Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Evaluation of Organisational Performance: Estonian Cultural and Creative Industries Organisations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management, Participation and Entrepreneurship in the Cultural and Creative Sector

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to find out how the heterogeneous background of CCI organisations relates to the evaluation of organisational performance, challenges and skills gap. Quantitative primary data was collected from 460 respondents by using an online questionnaire. The current study is one of the first studies on the evaluation of organisational performance in Estonian CCI organisations and it has revealed that the established organisational performance evaluation tools are not widely used among Estonian CCI organisations. The following skills gaps in financial management, strategic planning, compliance with laws, analyses and reporting; and challenges (no confidence in income; profitability and protection of copyright) affect the evaluation of organisational performance in CCI organisations of Estonia the most. The authors suggest a framework of organisational performance evaluation in CCI organisations to explain the factors influencing the existing practices and mind-sets of organisational performance evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almatrooshi, B., Singh, S. K., & Farouk, S. (2016). Determinants of organisational performance: A proposed framework. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 65(6), 844–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J., & Richardson, L. (2010). Meaningful measurement: A literature review and Australian and British case studies of arts organizations conducting ‘artistic self-assessment’. Cultural Trends, 19(4), 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2010.515004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, M., & O’Connor, J. (2009). After the creative industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 15(4), 365–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • del Barrio, M. J., Herrero, L. C., & Sanz, J. Á. (2009). Measuring the efficiency of heritage institutions: A case study of a regional system of museums in Spain. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 10(2), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2008.08.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • del Barrio, M. J., & Herrero, L. C. (2014). Evaluating the efficiency of museums using multiple outputs: Evidence from a regional system of museums in Spain. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 20(2), 221–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benghozi, P.-J., & Lyubareva, I. (2014). When organizations in the cultural industries seek new business models: A case study of the French online press. International Journal of Arts Management, 16(3), 6–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berziņš, G. (2012). Strategic management in creative industry organisations: Specifics in strategic decision making. Management of Organisations: Systematic Research, 62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilton, C., & Leary, R. (2002). What can managers do for creativity? Brokering creativity in the creative industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 8(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnkraut, G. (2011). Evaluation im Kulturbetrieb. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnkraut, G., & Heller, V. (2008). Development of an evaluation system for institutional subsidized arts institutions. In Kulturmanagement konkret. Hamburg, pp. 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boorsma, M., & Chiaravalloti, F. (2010). Arts marketing performance: An artistic-mission-led approach to evaluation. Journal of Arts Management Law and Society, 40, 297–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BTW Consultants. (2010). Evaluation capacity diagnostic tool. BTW Consultants. Available from http://informingchange.com/uploads/2010/06/Evaluation-Capacity-Diagnostic-Tool.pdf

  • Caust, J. (2003). Putting the ‘art’ back into arts policy making: How arts policy has been ‘captured’ by the economists and the marketers. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 9(1), 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. A. O., Morita, H., & Zhu, J. O. E. (2005). Context-dependent DEA with an application to Tokyo Public Libraries. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 4(3), 385–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, J.-R., Jen, S. C., & Huang, K.-P. (2012). A study of the performance on human resource management strategy in tourism industry with data envelopment analysis. Pakistan Journal of Statistics, 28(5), 735–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Culture, M. and S. (2001). Creative Industries Mapping Document 2001. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eesti Konjunktuuriinstituut. (2013). Eesti loomemajanduse olukorra uuring ja kaardistus. [Mapping and Survey of the Estonian Creative Economy]. Tallinn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eikhof, D. R., & Haunschild, A. (2006). Lifestyle meets market: Bohemian entrepreneurs in creative industries. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(3), 234–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. J., & Mcfarlan, F. W. (2011). Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of a nonprofit’s performance. Strategic Finance, (October), 27–34. Available from http://www.imanet.org/PDFs/Public/SF/2011_10/10_2011_epstein.pdf

  • European Creative Industries Alliance. (2012). Developing successful creative & cultural clusters. Measuring their outcomes and impacts with new framework tools.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, R. R., & Anderson, A. B. (1987). Short-term projects and emergent careers: Evidence from Hollywood. American Journal of Sociology, 92(4), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. D., & Schellenberg, D. A. (1982). Conceptual issues of linkage in the assessment of organisational performance. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 7(1), 49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • García, M. R. (2008). Evaluating the organizational performance and social impact of third sector organizations: A new functional realm for nonprofit marketing. In 8th International conference for the international society for third sector research (pp. 1–24).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, a. L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organisational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gstraunthaler, T., & Piber, M. (2007). Performance measurement and accounting: Museums in Austria. Museum Management and Curatorship, 22(4), 361–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, C. J. (2002). Efficiency in the provision of public services: A data envelopment analysis of UK public library systems. Applied Economics, 34(5), 649–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, D., & Briand, L. (2013). Controlling the uncontrollable: ‘Agile’ teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work. Work Employment and Society, 27(2), 308–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffcutt, P., & Pratt, A. C. (2002). Managing creativity in the cultural industries. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(4), 225–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A., & Sage, A. (2000). A systems management approach for improvement of organisational performance measurement systems. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 2(1), 33–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candace Jones, Mark Lorenzen, & Jonathan Sapsed (2015). Creative industries: A typology of change, The Oxford Handbook of Creative Industries.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P., et al. (2004). Creative industries: Economic contributions, management challenges and support initiatives. Management Research News, 27(11/12), 134–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilbride, W., & Norris, S. (2014). Collaborating to clarify the cost of curation. New Review of Information Networking, 19(1), 44–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krlev, G., Munscher, R., & Mulbert, K. (2013). Social Return on Investment (SROI): State-of-the-Art and Perspectives. A meta-analysis of practice in Social Return on Investment (SROI) studies published 2002–2012. Available from http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30064939%0A

  • Küttim, M., Arvola, K., & Venesaar, U. (2011). Development of creative entrepreneurship: Opinion of managers from Estonia, Latvia, Finland and Sweden. Business: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 369–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J. et al. (2014). Study on the technical efficiency of creative human capital in china by three-stage data envelopment analysis model. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S., & Sydow, J. (2007). Transforming creative potential in project networks: How TV movies are produced under network-based control. Critical Sociology, 33(1), 19–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, J. (2015). Assessing outcomes and value: It’s all a matter of perspective. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 16(3), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-10-2015-0034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miron, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality and efficiency complete or complement each other? Journal of Organisational Behavior, 25(2), 179–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montalto, V., Iglesias, M., & Kern, P. (2012). Towards a ‘benchmarking raster’: A selection of indicators to measure and assess policies for cultural and creative industries. Quaestiones Geographicae, 31(4), 33–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely, A., et al. (2000). Performance measurement system design: Developing and testing a process-based approach. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 20(10), 1119–1145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noyes, E., Allen, I. E., & Parise, S. (2012). Innovation and entrepreneurial behaviour in the Popular Music Industry. Creative Industries Journal, 5(1), 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pick, D., et al. (2015). Guest Editorial. Theorising creative industry management: Rebooting the woolly mammoth. Management Decision, 53(4), 828–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, J., & Cunningham, S. (2008). Four models of the creative industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 14(3), 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radbourne, J., Johanson, K., Glow, H., & White, T. (2009). The audience experience: Measuring quality in the performing arts. International Journal of Arts Management, 11(3), 16–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, M. (2002). Measuring the economic and social impact of the arts: A review. London: Arts council of England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichmann, G., & Sommersguter-Reichmann, M. (2010). Efficiency measures and productivity indexes in the context of university library benchmarking. Applied Economics, 42(3), 311–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, M. (2014). Hybrid organisations in the arts: A cautionary view. Journal of Arts Management Law and Society, 44(3), 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russ-Eft, D., & Hallie, P. (2009). Evaluation in organisations: A systematic approach to enhancing learning, performance, and change. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 3(5), 108–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, B. (1992). Making capital from culture: The corporate form of capitalist cultural production. Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scottish Arts Council. (2009). Quality framework guidelines for arts organisations (2nd ed.). 2. Available from http://www.scottisharts.org.uk/resources/publications/arts_culture/pdf/Quality_Framework_part2.pdf

  • Selwood, S. (2002). What difference do museums make? Producing evidence on the impact of museums. Critical Quarterly, 44, 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorjonen, H., & Uusitalo, L. (2005). Does market orientation influence the performance of art organisations?. In AIMAC, pp. 1–15. Available from http://neumann.hec.ca/aimac2005/PDF_Text/SorjonenH_UusitaloL.pdf

  • Thelwall, S. (2012, February 28). Benchmarking: How to put the arts sector’s data to work for you. The Guardian, p. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Town, J. S., Neshat, N., & Dehghani, M. (2013). Review of the current gap between clients’ expectations and perceptions of received service in national library by using gap analysis model. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 14(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/14678041311316130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towse, R. (2010). Creativity, copyright and the creative industries paradigm. Kyklos, 63(3), 461–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tscherning, R. W., & Boxenbaum, E. (2011). What do the Creative Industries need? – Barriers and possibilities for growth in the creative industries in Denmark, pp. 1–15. Available from http://www.ndpculture.org/publications/regional-reports

  • Turbide, J., & Laurin, C. (2014). Governance in the arts and culture nonprofit sector: Vigilance or indifference? Administrative Sciences, 4(4), 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, A. (2011). Review of Scottish arts council’s quality framework – Guidelines for arts organisations. Cultural Trends, 20(2), 185–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Government Accountability Office. (2005). Performance measurement and evaluation: Definitions and relationships. United States Government Accountability Office. Glossary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitaliano, D. F. (1998). Assessing public library efficiency. Public & Cooperative Economics, 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, D. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Roy, M. H. (2014). Performance measures and metrics for the creative economy. Benchmarking, 21(1), 46–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodley, P. M. (2007). Culture management through the balanced scorecard: A case study.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zappalà, G., & Lyons, M. (2009). Recent approaches to measuring social impact in the Third sector: An overview, (6), p. 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, S., Hu, M., & Su, B. (2016). Research on investment efficiency and policy recommendations for the culture industry of China based on a three-stage DEA. Sustainability (Switzerland), 8(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040324.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to survey participants—without ca 500 CCI employees, the current research could have not been conducted. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments that have helped to frame and focus the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Creative Industries and Smart Cities Research Group, Estonian Business School, Tallinn, Estonia

    Marge Sassi & Kristiina Urb

  2. Department of Management, Estonian Business School, Tallinn, Estonia

    Ülle Pihlak

Authors
  1. Marge Sassi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristiina Urb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ülle Pihlak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marge Sassi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Organisation and Learning, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Martin Piber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sassi, M., Urb, K., Pihlak, Ü. (2020). The Evaluation of Organisational Performance: Estonian Cultural and Creative Industries Organisations. In: Piber, M. (eds) Management, Participation and Entrepreneurship in the Cultural and Creative Sector. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46796-8_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation