thinking about functions & conceptual discrimination dr rodney dormer victoria university of...

Thinking About Functions & Conceptual Discrimination

Dr Rodney Dormer Victoria University of Wellington

Objectives

How do organisations differ?

To what extent is performance framed objectively and/or subjectively?

What is the relationship between local and national, internal and external performance information?

How do managers use performance information?


How do public sector organisations differ?

• Different structures?

• The nature of the work undertaken?

• The extent to which that work can be standardised?

• The extent to which that work can be observed?

• Different objectives?


Wilson’s functional matrix

observable outcomes (or effects of work)

observable outputs (or work)

Production organisations

e.g. passport provision or the payment of welfare benefits

Procedural organisations

e.g. policy advice

Craft organisations

e.g. law enforcement

Coping organisations

e.g. child welfare

more

less

less

adapted from Gregory (1995)


Production organisations – are characterised by the ability to define and observe both the work done and its effects.

This applies to standard tasks, such as issuing passports by the Department of Internal Affairs, when the definition and measurement of work done is relatively straightforward.


Wilson’s functional matrixProcedural organisations – are those in which the work done but not its effects is observable.

Such characteristics are evident, for example, in the policy advice functions of New Zealand’s Ministry of Women’s Affairs.

In such organisations performance will tend to be conceptualised and managed in terms of how closely the work done conforms to ‘due process’. It follows that, in such entities, performance measures are likely to focus on process related metrics such as the time taken to complete a task or whether all steps in the due process were completed.



Craft organisations – where the results of work done but not the work itself are observable.

This applies, for example, in the case of the investigation activities of the New Zealand Customs Service and the environmental protection work of the Department of Conservation.

In such organisations, performance will tend to be defined in terms of particular goals and measurement will therefore be concerned with the progress towards, or completion of, particular pieces of work such as elements of an annual work programme.

Note also potential emphasis on professional and ethical standards by which goals achieved.


Coping organisations – are characterised by an inability to observe either the work done or the results of that work.

For example, the social work undertaken by Child, Youth and Family Services usually takes place away from the office environment with results, in terms of the outcomes for children and young people, that can only be determined at some indeterminate time in the future, often many years hence.

Measurement problems – measuring what can be easily measured, ‘artifactual knowledge’, and a push back to inputs.


observable outcomes (or effects of work)

observable outputs (or work)

Production organisations

e.g. passport provision or the payment of welfare benefits

Procedural organisations

e.g. policy advice

Craft organisations

e.g. law enforcement

Coping organisations

e.g. child welfare

more

less

less

adapted from Gregory (1995)

Management of Inputs

Management of Processes

An alternative approach

The OECD has suggested that outputs may be more or less easily defined and measured depending on the following two factors:

knowledge of the production process - how well the production process is known and can be defined in advance and consistently followed; and

the number of exceptions - to the standard output, i.e. the ability to predict the detailed characteristics of each unit of output.


knowledge of the production process

number of exceptions

certain outputs

quantity, unit cost, timeliness

e.g. the payment of welfare benefits

rely on predictability

quality, average unit cost, possibly timeliness

e.g. policy prosecutions

rely on known processes

quality, range of unit costs, timeliness

e.g. prison management

uncertain outputs

quality, total coste.g. policy advice and diplomatic

representation

more

less

less

Ability to measure outputs

adapted from OECD (2000)

more


certain outputs – the production process is well defined and there are few exceptions to the standard output.

An example is provided by the payment of welfare benefits by the Ministry of Social Development.

The OECD suggests that in such cases performance criteria will focus on quantity, unit cost and timeliness of output delivery.



reliance on predictability– the situation in which production processes are not well articulated but outputs are relatively standardised and few exceptions occur.

An example is provided by public prosecutions undertaken by the Ministry of Justice.

Where this situation exists, management will rely on the predictability of outputs and performance criteria will focus on quality, average unit cost and possibly timeliness of output delivery.


reliance on known processes – outputs have known and clearly defined processes but considerable variability occurs across units produced.

This is the case, for example, with prison management and fisheries patrol and surveillance.

In these situations management will rely on known processes and procedural forms of control and performance will be defined in terms of adherence to procedural standards, quality, the range of unit costs, and timeliness.


uncertain outputs – production processes are not well established and articulated and there is considerable variability between units of outputs.

For example, policy advice and diplomatic representation.

In such cases it is difficult to both specify in advance, and subsequently monitor, performance. Under these conditions management will tend to focus on factors such as total cost and quality as defined by externally referenced professional standards.



Where does your organisation sit?

Do different parts of your organisation sit in different quadrants?

Why?
