Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

Debate: Complexity and the performance of social interventions

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Toby Lowe

Downloads


Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND).


Abstract

It is now routine to say that there are a wide range of organizations which undertake activity to enact social policy objectives. The range of organizations involved in enacting social policy are one demonstration that previously clear boundaries between state and civil society are now more problematic to draw with any clarity.In the field of the performance management of public services, this blurring of the boundaries between state and civil society has been recognized in the shift from speaking about performance management to performance governance (PG). It is now recognized that social interventions often involve multiple stakeholders, including both citizens themselves, and a range of private and voluntary sector organizations (Conaty, 2012Conaty, F. (2012), Performance management challenges in hybrid NPO/public sector settings: an Irish case. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61, 3 pp. 290–309. doi: 10.1108/17410401211205650[CrossRef]; Halligan et al., 2012Halligan, J., Sarrico, C. and Rhodes, M. L. (2012), On the road to performance governance in the public domain? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61, 3, pp. 224–234. doi: 10.1108/17410401211205623[CrossRef]). As a result, new concepts of PG, and in particular shared accountability, have developed. This is also reflected in the ‘collective impact’ movement (FSG, 2015FSG (2015), Seewww.fsg.org/approach-areas/collective-impact).The effect of introducing governance is to expand the realm of ‘managing for performance’ that both opens up the black box and goes well beyond. It suggests greater complexity and less direct control by governments. Several strands of PG can be differentiated. First there are organizational relationships both within and beyond the public sector that cover a range of collaborations through networks, partnerships, and co-ordination mechanisms that are governed by performance mechanisms. Public sector organizations linking to and partnering with private, not-for-profit, non-governmental and ad hoc citizen groups are all part of governing. The second dimension covers participation and citizen engagement in performance feedback (Halligan et al., 2012Halligan, J., Sarrico, C. and Rhodes, M. L. (2012), On the road to performance governance in the public domain? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61, 3, pp. 224–234. doi: 10.1108/17410401211205623[CrossRef], pp. 226–227).


Publication metadata

Author(s): Lowe T

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Public Money and Management

Year: 2017

Volume: 37

Issue: 2

Pages: 79-80

Print publication date: 01/02/2017

Online publication date: 12/01/2017

Acceptance date: 16/12/2016

ISSN (print): 0954-0962

ISSN (electronic): 1467-9302

Publisher: Taylor and Francis

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2016.1266141

DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2016.1266141


Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric


Actions

Find at Newcastle University icon    Link to this publication


Share