Guidebook for Performance Measurement

A rallying cry that has taken our country by storm. And it seems that those most eager to be swept into the tempest are our government programs.

Public programs of every stripe and size across the nation are shifting from seeing themselves as accountable for creating and carrying out activities to being accountable for achieving results – meeting goals, effecting change, and improving the quality of their services.

Performance measurement is a simple concept without a simple definition.

Essentially, performance measurement analyzes the success of a work group, program, or organization’s efforts by comparing data on what actually happened to what was planned or intended.

Performance measurement asks “Is progress being made toward desired goals? Are appropriate activities being undertaken to promote achieving those goals? Are there problem areas that need attention? Successful efforts that can serve as a model for others?”

Any article, book or paper you read on performance measurement will provide a good working definition – and each of these will say essentially the same thing.

They might use different words or look at performance measurement from a different angle, but the underlying concept will be the same. Here are two such definitions:

Performance measurement is the selection and use of quantitative measures of capacities, processes, and outcomes to develop information about critical aspects of activities, including their effect on the public.

Performance measurement is the regular collection and reporting of data to track work produced and results achieved.

To understand the first definition, you need to know what is meant by capacity, process, and outcome.