‘Mål- og resultatstyring’ i universitetssektoren – realitets- eller illusionsdannelse?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22439/sis.v33i4.5568Resumé
Moderniseringsstyrelsen har i de seneste år udviklet vejledende materiale til fremme af ‘mål- og resultatstyring’ i departementerne. Denne artikel undersøger, hvor god den udviklede model for mål- og resultatstyring er til at opfylde målsætningen om at skabe effektive institutioner. Undersøgelsen baserer sig på en analyse af centrale begreber i Moderniseringsstyrelsens model til mål- og resultatstyring og i de implementerede resultatkontrakter mellem Ministeriet for Uddannelse og Forskning og universiteterne. Teoretisk bygger vi på pragmatisk konstruktivisme, som opstiller de begrebslige krav, der må stilles til et målings- og styringsværktøj, hvis det skal kunne siges at være et troværdigt redskab til at skabe en praksis, der rent faktisk fungerer. Analysen afslører, at modellen er domineret af dårligt skitserede begreber og mismatcher, der danner grundlag for skabelse af illusioner. Der er således behov for at udvikle en bedre begrebsramme til mål- og resultatstyring af offentlige institutioner. Dette er især væsentligt i en tid, hvor man snakker om at give mere beslutningsautonomi til ledere i den offentlige sektor. Det kræver nemlig et troværdigt begrebsapparat, hvormed ministerierne kan holde disse ledere ansvarlige for resultaterne af deres handlinger.Referencer
Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. S. (2007). Management accounting as practice. Accounting, organizations and society, 32(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.013
Anthony R. & Govindajaran V. (2007) Management Control Systems. McGraw Hill
Anthony, R. N., & Young, D. W. (1999). Management control in nonprofit organizations (Vol. 6): Irwin Homewood, IL.
Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance Management in the Public Sector: The Ultimate Challenge. Financial Accountability & Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12049
Baldvinsdottir, G., Mitchell, F., & Nørreklit, H. (2010). Issues in the relationship between theory and practice in management accounting. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 79-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2010.02.006
Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533(7604), 452-454.
Bamber, L. S., Christensen, T. E., & Gaver, K. M. (2000). Do we really ‘know’ what we think we know? A case study of seminal research and its subsequent overgeneralization. Accounting, organizations and society, 25(2), 103-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00027-6
Binderkrantz, A. S., Holm, M., & Korsager, K. (2011). Performance contracts and goal attainment in government agencies. International Public Management Journal, 14(4), 445-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2011.657116
Chua, W. F. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. Accounting review, 601-632.
Clayson, D.E. and Haley, D.A., 2011. Are Students Telling Us the Truth? A Critical Look at the Student Evaluation of Teaching. Marketing Education Review, vol. 21, no. 2, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.2753/MER1052-8008210201
Deloitte. (2011). Kortlægning af økonomi- og virksomhedsstyring i udvalgte statslige institutioner København: Finansministeriet.
Devoteam/NextPuzzles. (2011). Analyse af økonomi- og virksomhedsstyring i udvalgte statslige institutioner. København: Finansministeriet.
Doran, G. T. (1981). There's a SMART Way to Write Management's Goals and Objectives Management Review (Vol. 70, 35-36.): American Management Association.
Feyerabend, P. (1970/2010). Against Method: Outline of an Anarchist Theory of Knowledge. London: Verso.
Forbes, D. P. (1998). Measuring the unmeasurable: Empirical studies of nonprofit organization effectiveness from 1977 to 1997. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 27(2), 183-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764098272005
Frege, G. (1879). Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens (H. Nebert, Trans.). Halle: Nebert.
Fried C.B. (2008) In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning Computers and Education Volume 50, Issue 3, April 2008, Pages 906-914
Fryer, K., Antony, J., & Ogden, S. (2009). Performance management in the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 22(6), 478-498. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550910982850
Gelman, A., & Loken, E. (2014). The statistical crisis in science. American Scientist, 102(6), 460. https://doi.org/10.1511/2014.111.460
Gelman A. (2017). The fallacy of objective measurement: The case of gaydar, 1-5
Gigerenzer, G., & Marewski, J. N. (2015). Surrogate Science The Idol of a Universal Method for Scientific Inference. Journal of Management, 41(2), 421-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314547522
Greve, C. (2006). Public management reform in Denmark. Public management review, 8(1), 161-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030500518956
Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015a). A government that worked better and cost less?: Evaluating three decades of reform and change in UK central Government: OUP Oxford.
Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015b). What we have to show for 30 years of new public management: Higher costs, more complaints. Governance, 28(3), 265-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12150
Hyndman, N., & Lapsley, I. (2016). New Public Management: The Story Continues. Financial Accountability & Management, 32(4), 385-408. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12100
Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med, 2(8), e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Jakobsen, M., Johansson, I-L, & Nørreklit, H. (Eds.). (2011). An actor's approach to management : conceptual framework and company practises (1. edition ed.). Copenhagen: DJØF.
Kaplan R. S. & Atkinson A. A. (1998): Advanced Management Accounting. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall International. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.11308
Kaplan, R. S. (2001). Strategic performance measurement and management in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit management and Leadership, 11(3), 353-370.
Kaplan, R. S, & Norton, D. P. (2008). The execution premium: Linking strategy to operations for competitive advantage: Harvard Business Press.
Kaspersen, L. B., & Nørgaard, J. (2015). Ledelseskrise i konkurrencestaten (1. udgave ed.). Kbh.: Hans Reitzel.
Kvalitetsudvalget. (2015). Nye veje og høje mål : Kvalitetsudvalgets samlede forslag til reform af de videregående uddannelser. Kbh.: Udvalg for Kvalitet og Relevans i de Videregående Uddannelser.
Levi-Strauss, Claude. (1950/1987). Introduction to Marcel Mauss. London: Routledge.
Merchant K. and Van der Stede W.A. (2014): Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA
Meyer, J. W, & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
Miller, P., & O'Leary, T. (1987). Accounting and the construction of the governable person. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(3), 235-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(87)90039-0
Møller, M. Ø., Iversen, K., & Andersen, V. N. (2016). Review af resultatbaseret styring. København: KORA.
Newton, J.D., (1988). Using student evaluation of teaching in administrative control: The validity problem. Journal of Accounting Education, vol. 6, no. 1, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0748-5751(88)90033-4
Nørreklit, H. (2017). A Philosophy of Management Accounting: A Pragmatic Constructivist Approach. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315680736
Nørreklit, H., Nørreklit, L., & Mitchell, F. (2007). Theoretical conditions for validity in accounting performance measurement. Business performance measurement: unifying theories and integration practice, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 179-217.
Nørreklit, H., Nørreklit, L., & Mitchell, F. (2010). Towards a paradigmatic foundation for accounting practice. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(6), 733-758. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571011065844
Nørreklit, H., Nørreklit, L., & Mitchell, F. (2016). Understanding practice generalisation–opening the research/practice gap. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 13(3), 278-302. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-09-2015-0088
Nørreklit, H., Nørreklit, L., Mitchell, F., & Bjørnenak, T. (2012). The rise of the balanced scorecard! Relevance regained? Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 8(4), 490-510. https://doi.org/10.1108/18325911211273491
Nørreklit, L. (2017). Paradigm of Pragmatic Constructivism. In H. Nørreklit (Ed.), A philosophy of management accounting: A pragmatic constructivist approach (21-94). London: Routledge.
Otley, D. T., & Berry, A. J. (1994). Case study research in management accounting and control. Management Accounting Research, 5(1), 45-65. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1994.1004
Ridley, C. E, & Simon, H. A. (1938). The criterion of efficiency. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 199(1), 20-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271623819900103
Ridley, C. E, & Simon, H. A. (1943). Measuring municipal activities: A survey of suggested criteria and reporting forms for appraising administration: International city managers' Association.
Ryan, R., Scapens, R. W, & Theobald, M. (2002). Research methods and methodology in accounting and finance. Thomson, London.
Røge K. M. (2017) Contemporary performance measurement and causal thinking. PhD Dissertation Aarhus University.
Tinker, Tony. (1991). The accountant as partisan. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(3), 297-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(91)90006-Z
Uttl, B., White, C.A.and Gonsales, D.W., 2017. Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. , September 2017,
Van de Walle, S. (2008). Comparing the performance of national public sectors: conceptual problems. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 57(4), 329-338. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400810867535
Whitehead, AR, & Russel, BB. (1910-1913). Principia Mathematica.
Wilson, S. (1969). Thinking with Concepts. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Downloads
Publiceret
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Forfatteren(ne) giver tilladelse til publicering af artiklen i det aftalte nummer. Forfatteren(ne) bevarer copyright til egne artikler.
SIS’ redaktør har ophavsretten til tidsskriftets design, navn, systematik, særpræg etc. Artikler, der er udgivet i SIS og som er fagligt godkendt af redaktionen til udgivelse, må ikke tilrettes, omredigeres, kopieres eller gengives i uddrag i andre medier uden redaktionens og forfatterens samtykke.
Artikler må ikke offentliggøres af forfatteren(ne) andetsteds uden indhentning af godkendelse fra ansvarshavende redaktør. SIS’ redaktør er dog altid forfatteren(ne) behjælpelig med at udgive artikler i særtryk samt udbrede artiklerne til andre udgivere, men kun efter aftale med forfatteren(ne) og med angivelse af, at artiklen oprindeligt blev publiceret i SIS.
