The Role of IS in Performance Management: The Case of an Italian Public University

  • Riccardo Mercurio
  • Ernesto De Nito
  • Mario Pezzillo Iacono
  • Vincenza Esposito
  • Lucia Silvestri
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 6)

Abstract

The article investigates the relationship between Performance Management Systems (PMS) and IS in a single Italian Public University, starting from the gap that exists between what is declared in University policy statements—ostensibly oriented towards empowerment—and what is actually implemented by public managers. We are particularly interested in understanding how ICT could support PMS in the control process. In our empirical analysis we observed that the role of IS depends on the strategy adopted in planning and implementing the PMS.

Keywords

Performance management systems Information systems Organizational control Public university 

References

  1. 1.
    Borgonovi, E.: Il Diritto Dovere di Valutare e Premiare il Merito nelle Amministrazioni Pubbliche. Azienda Pubblica 22(2), 199–204 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Riege, A., Lindsay, N.: Knowledge management in the public sector: stakeholder partnerships in the public policy development. J. Knowl. Manage. 10(3), 24–39 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Minelli, E., Rebora, G., Turri, M.: Waiting for the market: where is the Italian university System heading? High. Educ. Policy 25, 131–145 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hellström, T., Husted, K.: Mapping knowledge and intellectual capital in academic environments: a focus group study. J. Intellect. Capital 5(1), 165–180 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hood, C.: A public management for all seasons? Public Adm. 69, 3–19 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vienažindiene, M., Ciarniene, R.: New public management: theoretical and practical aspects. Eng. Econ. 5, 44–50 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Bruijn, H.: Performance measurement in the public sector: strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement. Int. J. Public Sector Manag. 15(7), 578–594 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rainey, H.G.: Reform trends at the federal level with implications for the states: the pursuit of flexibility and the human capital movement. In: Kellough, J.E., Nigro, L.G. (eds.) Civil Service Reform in the States: Personnel Policies and Politics at the Sub-national Level. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp. 33–58 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heinrich, C.J.: Do government bureaucrats make effective use of performance management information? J. Public Adm. Res. Theor. 9(3), 363–393 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Radin, B.A.: The government performance and results act and the tradition of federal management reform: square pegs in round holes. J. Public Adm. Res. Theor. 10(1), 1–35 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moynihan, D.P.: The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. Georgetown University Press, Washington (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heinrich, C.J., Marschke, G.: Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 29(1), 183–208 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cavalluzzo, K.S., Ittner, C.D.: Implementing performance measurement innovations: evidence from government. Acc. Organ. Soc. 29(3–4), 243–267 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Broadbent, J., Laughlin, R.: Performance management systems: a conceptual model. Manage. Acc. Res. 20, 283–295 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corcoles, Y.R., Penalver, J.F.S., Ponce, A.T.: Intellectual capital in Spanish public universities: stakeholders’ information needs. J. Intellect. Capital 12(3), 356–376 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sánchez, M.P., Elena, S., Castrillo, R.: Intellectual capital dynamics in universities: a reporting model. J. Intellect. Capital 10(2), 307–324 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Minelli, E., Rebora, G., Turri, M.: The risk of failure of controls and levers of change: an examination of two Italian public sector. J. Acc. Organ. Change 4(1), 5–26 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Secundo, G., Margherita, A., Elia, G., Passiante, G.: Intangible assets in higher education and research: mission, performance or both? J. Intellect. Capital 11(2), 140–157 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Neely, A.D., Gregory, M.J., Platts, K.: Performance measurement system design: a literature Review and research agenda. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 15(4), 80–116 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Otley, D.: Performance management: a framework for management control systems research. Manage. Acc. Res. 10(4), 363–382 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gruman, J.A., Saks, A.M.: Performance management and employee engagement. Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev. 21(2), 123–136 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cardy, R.L.: Performance Management: Concepts, Skills, and Exercises. M. E. Sharpe, Armonk (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aguinis, H.: Performance Management, 2nd edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fitzgerald, L., Moon, P.: Performance Measurement in Service Industries: Making It Work. CIMA, London (1996)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ferreira, A., Otley, D.: The design and use of performance management systems: an extended framework for analysis. Manage. Acc. Res. 20(4), 263–282 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Canonico, P., Söderlund, P.: Getting control of multi-project organizations: combining contingent control mechanisms. Int. J. Project Manage. 28, 796–806 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Doolin, B., McLeod, L.: Towards critical interpretivism in IS research. In: Howcroft, D., Trauth, E.M. (eds.) Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research: Theory and Application, pp. 244–271. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Klein, H.K., Brooke, C.: Exploring the critical research agenda in information Systems research. Inf. Syst. J. 18(2), 123–135 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Howcroft, D.: Information System. In: Alvesson, M., Bridgman, T., Willmott, H. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bednar, P.M.: A contextual integration of individual and organizational learning perspectives as part of IS analysis. Inf. Sci. J. 3(3), 145–156 (2000)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    McLoughlin, I., Harris, M.: Innovation, Organizational Change and Technology. International Thompson Business Paper, London (1997)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cecez-Kecmanovic, D.: Basic assumptions of the critical research perspectives in information systems. In: Howcroft, D., Trauth, E. (eds.) Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research: Theory and Application, pp. 19–46. Aldershot, Edward Elgar (2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Avgerou, C., Mansell, R., Quah, D., Silverstone, R.: The Oxford Handbook of Information and Communication Technologies. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Berger, P.L., Luckmann, T.: The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Garden City (1966)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weick, K.E.: Enactment processes in organizations. In: Staw, B.M., Salancick, G.R. (eds.) New Directions in Organizational Behaviour. St. Clair Press, Chicago (1977)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Giddens, A.: Modernity and Self Identity, Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Polity Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sveningsson, S., Alvesson, M.: Managing managerial identities: organizational fragmentation. Discourse and identity struggle. Hum. Relat. 56(10), 1141–1193 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Alvesson, M., Willmott, H.: Identity regulation as organizational control: producing the appropriate individual. J. Manage. Stud. 39, 619–644 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Alvesson, M., Willmott, H.: On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Acad. Manag. Rev. 17(3), 432–464 (1992)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Brooke, C.: Critical research in information systems. J. Inf. Technol. 17(2), 45–47 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Martinez, M., Pezzillo Iacono, M.: Dealing with critical IS research: artifacts, drifts, electronic panopticon and illusions of empowerment. In: Baskerville, R., De Marco, M., Spagnoletti, P. (eds.) Designing Organisational Systems—An Interdisciplinary Discourse, Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ciborra, C.U.: A Critical Review of the Literature on the Management of Corporate Information Infrastructure. In: Ciborra, C.U. (ed.) From Control to Drift: the Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, pp. 15–40. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ciborra, C.U.: The Labyrinths of Information: Challenging the Wisdom of Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rajao, R., Hayes, N.: Conceptions of control and IT artefacts: an institutional account of the Amazon rainforest monitoring system. J. Inf. Technol. 24(4), 320–331 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Fligstein, N.: The Transformation of Corporate Control. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Martinez, M.: ICT, Productivity and organizational complementarity. In: Rossignoli, C., Carugati, A. (eds.) Emerging Themes in Information Systems and Organization Studies, pp. 271–281 (2011)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Introna, L.D.: Management, Information and Power. Macmillan, London (1997)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ. Sci. 11(4), 404–428 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    OECD: Modernising the public administration: A Study on Italy. Presented at public governance committee meeting at the ministerial level, Venice, 15–16 Nov 2010Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hunt, D.P.: The concept of knowledge and how to measure it. J. Intellect. Capital 4(1), 125–142 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Boyer, E.: Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Carnegie Foundation, Princeton (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Riccardo Mercurio
    • 1
  • Ernesto De Nito
    • 2
  • Mario Pezzillo Iacono
    • 3
  • Vincenza Esposito
    • 4
  • Lucia Silvestri
    • 4
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Economia, Management, IstituzioniUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IINaplesItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento of Scienze Giuridiche, Storiche, Economiche e SocialiUniversità Magna Græcia di CatanzaroCatanzaroItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di EconomiaSeconda Università di NapoliCapuaItaly
  4. 4.Dipartimento di Economia, Management e Metodi QuantitativiUniversità degli Studi del SannioBeneventoItaly

Personalised recommendations