IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/vgmu00/2020i5p81-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management, Goal Alignment, And Performance Assessment Legitimacy: Evidence From The Colombian Public Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandra Rodas-Gaiter
  • Pablo Sanabria-Pulido

Abstract

The performance assessment process of public servants, in countries with civil services still in development, usually appears as a formality, instead of a key input of the strategic management process. This situation reduces its legitimacy perception among key organizational actors, leading to a vicious circle in which performance is neither informative nor binding, nor generates positive incentives towards greater performance. This article quantitatively explores the determinants of legitimacy of the performance assessments among Colombian public officials at the subnational level, using data from a large survey of public servants. The authors find that, although transparency portrays a mixed relationship with legitimacy, the role that the managers play, and the level of individual/organizational assessment alignment, are positive determinants of the levels of legitimacy of the performance management system.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandra Rodas-Gaiter & Pablo Sanabria-Pulido, 2020. "Management, Goal Alignment, And Performance Assessment Legitimacy: Evidence From The Colombian Public Sector," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 5, pages 81-104.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:vgmu00:2020:i:5:p:81-104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://vgmu.hse.ru/data/2020/08/05/1602162968/Rodas-Gaiter,%20Sanabria-Pulido%205-2020.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Dahler-Larsen, 2014. "Constitutive Effects of Performance Indicators: Getting beyond unintended consequences," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 969-986, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giliberto Capano & Benedetto Lepori, 2024. "Designing policies that could work: understanding the interaction between policy design spaces and organizational responses in public sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 53-82, March.
    2. Fontdevila, Clara, 2023. "The politics of good enough data. Developments, dilemmas and deadlocks in the production of global learning metrics," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Jeongeun Kim, 2018. "The Functions and Dysfunctions of College Rankings: An Analysis of Institutional Expenditure," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 59(1), pages 54-87, February.
    4. Julia Heuritsch, 2023. "The Evaluation Gap in Astronomy—Explained through a Rational Choice Framework," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-26, June.
    5. Elizabeth Troncoso & Francisco Ganga-Contreras & Margarita Briceño, 2022. "Incentive Policies for Scientific Publications in the State Universities of Chile," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Julia Heuritsch, 2021. "Reflexive Behaviour: How Publication Pressure Affects Research Quality in Astronomy," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, November.
    7. de Kam, David & Kok, Josje & Grit, Kor & Leistikow, Ian & Vlemminx, Maurice & Bal, Roland, 2020. "How incident reporting systems can stimulate social and participative learning: A mixed-methods study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(8), pages 834-841.
    8. Kalpazidou Schmidt, Evanthia & Graversen, Ebbe Krogh, 2020. "Developing a conceptual evaluation framework for gender equality interventions in research and innovation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Chen, Huey T. & Morosanu, Liliana & Powell-Threets, Kia & Lian, Brad & Turner, Nannette, 2019. "Assessment of the monitoring and evaluation system of a population-based program: Theory-driven evaluation approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    10. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & Tobias Opthof, 2019. "hα: the scientist as chimpanzee or bonobo," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1163-1166, March.
    11. Alberto Baccini & Giuseppe De Nicolao & Eugenio Petrovich, 2019. "Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    12. Cinzia Daraio, 2017. "A framework for the Assessment of Research and its impacts," DIAG Technical Reports 2017-04, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nos:vgmu00:2020:i:5:p:81-104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Irina A. Zvereva (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vgmu.hse.ru/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.