Better than Raw: A Guide to Measuring Organizational Performance with Adjusted Performance Measures
- 14 August 2003
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Public Administration Review
- Vol. 63 (5) , 607-615
Abstract
Like oysters on the half shell, some things are better when they're raw. In evaluating the performance of organizations and providing guidance for improving performance, however, raw performance measures, such as test scores or success rates, are often inferior to performance measures adjusted for client and environmental characteristics, or adjusted performance measures (APMs). Using examples from a variety of public services and data on public schools in Georgia, we compare the performance data generated by raw scores and by APMs. We conclude with guidance for constructing and using adjusted performance measures.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Performance Measurement in U.S. Counties: Capacity for ReformPublic Administration Review, 2000
- Duties of a doctor: UK doctors and Good Medical PracticeQuality and Safety in Health Care, 2000
- Using Adjusted Performance Measures for Evaluating Resource UsePublic Budgeting & Finance, 1999
- Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the PracticePublic Administration Review, 1999
- Tennessee's Class Size Study: Findings, Implications, MisconceptionsEducational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1999
- Local Government Benchmarking: Lessons from Two Major Multigovernment EffortsPublic Administration Review, 1999
- The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 out of 50Public Administration Review, 1998
- Severity-Adjusted Mortality and Length of Stay in Teaching and Nonteaching HospitalsJAMA, 1997
- Designing Effective Performance-Measurement Systems under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993Public Administration Review, 1996
- Developing Performance Indicators for the Pennsylvania Department of TransportationPublic Productivity Review, 1982