarding
the strategic elements of the decision-making process and managerial
planning. On the other hand, the evaluator must also know the theoretical
and practical elements of the process of forecasting, setting objectives,
evaluation and interview technique.
We observe that in performance management the focus is not on the
activities within the processes, but on their results, which are continuously

521
 Tatiana Furculiţa

reviewed, in a continuous evaluation cycle. On the other hand, managers

identify the actions taken in the key result areas that thus contribute to the
overall objectives. Afterwards, each task must be defined and performance
standards established as objectives that reflect the quality, quantity, cost and
time agreed upon by managers together with employees. Standards can be
described as a "statement of the conditions that will exist when the required
results are satisfactorily achieved". It does not represent a series of actions,
but their final result.
A standard is established according to the task and must not vary
according to the employee. In practice, there are objectives that can be
quantified and measured through quantity indicators through budgets, costs,
work performed, etc., but often the objectives must be assessed through
quality indicators, such as those standards which, although they cannot be
measured directly, can be appreciated or observed, for example customer
relations. The way of setting the objectives is decisive for the performance
of their achievement. Thus, if the objectives are unimportant, set in the short
term or cannot be measured, managers, regardless of the form of motivation
(positive or negative), will not achieve the proposed goal [3, p. 267]. The
degree of achievement of the objectives also depends on the information/
reporting system implemented by the managers. It involves the development
of methods of gathering information in relation to the control objectives of
the managers.
Accurate information – which can be easily gathered – about what has
been achieved is essential. They are then compared with what should have
been achieved and it is analyzed whether the necessary measures can be
taken to correct the performance. It is important to decide what information
is crucial for control purposes and to prepare reports that convey this
information to those who need it and can take action. Information systems
can also help to identify constraints that can prevent the achievement of
objectives. The action plans, which describe the institution's objectives, are
reviewed periodically.
The performances of departments, units and specific functions in the
organization are also regularly reviewed against established objectives
and standards. The employee's individual performance is also reviewed,
often through staff appraisal reports. The purpose of these reviews is to
support employees at work and continuous development. Action plans are

522
 Chapter «State administration»

detailed descriptions of how the objectives are achieved; the plans are
established prior to the implementation of the activities and are revised
periodically.
The 7-step method for drawing up an action plan:
Step 1. establishing what needs to be done;
Step 2. defining the main activities intended to support the objectives;
Step 3. establishing the relationship between these activities;
Step 4. clarifying roles and links and assigning the main responsibilities
for each action;
Step 5. estimating the deadlines for the completion of each main activity
and secondary activities;
Step 6. identifying the resources needed to perform each activity;
Step 7. checking the deadlines and modifying the action plan, so that
there is sufficient flexibility for possible modifications.
Defining specific objectives in accordance with the SMART requirements
package and correlating them with the general objectives of the institution.
Any public institution must define its general and specific objectives in
accordance with the purpose for which it was created and compliance with
internal laws, regulations and policies.
The general requirements regarding the definition of objectives are:
– The general objectives are consistent with the mission of the public
institution;
– The general objectives are detailed in specific objectives and expected
results for each activity;
– The objectives must be defined in such a way as to respond to the set
of "S.M.A.R.T." conditionality;
– Establishing objectives is the attribute of management, and the
responsibility for their achievement rests with both management and
employees;
– For each objective, the expected results (targets) must be defined;
– The established objectives and expected results must be communicated
to employees and stakeholders.
The general objectives of any public institution refer to the realization
of good quality public services, under conditions of maximum efficiency
and effectiveness, as these objectives are presented in the normative act that
regulates its organization and operation.

523
 Tatiana Furculiţa

Conditionalities like S.M.A.R.T. applied to the objectives:

1. Precise ("Specific"): takes into account the fact that the objective
must be clear and well defined, in other words any employee in the field
can understand it, and its interpretation by the employees is unitary.
Example of an objective that is not precise: "Improving the procurement
process". (it is impossible to know what is desired regarding the
improvement of this process – the purchase of a software, new hires,
professional training, etc.).
2. Measurable and verifiable: represents the most important attribute and
helps in establishing the following elements:
– the objective can be met;
– the period of time established until its total realization;
– when the objective was met (in the case of evaluating the entity's
performance).
Example of objective that is not measurable: "increasing the skills and
abilities of the staff" without specifying the expected results (for example,
a procurement course for 10 people).
3. Necessary ("Appropriate"): monitors whether the objective is
correlated with the institution's mission and strategic objective. The
avoidance of illegal or ethically and morally unacceptable aspects is
also considered. Example of an objective that is not always necessary:
"acquisition of a high-performance specialized e-commerce software" in
conditions where it cannot be used by the purchasing structure, "acquisition
of a Porsche", "the best/expensive laptop on the market".
4. Realistic: assumes that the objective can be achieved (it is not
impossible) and that the employees have the skills, knowledge, resources
and time necessary to achieve it. Example of an objective that is not realistic:
"reducing the purchase costs for fuel by 20%", in the conditions where a
50% increase in the price of fuel on the market is forecast.
5. Deadline ("Time-dependent"): aims to establish a clear deadline
in time. This term must allow the achievement of the objective, but not
be excessively high so as to affect the performance of the activity (ie,
cause low efficiency). Example of an objective that does not have a
deadline: "the emergency purchase of an IT network". In this case, for
some people the emergency regime can mean a few days, and for others
a month or two.

524
 Chapter «State administration»

KPIs (Performance indicators)

The indicator represents a quantitative, qualitative or other criterion
measurement by which the performance of a process is evaluated, often by
comparison with a standard or objective, agreed in advance. The correct
definition of performance indicators means the effective evaluation of the
strategy of a public institution, because it allows [4, p. 459]:
– knowledge of the degree of achievement of the objectives established
by the strategy;
– monitoring and evaluating the performance of each process;
– analysis of the system and the processes within it according to several
criteria/variables, which can be combined: quantity, quality, cost and time;
Purpose of using performance indicators:
– Evaluation, at certain moments of time, of the stage of meeting the
objectives;
– Implementation of an early warning system regarding the occurrence
of problems, which will allow corrective measures to be taken in a timely
manner;
– Increasing managerial responsibility in public entities by establishing
objective criteria for evaluating activity performance;
– Making comparisons to identify opportunities to improve activities;
– Promoting the improvement of activities by publishing the performance
levels achieved by the entities, etc.
Characteristics of performance indicators:
– Consistency – to ensure comparison over time and for different entities
with the same activity;
– Clarity – the indicators must be simple, well defined and easy to understand;
– Controllability – performance must be measured in areas that can be
controlled by managers. However, there may be many other factors that
influence performance that are not under management's control.
– Scope – the indicators must cover all important aspects of the activity.
However, the excessive use of indicators can generate confusion and lead
to the dissipation of efforts.
– Credibility – the defined indicators must be accepted as suitable
for measuring performance and must be based on adequate sources of
information. In practice, three types of indicators are used in the performance
measurement process:

525
 Tatiana Furculiţa

Table 3
Typology of performance indicators
Input indicators Intermediate indicators Final indicators
Output indicators (product/ Outcome indicators
Input indicators
servicice) (consequences/ effects)
Inputs (resources) are
Outputs are not ends in
not ends in themselves, Can measure the
themselves, but contribute
but contribute to the achievement of the
to the achievement of the
achievement of the institution's goals
institution's goals
institution's goals
It measures the effect
of the institution's
intervention on the target
groups (individuals,
organizations)
Source: developed by the author

Performance monitoring in public institutions.

In the context of the adoption by a number of important public
institutions of performance management (strategy, strategic plan,
Financial:
Objectives
Indicators
Targets
Initiative

Stakeholders: Internal processes:

Objectives Objectives
Indicators Indicators
Targets Targets
Initiative Initiative

Human Resources,
Learning, Innovation:
Objectives
Indicators
Targets
Initiative

Figure 1. Balanced Scorecard model

526
 Chapter «State administration»

objectives and performance indicators, etc.), an evolutionary step was

the implementation of managerial tools that provide information about
performance in real time [6, p. 349].
The Balanced Scorecard model became a conceptual platform on which
these institutions designed their internal/external processes and flows so
that staff and other stakeholders could monitor progress, take responsibility
and manage results [17, p. 101].
The Balance Scorecard essentially defines the architecture of any
integrated performance management system in an institution or between
several institutions in functional relationships, so that the system as a whole
focuses on the added value of public services provided and the improvement
of institutional performance.

5. The managerial approach of the public service

The desire of public authorities and the expectations of users to transform
public services so that they are in line with the public interest, determined
the outline of this distinct approach, the managerial approach to public
services, which appeared against the background of the diversification
of activities in which public authorities are involved, especially in the
economic and, implicitly, of the development of public interventions, as
well as the inability of traditional methods to lead to performance.
The management approaches the public service as an activity and as
an organization that carries out this activity, aiming to increase overall
performance. Themes such as objectives of the service provider organization
(mission, policies and strategies), its structure (relationship with objectives,
design, operations, roles), technology (information processing, equipment),
culture (values, leadership style), external environment ( political,
economic, social factors, the organization's customers, the relationship with
them, public marketing activities), the decision-making system (approach,
the participation of interested groups in the decision-making process)
represents the center of managerial concerns over the public service.
Special attention is given to the main resources engaged in the public
service [19, p. 1250]: the creative potential of people and the informational
resource, considered to be the basis of public performances, as well
as development methods: redefining the processes of recruitment and
selection of personnel, motivation, career development, ethical aspects and

527
 Tatiana Furculiţa

deontology of the public function, training/improvement, the introduction

of innovation, decentralization, privatization, entrepreneurship, user
education. Last but not least, management is concerned with observing,
analyzing and improving the knowledge and capacities of managers in the
public sector, including the ethical aspects of their activity.
A new paradigm for the management of public services has emerged
regarding the development of a new performance-oriented culture in
a less centralized and resized public sector. In any discussion about
public enterprise, questions about efficiency and management, as well as
ownership, are imposed. Public enterprises try to be efficient by fulfilling
their objectives. Their missions differ from the provision and provision
of services for users (legal or natural persons) to the elaboration and
implementation of public policies. Movements for performance orientation
(efficiency, effectiveness and quality of public services) in the management
of public activities require "the development of enterprises that continuously
adapt to meet public needs".
It is also important to identify a set of indicators by which the
performance of public services can be measured [18, p. 49]. The system
of performance indicators makes it possible to evaluate the consumption
of resources in relation to the results obtained after the completion of the
processes of realization and provision of services and to compare them with
the levels established as objectives.

Results

Citizen/
client

Effectiveness Efficiency

Objectives Economical Resources

Figure 2. The performance triangle

528
 Chapter «State administration»

The primary role of public institutions is to provide a service or product

to a consumer or beneficiary, as opposed to providing jobs for civil servants,
for example. The logic pursued by public enterprises in the realization of
public services is defined by "the implementation of public policy, the
provision of free services, redistribution, the provision of services that are
paid for by the user when he benefits from them, etc.".

6. Conclusions
Reforming public services, the central concern of management, is
more than necessary in any administrative system. Within the reformation
process, certain stages are necessary, such as: establishing a unitary
vision in accordance with the situation, with traditions and mentalities;
defining the public sector, including the typology of public services;
assigning responsibilities to public administration levels; establishing
sources of income by administration levels; sharing the regulatory
function on the administration levels; drafting legislation in the field of
public service provision; opening the administration's access to the capital
market and adopting some measures regarding the improvement of the
financing framework of public services; creating the framework for the
real professional improvement of civil servants and the improvement of
public management. From the aspect of user involvement in the provision
of public services, it is worth mentioning that users play a special role in
the evolution of public services, claiming the need to be a component part
in the management of public services, through the lens of representation
mechanisms and claiming, more or less explicitly, an egalitarianism
regarding the conditions of supply.
The efficiency of public administration depends, to a large extent, on
the human resources management system applied in public authorities,
on the level of professionalism of public servants, on their orientation
towards satisfying the needs and legitimate interests of citizens. The degree
of satisfaction of citizens' needs is conditioned by the performance of
public authorities and, to a large extent, by the professionalism of human
resources, by the way in which the officials understand the objectives facing
the public authorities, by the extent to which they assume responsibility for
the consequences of their activity, the way of providing public services, the
way they work with citizens. Thus, the management of the public function

529
 Tatiana Furculiţa

and the civil servant has a substantial impact on citizens, civil society,
public and private sectors, authorities and public institutions. At the current
stage, the quality of public services that citizens benefit from is a problem of
major importance for society. The mission of public authorities to provide
public services to citizens in an effective and efficient manner can only be
achieved through a modern management of all resources at system level,
public authority and, in particular, human resources.

References:
1. Abdel-Maksoud, A., Elbanna, S., Mahama, H., & Pollanen, R. (2015) The use
of performance information in strategic decision making in public organizations.
International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(7), 528–549.
2. Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2011) Dimensions of public-
ness and organizational performance: A review of the evidence. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl 3), 301–319.
3. Arnaboldi, M., and Azzone, G., (2010) Constructing performance measure-
ment in the public sector. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21, 266–282.
4. Askim, J. (2007) How do politicians use performance information? An
analysis of the Norwegian local government experience. International Review of
Administrative Sciences, 73(3), 453–472.
5. Behn, R. D. (2003) Why measure performance? Different purposes require
different measures. Public administration review, 63(5), 586–606.
6. Berman, E. (2002) How useful is performance measurement. Public
Performance & Management Review, 348–351.
7. Boland, T., & Fowler, A. (2000) A systems perspective of performance man-
agement in public sector organisations. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 13(5), 417–446.
8. Borst, R., Lako, C., & de Vries, M. (2014) Is Performance Measurement
Applicable in the Public Sector? A Comparative Study of Attitudes among Dutch
Officials. International Journal of Public Administration, 37(13), 922–931.
9. Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2010) Strategic management and public ser-
vice performance: The way ahead. Public Administration Review, 70 (s1), 185–192.
10. Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (2000) An institutional perspective on perfor-
mance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector’. Management
Accounting Research, 11(3), 281–306;
11. Carter, N. (1991) Learning to measure performance: the use of indicators in
organizations. Public Administration, 69(1), 85–101.
12. Chalmers, D. (2008) Defining quality indicators in the context of quality
models.
13. Goh, S. C., (2012) Making performance measurement systems more effec-
tive in public sector organizations", Measuring Business Excellence, 16(1), 31–42;
14. Hood, C. (1991) A public management for all seasons. Public administra-
tion, 69(1), 3–19.

530
 Chapter «State administration»

15. Hvidman, U., & Andersen, S. C. (2014) Impact of performance management

in public and private organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 24(1), 35–58.
16. Julnes, P. D. L. (2006) Performance Measurement An Effective Tool for
Government Accountability? The Debate Goes On. Evaluation, 12(2), 219–235.
17. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992) The Balanced Scorecard – Measures
That Drive Performance –, in: Harvard Business Review;
18. Modell, S. (2004) Performance measurement myths in the public sector:
a research note. Financial Accountability & Management, 20(1), 39–55.
19. Neely, A. (2005) The evolution of performance measurement research:
developments in the last decade and a research agenda for the next. International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(12), 1264–1277.
20. Talbot, C. (2008) Performance regimes – The institutional context of perfor-
mance policies. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 31(14), 1569–1591.

531