Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Performance Measurement Systems Support Managerial Actions in Networks: Evidence from an Italian Case Study

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study addresses the role of Performance Measurement Systems (PMS) in public networks to investigate how PMS processes support the network managerial actions known as connecting, exploring content, arranging, and process agreements. A case study methodology was used to investigate the actions taken by management concerning the local transport network of an Italian region. The network actors and their use of the relative PMS processes were followed over a period of 3 years, from 2008 to 2011. Results provide evidence on the interconnection between managerial actions and PMS, highlighting its contribution to empowering and involving actors at a distance.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A Region is the first-level administrative divisions of the State. Italy is politically divided into 20 Regions. Each is further divided in Provinces and Municipalities with political competency for their local area.

References

  • Agostino, D., & Arnaboldi, M. (2012). Design issues in Balanced Scorecards: the “what” and “how” of control. European Management Journal, 30(4), 327–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2001). Big Questions in Public Network Management Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3), 295–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within Networks: Adding Value to Public Organizations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barretta, A., & Busco, C. (2011). Technologies of government in public sector’s networks: In search of cooperation through management control innovations. Management Accounting Research, 22(4), 211–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behn, R. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The Design and Implementation of Cross-Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, W. F. (1995). Experts, networks and inscriptions in the fabrication of accounting images: a story of the representation of three public hospitals. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3), 111–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, B., & Bryson, J. M. (2010). Integrative leadership and the creation and maintenance of cross-sector collaboration. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(2), 211–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelenbos, J., Klijn, E.-H., & Steijn, B. (2011). Managers in governance networks: how to reach good outcomes? International Public Management Journal, 14(4), 420–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2010). Accounting information and managerial work. Accounting Organizations and Society, 35(3), 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, A.W. (1997). The proposal in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 3(1), Retrieved May 10, 2011, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/index.html

  • Henri, J. F. (2006). Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Accounting Organizations and Society, 31(1), 77–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herranz, J. (2010). Multilevel performance indicators for multisectoral networks and management. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(4), 445–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicklin, A. (2004). Network stability: opportunities or obstacle? Public Organization Review, 4(2), 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxham, C. (2002). The New Public Management: An Action Research Approach. In K. Mclaughlin, S. Osborne, & E. Ferlie (Eds.), The New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects (pp. 295–310). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isett, K. R., Mergel, I. A., LeRoux, K., Mischen, P. A., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(s1), i157–i173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen, J. (2005). What Does 25 Years of Experience Tell Us about the State of Performance Measurement in Public Policy and Management? Public Money and Management, 25(1), 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keast, R., Mandell, M. P., Brown, K., & Woolcock, G. (2004). Network Structures: Working Differently and Changing Expectations. Public Administration Review, 64(3), 363–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenis, P., & Provan, K. G. (2009). Towards an exogenous theory of public network performance. Public Administration, 87(3), 440–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettl, D. F. (2006). Managing Boundaries in American Administration: The Collaboration Imperative. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., Steijn, B., & Edelenbos, J. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public Administration, 88(4), 1063–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koppenjan, J. F. M., & Klijn, E. H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks. A network approach to problem solving and decision making. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laumann, E. O., & Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marques, L., Ribeiro, J. A., & Scapens, R. (2011). The use of management control mechanisms by public organizations with a network coordination role: A case study in the port industry. Management Accounting Research, 22(4), 269–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, M. (2002). Managing networks: propositions on what managers do and why they do it. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 599–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, M. (2006). Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We Know and How We Know It. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, R., & Agranoff, R. (2011). The limitations of public management networks. Public Administration, 89(2), 265–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan, D. P., Fernandez, S., Kim, S., LeRoux, M., Piotrowski, S. J., Bradley, E. W., & Yang, K. (2011). Performance Regimes Amidst Governance Complexity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(s1), i141–i155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. (1999). La Tête bien faite. Repenser la Réforme – Réformer la Pensée. Paris: Ed. du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neely, A., Richards, H., Mills, J., Platts, K., & Bourne, M. (1997). Designing performance measures: a structured approach. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 17(11), 1131–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan, R. C., & Martin, L. L. (1999). Comparative performance measurement. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22(3), 348–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prior, L. (2003). Using Documents in Social Research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, L. (2008). Repositioning documents in social research. Sociology, 42(5), 821–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of network effectiveness: a comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provan, K. G., & Sebastian, J. (1998). Networks within networks: service link overlap, organization cliques, and network effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 453–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (2001). Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review, 61(4), 413–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provan, K. G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: a review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: structures, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, G., Nolan, J., & Yoder, S. (2000). Successive free listing: Using multiple free lists to generate explanatory models. Field Methods, 12(2), 83–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, S. (2011). Modeling Network Management: An Examination of Internal and External Strategies. Public Organization Review, 11(4), 335–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, C., & McGuire, M. (2010). Leading public sector networks: an empirical examination of integrative leadership behaviours. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(2), 264–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turrini, A., Cristofoli, D., Frosini, F., & Nasi, G. (2010). Network literature about determinants of network effectiveness. Public Administration, 88(2), 528–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voets, J., Van Dooren, W., & De Rynck, F. (2008). A framework for assessing the performance of policy networks. Public Management Review, 10(6), 773–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Politecnico di Milano, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Gestionale, Via Lambruschini 4b, 20156, Milano, Italy

    Deborah Agostino & Michela Arnaboldi

Authors
  1. Deborah Agostino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michela Arnaboldi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deborah Agostino.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Agostino, D., Arnaboldi, M. How Performance Measurement Systems Support Managerial Actions in Networks: Evidence from an Italian Case Study. Public Organiz Rev 15, 117–137 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0264-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0264-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation