Do they all perform alike? An examination of perceived performance, citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal agencies

Abstract

What drives citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal government agencies? Are these determinants constant across agencies, or do they differ? In this article, we examine elements of citizen perceived performance as determinants of satisfaction and trust in federal agencies using a multi-year, cross-sectional, multi-agency sample of respondents. Focusing on six high-incidence federal agencies experienced by a large cross-section of American citizens, we observe differences in the determinants of satisfaction and trust, which include perceptions of the quality of the services experienced and the information provided, demographic factors, citizen expectations, and e-government adoption. We discuss these differences, with a particular focus on the implications of these findings for the practice of performance benchmarking. Given that one central objective of a variety of recent federal initiatives has been to better measure bureaucratic performance with the goal of improving the quality of services delivered to citizens through benchmarking, these findings highlight the complexity of government efforts to realize this goal. In conclusion, suggestions for improving cross-agency benchmarking are provided. Points for practitioners The key finding in this article for public administration and management practitioners relates to the difficulties inherent in identifying benchmarking partners, and thus in effectively benchmarking performance across agencies with the goal of identifying best practices useful in improving performance. These difficulties arise from the differential nature of what determines citizen satisfaction across agencies with different missions, purposes and goals. An alternative strategy for identifying benchmarking partners based on similarities in satisfaction determinants — what we call ‘benchmark partner selection by determinants’ — is discussed.