The most important part of performance management is performance evaluation, and the most difficult part of performance evaluation is to establish a reasonable evaluation index system. Theoretically, we can use the "four elements" model to construct the performance evaluation index system: ① the "input" of various necessary resources or costs; ② the "process" of resource or cost conversion; (3) the "output" of organizing activities or providing services; (4) the impact or "results" of the output or service. Although the above model can reflect the performance of an organization from one aspect, it is more common to use the concept of "4e" (economy, efficiency, effectiveness and fairness) to construct the index system. 2
1 CoCo Lee. Public management [M]. Higher Education Press, 2003( 1)
2 excellent. Public sector performance evaluation-master of public administration series teaching materials [M]. Renmin University of China Press, 2004( 1)
main body
In 1960s, the General Accounting Office of the United States took the lead in establishing the 3E evaluation method which focused on economy, efficiency and effectiveness. This is also the three levels that the performance measurement index outlined by scholar fenwick in 1995 should include. By the end of 1960s and the beginning of 1970s, the New School of Public Administration put forward the values of social equity, which was biased towards hard indicators such as economy and neglected soft indicators such as fairness and democracy, so the 3E evaluation method was questioned. Equality index was incorporated into the later government performance evaluation system, and gradually developed into 4E evaluation method summarized by Fu Lin in 1997. The specific contents of the "4E" indicators are as follows:
1. Economy. Economic indicators usually refer to the amount of resources invested by the organization in management projects. The requirement of economic indicators is to provide and maintain a certain quantity and quality of public goods or services with the lowest possible input or cost.
2. Efficiency. Efficiency indicators usually include: the provision of services, the implementation of activities, the quantity of services and products, the unit cost of services, etc. Efficiency can be simply understood as the proportional relationship between input and output. Efficiency focuses on means, and means are often embodied in the form of money.
3. effectiveness. Efficiency usually refers to the degree to which public services achieve goals and the degree to which public services meet policy goals, and is usually measured by the relationship between output and results.
4. Equity. As an indicator to measure performance, fairness is mainly concerned with "whether all groups or individuals receiving services can be treated fairly, and whether the vulnerable groups in need of special care have received more social care".
The "4E" index is a whole, and the lack of any one will make the performance evaluation imperfect. Although the performance evaluation of China's public sector is strictly in accordance with the "4E" index, there are still many problems.
First of all, the output of government departments is difficult to quantify. Any "4E" indicator is inseparable from output, and the public sector is also very concerned about output, but all performance is presented in a quantitative way, which is not a problem in the private sector. The performance evaluation of government departments is far more complicated than that of the private sector. James wilson, a famous public administrator, said: "It is usually difficult to measure the output of an institution. In fact, even just imagining what the output of a national department is is dizzy enough. " As the administrative organization is a special public power organization, the products or services it produces are some "non-commodity outputs". When they enter the market, it is impossible to form a currency price that reflects the opportunity cost of their production in the trading system, which brings technical difficulties to correctly measure their quantity. three
Second, decision makers and managers in the public sector resist evaluation. The fairness index in the "4E" index means that everyone in the organization should conduct performance evaluation. However, because performance evaluation can identify the ability of decision makers and managers, this identification makes them feel threatened and worried that their interests will be damaged, so they resist evaluation, which greatly reduces the credibility of performance evaluation.
Thirdly, as a new field, performance evaluation has not yet formed a standardized and institutionalized evaluation system, which brings many operational difficulties to the specific evaluation work. 3 Zhao Guojun. Design and Implementation of Performance Management Scheme [M]. Chemical Industry Press
Finally, the performance management of public sector lacks humanistic thought. The concept based on the public sector downplays humanistic care, deviates from publicity, and focuses on simple economic indicators in evaluation, while nurses introduce social and humanistic development indicators such as the quantity and quality of public services and public satisfaction. four
conclusion
The "4E" index is reasonable, but it should be used flexibly. In today's social economy, efficiency, effectiveness and fairness are important, but in the final analysis, they are also for serving people. If we only act according to the indicators, regardless of the actual situation of people, it is bound to cause controversy. Therefore, the "4E" indicator should also have vitality and go hand in hand with other qualitative indicators. In order to improve the "4E" index, the following suggestions are put forward for performance management:
1. The main content of public sector performance should highlight the all-round development of people. Establishing a correct view of political achievements is the basic premise of carrying out and implementing government performance evaluation. Government performance is not equal to simple economic growth, but should include three specific dimensions of economy, society and politics. We should attach importance to people's dominant position in development, meet people's material, spiritual and cultural needs to the maximum extent, and promote people's all-round development.
2. Public sector performance evaluation must pay attention to public satisfaction. Whether and how the goals and plans of the public sector are realized, the public has the most say. A good performance indicator system includes not only quantitative indicators such as input, output, results and efficiency, but also some qualitative indicators such as fairness, democracy, service quality and public satisfaction.