IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/njopap/v11y2018i2p171-198n8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance Evaluation of the Government Agencies of Kazakhstan

Author

Listed:
  • Suleimenova Gulimzhan

    (Academy of Public Administration Under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan,Astana, Kazakhstan)

  • Kapoguzov Evgeny

    (Omsk State University,Omsk, Russia)

  • Kabizhan Nurbek

    (Ministry of Investment and Development of Kazakhstan,Astana, Kazakhstan)

  • Kadyrova Margarita

    (Academy of Public Administration Under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan,Astana, Kazakhstan)

Abstract

Performance evaluation of the government agencies seems to be one of the most important issues in modern public administration. The countries with developed economies introduced various performance evaluation models. Th e developing countries also implement instruments to evaluate the government agencies performance. Unlike countries with developed institutional environments, the developing ones very often import evaluation models that have been proven in other countries. In that context, our research aimed to understand how the performance evaluation models work in countries with a developing institutional environment. The fact is that the performance evaluation of the government agencies shows certain results which present it in a positive way to the public. Unfortunately, these survey results do not adequately cover difficulties and obstacles that appear in the performance evaluation introduction process. In this regard, the perception of the evaluation system by the first-hand (civil servants), as well as the end entities (NGO representatives) of how the introduction of the evaluation institute contributes to improving the effectiveness of government agencies need to be analyzed. This article presents an analysis of the impact performance evaluation on performance in government agencies of Kazakhstan through interviews with civil servants (insiders), as they are aware of administrative changes, and representatives of NGO that closely interact with government agencies, so they can really assess the effect of changes. Data collected by quantitative and qualitive methods, such as legislative analysis, mass survey, in-depth interviews of civil servants and NGOs, and focus groups. The authors took into account all the limitations that are typical for surveys of civil servants in countries with a developing institutional environment (e.g. Nemec et al. 2011). In general, the research results provide a wider understanding of the effectiveness of institutional changes when embedding NPM tools into the administrative reforms through a “top-down approach” in emerging economies. The results show that the implementation of a new institution (performance evaluation) into the existing structure of formal institutions of the government agencies was accomplished. It was found that implanting a new institution caused, to some extent, a short-term “shock” to the government agencies, as there since previously there were no objective criteria for evaluating their activity. At the same time, performance evaluation is still not unincorporated into the internal management system in government agencies. It is perceived as a redundant imputed data transfer function for external evaluators. For this reason, top management of government agencies does not involve all staff in the process of evaluating and discussing its results. However, employees show interest in participating in these processes. All this once again confirms that the post-Soviet countries are still in networks of past heritage, namely they preserve a centralized bureaucratic system controlled from above.

Suggested Citation

  • Suleimenova Gulimzhan & Kapoguzov Evgeny & Kabizhan Nurbek & Kadyrova Margarita, 2018. "Performance Evaluation of the Government Agencies of Kazakhstan," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 11(2), pages 171-198, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:njopap:v:11:y:2018:i:2:p:171-198:n:8
    DOI: 10.2478/nispa-2018-0018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2018-0018
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/nispa-2018-0018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juraj Nemec & Beata Merickova & Marketa Sumpikova Fantova, 2011. "Is the Estonian Municipal Benchmarking Really Better?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 539-549, May.
    2. Dobrolyubova Elena, 2017. "Evaluating Performance of Government Inspection Bodies: A Possible Approach," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 10(2), pages 49-72, December.
    3. Nicola Mario Iacovino & Sara Barsanti & Lino Cinquini, 2017. "Public Organizations Between Old Public Administration, New Public Management and Public Governance: the Case of the Tuscany Region," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 61-82, March.
    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. Edgar Quispe-Mamani & Pascual Ayamamani-Collanqui, 2023. "Unitarian Illusion in Peru: Recentralization and Intergovernmental Conflicts from the Perspective of Local Governments," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 985-1000, September.
    2. Aleksander Aristovnik & Eva Murko & Dejan Ravšelj, 2022. "From Neo-Weberian to Hybrid Governance Models in Public Administration: Differences between State and Local Self-Government," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Monia Castellini & Caterina Ferrario & Vincenzo Riso, 2021. "From New Public Management to Public Risk Management: An overview of Italian municipalities," Working Papers 20210310, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    4. Christodoulos K. Akrivos, 2019. "Managers’ Perception on Public Organizations’ Performance and New Public Management during Economic Crises," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(3), pages 57-69.
    5. Koppitz David & Půček Milan & Ochrana František & Plaček Michal, 2015. "Comparative Analysis of Selected Factors Affecting Heating Costs of Schools in Selected Balkan Countries," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 61-84, June.
    6. Hassan Danaeefard & Atiye Sedaghat & Seyed Hosein Kazemi & Ahmadali Khaef Elahi, 2022. "Investment Areas to Enhance Public Employee Resilience during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Evidence from Iran," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 837-855, September.
    7. Pisár Peter & Varga Martin, 2018. "Public Support for Higher Education Institutions from EU Structural Funds and its Evaluation: Case Study of Slovakia," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 11(2), pages 103-127, December.
    8. Lenka Hudáková Stašová, 2019. "The Scope of Control of the Supreme Audit Office in the Slovak Republic and in the other Visegrad Four Countries," Society and Economy, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 41(2), pages 245-262, June.
    9. Abdullah Zafar Sheikh & John Chandler & Basharat Hussain & Stephen Timmons, 2022. "Performance measurement and management in the British higher education sector," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4809-4824, December.
    10. Philippe Dumas & Stéphanie Gagnon & Maud Micheau, 2021. "A Convention Out of the Blue: Implementing Community Policing over the Long Term," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 453-469, September.

    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:vrs:njopap:v:11:y:2018:i:2:p:171-198:n:8. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.