Zelf-evaluatie vs zelf-promotie? Een onderzoek naar de motieven voor het gebruik van het Common Assessment Framework (CAF) bij Belgische overheidsdiensten

Organisaties in de publieke sector in Europa gebruiken meer en meer kwaliteitsmodellen zoals het EFQM model, het ISO model, Balanced Scorecards, Six Sigma, enzovoort. Recentelijk werd het Common Assessment Framework (CAF) aan het rijtje toegevoegd. Op Europees vlak wordt het CAF gepromoot als instrument voor zelfevaluatie. Het Europese karakter van het instrument houdt een sterke potentie tot internationaal vergelijkende analyse in zich. Het CAF wordt daarenboven opgevat als een instapmodel voor kwaliteitsanalyse dat de kloof met meer gesofisticeerde managementmodellen (in het bijzonder het EFQM model) kan helpen overbruggen. Ook in België wordt het CAF gepromoot. In 2001 werd een eerste conferentie over de kwaliteit van de overheidsdiensten georganiseerd waar geselecteerde organisaties hun CAF-evaluatie en goede praktijken konden voorstellen

Why do Belgian public agencies use the Common Assessment Framework (CAF)?

Public sector organisations throughout Europe are increasingly applying quality models such as the EFQM Business Excellence Model, the ISO 9000 or 14000 series, Balanced Scorecard approaches, Six Sigma, etc. Recently, the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) was added to this ‘hit parade’ of quality tools. It has been introduced as a self-assessment tool which will be widely used by European public agencies – and this shared nature means that it can give rise to interesting comparative analysis. It aspires to bridge the different quality models and to serve as a useful ‘starter model’ before moving on to more sophisticated quality management models

Performance information in the public sector: How it is used

Performance information has long permeated the public sector. The actual use of performance information however has long been taken for granted. This book is one of the first to bring together an international team of acclaimed academics focusing on how and whether politicians, public officials, and citizens use public sector performance information. Combining practical experience with academic analysis this book explores the social and organizational dynamics of performance indicators. It moves beyond the technicalities of measurement and indicators and looks at how performance information is changing the public sector

How is information used to improve performance in the public sector? Exploring the dynamics of performance informations

In this chapter, we challenge the assumption of a direct relationship between the existence and availability of information, and its use in decisions. We will do so by integrating three different sets of literature. Other chapters in this book stress organisations’ capacities and capabilities to produce a turnaround, or refer to contextual factors that make a turnaround difficult. Our basic argument is that the fact that information exists does not mean it will also be used by those in charge. A first set of arguments comes from a somewhat more recent field of study looking at the actual use of performance information by decision makers in the public sector (Van Dooren & Van de Walle, 2008). The second part will focus on structural and organisational factors that may facilitate or complicate the diffusion of information through an organisation. The third part will briefly introduce psychological factors that make that certain pieces of information are excluded from consideration in decision making. We will subsequently integrate this information and distil the major trends. We end by discussing the implication of our findings on public organisations’ ability to connect knowledge to performance

International difference in public service motivation: Comparing regions across the world

Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service joins a long-standing debate about what drives the behavior of government employees and others who are engaged in the public's business. For many centuries, public service was considered a noble calling and, more recently, a profession. During the latter part of the 20th century, however, many scholars called into question both the reality and desirability of a public service ethic. This book draws upon a substantial and growing body of evidence from across disciplines in the social, behavioral, and natural sciences. It asks and answers key questions about the extent to which behavior is fundamentally self- or other-regarding. To paraphrase James Madison, "public servants are not angels," but neither are they self-aggrandizing opportunists. The evidence presented in this volume offers a compelling case that motivation theory should be grounded not only in rational choice models, but altruistic and prosocial perspectives as well. In addition to reviewing evidence from many disciplines, the volume extensively reviews research in public management conducted under the rubric of "public service motivation". The volume is a comprehensive guide to history, methodology, empirical research, and institutional and managerial implications of research on public service motivation. As the contributors illustrate, the implications transcend particular sectors or countries

Current and future trends in public sector reform: The views of trade unions and consultants in ten European countries.

__Abstract__ While public sector reform has been a constant process, sometimes evolutionary and sometimes revolutionary, the financial crisis that started in 2008, along with the streamlining and efficiency aims of New Public Management paradigms that began to emerge in the 1980s, have increased the focus on current trends in reform in Europe and what this means for the future of the public sector. This report draws on a total of 59 interviews conducted in 10 countries with top public sector consultants and public sector trade unions to determine perceptions of current trends in the public sector in each of the countries, as well as the future of public sector reform. The interviews were conducted according to a standardised set of questions, although they were conducted in each country’s native language. Interviewees were asked background questions about their role in regard to the public sector, along with questions about the state of public administration in their country, specific public sector reform factors that had improved or deteriorated over the past five years, the effects of these reforms on their work and what trends they saw shaping the future of the public sector