Different levels of performance evaluation - individual versus organizational

Tadas Sudnickas


One of the biggest challenges for performance measurement is integration of different aspects of organizational performance, which are very different by their nature, are measured by completely different, not comparable indicators. Organizational and individual-level performance indicators, although naturally and organically linked, but, nevertheless, are measured in different dimensions, could serve as an example. Performance measurement, in one or another form, is spread across various management disciplines: Strategic management, Quality management, Process improvement, and Performance appraisal as a part of Human resources management. Organizational level indicators prevail in Strategic management systems, both organizational level and individual level performance indicators can be found in Quality management and Process inprovement systems, and individual level performance indicators are dominant in Human resource management. The link between the indicators of these two levels is of particular importance, if they are not properly connected, employees’ motyvation and compensation for work becomes quite formal and does not match overall goals of organization. The difference of the performance measurement in the public and private sectors is determined not only by the different nature of these sectors, but also by different historical traditions. Because of the complexity of the public sector organizations’ mission, private sector organizations’ performance evaluation can be regarded as an isolated case of performance evaluation in public sector organizations. Performance indicators should be clearly distinguished from the factors determining the level of performance, which are no less important, however, are often confused with each other. The first are used to monitor performance, the latter – to improve it. Individual level performance indicators could be more usefull in searching the factors determining performance.


Performance measurement, performance indicators, effectiveness, individual performance, organizational performance, public sector.

Full Text:



Arveson P. Translating Performance Metrics from the Private to the Public Sector. 1999. prieiga prie interneto http://www.balancedscorecard.org/TranslatingMetrics/tabid/139/Default.aspx [2016 m. sausio 19 d.]

Bititci Umit, Garingo Patrizia, Dörfler Viktor and Nudurupati Sai. Performance Measurement: Challenges for Tomorrow. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2012: 13/116

Boyatzis R.E. (2008), Competencies in the 21st mentury. Journal of Management Development, Vol. 27, Issue 1, 2008

Bratton, J. and Gold, J. Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice (3rd edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 2003

Cameron, K. S. Effectiveness as paradox: consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management science. Vol. 32, No. 5, May 1986.

Griffiths J. Balanced Scorecard Use in New Zealand Government Departments and Crown Entities. Australian Journal of Public Administration 62(4):70-79, December 2003

Grote, Richard C, The Complete Guide to Performance Appraisal , Business & Economics, 1996 , 384 pp.

Lusthaus, Charles, Inter-American Development Bank, International Development Research Centre (Canada) Date: 2002

Mayne J., Zapico-Goñi E. Monitoring Performance in the Public Sector: Future Directions from International Experience. Transaction Publishers, 2007-02-01 - 282 psl.

Neely A.D. Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002

Olve, N.-G., Roy J. and Wetter M., Performance Drivers, , Willey, 1999

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform. A comparative analysis—New public management, governance and the neo-Weberian state (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton. Linking the Balanced Scorecard to Strategy. California Management Review Vol 39, No 1 Fall 1996

Rohm H., A Balancing Act: Developing and Using Balanced Scorecard Performance System, Perform Magazine Vol. 2 Issue 2, June 2002

Spencer, L. M., Spencer S. M. Competence at work: models for superior performance. ISBN 0-471-54809-X, John Viley & Sons, Inc, 1993

Stroobants J. & Bouckaert G. Towards Measurable and Auditable Efficiency Gains in the Flemish Public Sector. Public Organiz Rev (2013) 13:245–260

Summermatter, L., & Siegel, J. P. (2009, April). Defining Performance in Public Management: Variations over time and space. In Conference of the International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-16-15-2-01


  • There are currently no refbacks.

"Public Policy and Administration" ISSN online 2029-2872 / ISSN print 1648-2603