Performance Measurement In Universities Research Articles

Institutional logic and scholars' reactions to performance measurement in universities

PurposeEmploying institutional logic and institutional work as its theoretical framework, this study analyzes scholars' reactions to performance measurement systems in academia.Design/methodology/approachLarge datasets were collected over time, combining both quantitative and qualitative elements. The data were gathered from a two-wave survey in 2010 (966 respondents) and 2015 (672 respondents), conducted among scholars performing teaching- and research-oriented tasks in three Finnish universities.FindingsThe analysis showed statistically significant changes over time in the ways that the respondents were positioned in three major groups influenced by different institutional logics. This study contributes to the international debate on institutional change in universities by showing that in Finnish universities, emerging business logics and existing professional logics can co-exist and be blended among a growing group of academics. The analysis of qualitative open-ended answers suggests that performance measurement systems have led to changes in institutional logic, which have influenced the scholars participating in institutional work at the microlevel in academia.Social implicationsWhile most scholars remain critical of performance measurement systems in universities, the fact that many academics are adapting to performance measurement systems highlights significant changes that are generally occurring in academia.Originality/valueWhile most extant studies have focused on field- and organizational-level analyses, this study focuses on understanding how the adoption of performance measurement systems affects institutional logic and institutional work at the microlevel. Moreover, the study's cross-sectional research setting increases society's understanding of institutional evolution in academia.

Performance analysis in the presence of bounded, discrete and flexible measures_

In conventional data envelopment analysis (DEA) models, the relative efficiency of decision making units (DMUs) is evaluated while all measures with certain input and/or output status are considered as continuous data without upper and/or lower bounds. However, there are occasions in real-world applications that the efficiency of firms must be assessed while bounded elements, discrete values, and flexible measures are present. For this purpose, the current study proposes DEA-based approaches to estimate the relative efficiency of DMUs where bounded factors, integer values, and flexible measures exist. To illustrate it, radial models based on two aspects, individual and aggregate, are introduced to measure the performance of entities and to handle the status of the flexible measure such that there are bounded components and discrete data. Applications of approaches proposed in the areas of quality management, highway maintenance patrols, and university performance measurement are given to clarify the issue and to show their practicability. It was found that the introduced procedure can determine practical projection points for bounded measures and integer values (from the individual DMU viewpoint) and can classify flexible measures along with evaluation of DMUs relative efficiency.

What you see depends on where you look: performance measurement of Australian accounting academics

PurposeThis paper explores the impact of contemporary calculative practices, termed “accountingisation”, on Australian accounting academics' values. Also, it seeks to understand the rationale underlying the development of various university performance measurement systems (PMSs), and their implementation and evaluation.Design/methodology/approachA case study approach uses accounting academics' responses to an online survey and also semi-structured interviews with senior research-related leaders in a group of Australian universities. This is supplemented by document analysis. A narrative story-telling approach explores and presents the combined data observations, over the period 2010–2018, of two characters: a “typical” accounting academic and a “typical” vice-chancellor.FindingsThe study contributes to the literature on PMSs in understanding “accountingisation”, the rationale behind the development, implementation and evaluation of performance metrics by senior management and its impact on accounting academics. It juxtaposes and unpacks the complexities and nuances of PMSs and provides empirical evidence by highlighting the perceptions of both the Australian accounting academics and senior university management. The findings demonstrate a level of discontent among accounting academics in reconciling the expectations of increased “accountingisation” within university PMSs. These are juxtaposed against the views of senior university leaders who are influential in determining PMSs.Originality/valueThis paper is novel in considering the implications of “accountingisation” in a contemporary setting, focusing on accounting academics, values and individual PMSs within business schools.

Balanced Scorecard in Universities

Abstract Objective: Performance measurement and reporting leading to greater transparency and accountability of universities have become a challenging issue. Increasingly, universities have been required to provide performance indicators—empirical evidence of their value creation — to the different group of stakeholders. One of the approaches that may be applied by universities is the Balanced Scorecard (BSC). The objective of this paper is to indicate the BSC as a useful tool for the evaluation of the universities’ performance. Methodology: This study is based on the following research methods: descriptive, deductive, and the literature review. It refers also to case studies that are quoted in the context of their practical BSC application experience and it presents the pioneer approach of California University in BSC adoption. The rationale of this paper follows the principal-agent theory that is a foundation of the accountability concept. It refers also to the new managerialism, new public management, and entrepreneurial university. Findings: Based on the literature review concerning the analysis of the examples of universities implementing BSC, this paper argues that BSC provides a framework for the performance measurement that allows for the increased transparency and accountability of these institutions. Value added: The pioneer BSC framework presented in this paper can be used as the basis for the development of general performance measurement in universities. Recommendations: It is recommended that the universities that want to boost their transparency and be accountable for their outcomes apply and develop the BSC framework to which we refer to in this paper.

Performance measurement in universities: ambiguities in the use of quality versus quantity in performance indicators

Performance measurement (PM) is now common in Western universities. This is also the case in Finland, where a new funding scheme was implemented to ensure that quality was included in universities’ PM. However, this paper shows that the quality indicators in use are, in practice, quantitative. The paper is based on a large survey and has implications for university PM systems in Finland and internationally.

The use of performance measurement in universities

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify the degree of maturity in performance measurement in a national group of universities.Design/methodology/approachA model for identifying the level of performance measurement maturity in an organisation was identified; this model consisted of seven constructs. A survey consisting of Likert-scale items derived from the maturity model was then administered to academic and administrative staff at New Zealand’s eight universities.FindingsThe survey showed a relatively high use of performance measurement (usage index 3.47/5), and strong alignment of strategy and performance measurement (strategy index 3.95/5). Research output measures were the most commonly used by academics, whereas measures relating to community service and third role activities were used least. Multiple significant differences between academics and administrators were identified, with the degree of support for performance measurement a particular area of contrast. The overall degree of performance measurement maturity identified was higher than found in similar studies utilising documentary methods.Originality/valuePerformance measurement in higher education is a controversial subject and there has been relatively little research into the basics of how, and how well, universities utilise the approach. This exploratory study helps fill the gap and provides a basis for more detailed research.

Performance measurement in universities - Meaningful reconciliations of dilemmas

New Public Management (NPM) reforms have led to numerous transformations in the public sector including higher education organizations, and universities are increasingly competing with each other w...

The Peculiarities of Performance Measurement in Universities

In order to function effectively, to stay in the market and to meet the ever growing needs of consumers best, each organization should first of all put all the efforts to evaluate its performance and efficiency; therefore, performance measurement has become a significant issue. The problems analysed by researchers mainly involve performance measurement for the private sector organizations, while the public sector organizations receive little attention.Since universities are named as one of the types of organizations in the public sector, this article will review the methodologies of performance measurement and their suitability for performance measurement in universities.

Addressing directions in interdisciplinary accounting research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address and critique the current state and trajectory of the interdisciplinary accounting movement. Design/methodology/approach – An interdisciplinary literature sourced analysis and critique of the movement's positioning and trajectory. Findings – It observes the creeping currency of the financial economics-based accounting research tradition, with its attendant limitations in scope and policy/practice relevance of its subject matter and findings. The paper reveals the persistent growth and development of an interdisciplinary accounting community despite the pressures of careerist research score-based goal displacement produced by government and university performance measurement systems. Originality/value – The interdisciplinary movement is seen as offering issues focused and innovation-driven research that aims to engage with the complexities of the organisational and institutional actors’ worlds. This remit remains essential to the challenge of the accounting academy's pursuit of issues of societal significance.

University Performance Measurement Using the Balanced Scorecard Method - Special Focus to the Learning and Growth Perspective (LGP)

The performance measurement is important aspect within the higher education system in Sri Lanka and all over the world. When considering education, quality of educational service and stakeholder satisfaction can be taken as more important. Most of the performance measurement systems fail to address and consider the entire stakeholder needs after considering the importance and contributions of all stakeholders to the organization. Robert Kaplan and David Norton (1992) present the Balanced Scorecard (BSC), a widely used method to improve on an organizations performance. It is a management tool that translates an organization’s mission and strategy into a comprehensive set of performance measure that provide a framework for strategic management and measurement system. In this paper with consideration of BSC strength in strategic evaluation, it is used for analyzing the Management Faculties in Sri Lankan Universities and study based on the 11 universities out of 15 universities with selecting of 46 departments. The data collection through the questioner and it consists of 28 questions relating to the Learning and Growth Perspective as well as Mission and Strategies in universities and analysis done through the SPSS statistical package. In today’s knowledge-based economy and dynamic environment, it is essential for universities as the center of education, knowledge creation and knowledge worker evolvement. The findings could be used in developing strategic plans for the management faculties in each universities and encourage to achieving organizational objectives and creating highly performed academic and research-centered organization through the Learning and Growth Perspective. The results of correlation analysis that the: coefficient between Learning and Growth Perspective has a significant positive influence on the Mission and Strategies.

Management-by-results and performance measurement in universities – implications for work motivation

The article focuses on the effects of management-by-results from the perspective of the work motivation of university employees. The study is based on extensive survey data among employees at Finnish universities. According to the results, performance measurement is based on quantitative rather than qualitative measures, and the current management-by-results system has a negative effect on work motivation among experts. The motivation to engage in creative, knowledge-intensive work, such as the work carried out at universities, is typically intrinsic. In the light of the empirical findings of the study it seems that management-by-results is in conflict with intrinsic motivation and the very essence of the expert work undertaken in universities.

Performance Management in Universities: Effects of the Transition to More Quantitative Measurement Systems

The measurement of research and teaching performance is increasingly common within universities, driven probably by the rise of New Public Management (NPM). Although changing over time and varying from country to country, NPM involves the use of private sector methods in the public sector. Traditionally, performance measurement in universities has had a developmental role – helping individuals to improve their (future) performance. However, the new systems seem more judgemental – i.e. seeking to quantitatively evaluate (past) performance. We study performance measurement in two Accounting and Finance groups – one in the Netherlands and one in the UK. In both we see an increasing use of judgemental forms of performance evaluation and, in particular, the use of more quantitative performance measures. The use of these more judgemental quantitative systems is seen to have various effects. Although these systems emphasise objective quantitative measures, they relocate subjectivities (usually at a greater distance from the subject), rather than remove them. This creates uncertainty and anxiety about how the systems are used. There is a danger that the new systems could inhibit creativity in teaching and limit contributions to the world outside the university. Furthermore, they could damage creativity and innovation in accounting research – as researchers play safe in getting the publications they need. As we are both researchers and practitioners in this area, we should be challenging these trends and pointing to the dangers for research (and teaching) in our field.

Efficiency assessment of universities through data envelopment analysis

Assessing the efficiency of universities is vital for effective allocation and utilization of educational resources. In this paper, a data envelopment analysis (DEA) model for jointly evaluating the relative teaching and research efficiencies of universities was presented. The inputs and outputs for university performance measurement were first identified. They comprise a total of 16 measures which are believed to be essential. A variant of DEA called joint DEA maximization was used to model and evaluate these measures. The model was tested using a hypothetical example and its use and implications in university performance measurement were described. The application of DEA enables academics to identify deficient activities in their universities and take appropriate actions for improvement.

Performance Measurement in Universities: A Comparative Study of Two A&F Groups in the Netherlands and the UK

Traditionally, the management of universities has been relatively informal and, to a large extent, the responsibility of academics. However, with the rise of New Public Management in the 1980s, and its introduction of rational, ‘businesslike’ management into the public sectors of most Western countries, many universities have made various changes in their management and control systems. For example, in many countries university funding is now much more dependent on ‘performance measures,' with such things as journal rankings, research assessments, teaching quality audits and so on. In this paper we describe a study we conducted in our own two universities; i.e., the Accounting and Finance groups in Groningen and Manchester. The objective of this research is to explore the reasons for the similarities, and more importantly, the differences in the use of performance measurement systems in the two universities. Our research is informed by recent developments in institutional theory which have begun to explore the internal processes through which organizations respond to external institutional pressures. The aim is to examine how the institutional pressure for more performance measurement in universities in general is reproduced in terms of performance measurement systems within the specific universities and how these systems impact on individual departments and the academics working within them. Although there are differences, the perceived effects of the new performance measurement systems appear quite similar in both cases. For example, individual academics understand and probably to some extent positively welcome the new more ‘rational and objective’ systems, but these systems also create uncertainty, stress and, in some instances, even anger and frustration. In the past, resource allocation and performance measurement were relatively implicit and subjective, but they were largely developed and ‘owned’ by the academics themselves, and were a part of their ‘group culture’, whilst nowadays the systems are imposed from higher levels of the faculty and/or university. It seems that adding elements of rationality and objectivity to the systems does not necessarily reduce uncertainty and stress; more likely it can even add to them.

Commentary: Research Productivity Measurement and the Field of Academic Accounting*

ABSTRACTThe previous issue of Canadian Accounting Perspectives contained three studies that examined various aspects of performance measurement in universities. In this issue, we step back from the acts of performance measurement and disclosure to consider the context within which the demand for increased performance measurement has arisen. The current commentary considers the use of research productivity measures in the field of academic accounting and why the use of these measures is drawing such an equivocal response from academics in the field. Starting from three theoretical perspectives, we consider the use, response, and consequences associated with research productivity measurement.

Quality, Costs and Changing Strategies of Control in Universities in the UK

Describes moves towards quasi market‐based systems of resource allocation in Britain′s universities. Considers the appropriateness of existing organizational structures to meet the cost and quality pressures generated by these systems and, drawing on ideas from the total quality movement, analyses the implications for organization, control and performance measurement in universities.

Performance measurement in universities

Universities have traditionally possessed as their primary objectives the pursuit and the transmission of knowledge. During the 1980's, financial pressures on British universities have greatly increased, all budgets being cut in real terms, dramatically so for a handful of universities. The current emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency has naturally led on to a thorough examination of measures of performance. What is the organisational effectiveness of a University (and of a constituent department) and how do we measure it? Universities may be regarded as offering three major categories of output: (i) highly qualified manpower; (ii) research and scholarship; (iii) various other social benefits e.g. contribution to ‘national culture’ or valuable contributions to the life of their local communities. Clearly some of these outputs are much easier to measure than others. The paper will examine the methods used to measure output and to relate categories of output to the relevant inputs, including the concept of ‘the social rate of return’. Performance indicators will be included under three major categories: • (i) Internal, e.g. first degree graduation rates, success rates of higher degrees, attraction of research funds. • (ii) External, e.g. acceptability of graduates in employment, staff publications, patents. • (iii) Operating, e.g. unit costs, staff/student ratios, staff workloads. The third category includes a number of traditional problem areas for OR/MS work such as establishing service levels for libraries and computer systems. The overall approach clearly possesses considerable implications for the whole philosophy and culture of universities and for individual members of staff. The paper will touch on these aspects too.