Dubnick, Melvin J., “Accountability and the Promise of Performance: In Search of the Mechanisms.” Prepared for delivery at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, Philadelphia, PA.
Also presented at Conference of the European Group of Public Administration (EGPA), September 3-6, 2003, Lisbon, Portugal; and Institute of Local Government Seminar, University of Birmingham (UK), June 14, 2004.
Author’s Note:
A final version of this paper under the same title was published in 2005 by PPMR.
AI-Generated Summary:
This document critically examines the assumed relationship between accountability and performance in public administration reforms, particularly within the context of New Public Management.
The Promises and Assumptions of Accountability
- Accountability is widely promoted as a solution to transparency, justice, ethics, and performance.
- The core assumption is that increased accountability leads to improved government performance (A=>P).
Shift from Traditional to New Accountability
- Traditional accountability focused on ministerial responsibility and indirect responsibility of officials.
- NPM reforms emphasize direct responsibility of functionaries, reducing elected officials’ oversight.
- This shift aims to improve performance through more direct connections between providers and consumers.
The Relationship Between Accountability and Performance
- The assumed link (A=>P) is often treated as a myth without thorough theoretical or empirical scrutiny.
- Many reforms rely on rhetoric rather than clear, tested theories of how accountability influences performance.
- Some argue the relationship is dialectical, balancing performance and democratic accountability.
Conceptual Ambiguity and Management Bias
- Accountability is a vague, multi-faceted concept often equated with responsibility, answerability, or responsiveness.
- The management bias narrows accountability to strategic or instrumental functions, limiting understanding.
- This bias emphasizes management roles, risking long-term tunnel vision over broader accountability principles.
Social Mechanism Approach to Accountability
- The paper adopts a social mechanism perspective to analyze how accountability might influence performance.
- It views accountability as social processes involving specific behaviors and interactions with transformational effects.
- The approach focuses on how account-giving behaviors (reporting, mitigating, reframing) act as mechanisms influencing performance.
Account-Giving Mechanisms and Behaviors
- Reporting involves providing neutral information, often used for control and monitoring.
- Mitigating involves responses to awkward situations, emphasizing responsibility sharing.
- Reframing transforms the relationship, aiming to control or change the principal-agent dynamic.
Historical and Theoretical Foundations of Administrative Reporting
- Administrative reporting has historically been rooted in folk wisdom emphasizing oversight, control, and transparency.
- Despite the decline of Taylorism, reporting remained central to public sector management, serving both managerial control and democratic accountability.
Financial Reporting and Its Societal Role
- Financial reporting, institutionalized through legal standards, brought rationality and transparency to capitalism and the state.
- It enables surface-level oversight, comparison with budgets, and evaluation of efficiency, but resists transformation into reform tools.
Reporting as a Control Mechanism
- Reports establish subordinate roles for agents, functioning as mechanisms of social control influencing perceptions of predictability.
- Organizations are often shaped by their accounting reports, affecting decision-making and organizational behavior.
Types of Performance and Measurement
- Performance is multifaceted, including task quality, competence, results, and productivity.
- Different forms focus on process (production), skill (competence), output (results), and efficiency (productivity), each relevant in management and public administration.
The Social Mechanism of Accountability
- Accountability acts as a social mechanism driven by “M” factors like cognition, norms, social interactions, and institutional patterns.
- The link between account giving and performance is complex and often exogenous, influenced by context, expectations, and trust.
The Accountability Paradox
- Increasing accountability efforts can hinder performance improvements due to resource consumption and performative activities.
- Efforts like GPRA and PART exemplify how accountability reports often become symbolic, with limited impact on actual performance.
Expectations and Trust in Accountability
- Expectations shape account giving, with characteristics like scope, clarity, and emotional attachment influencing effectiveness.
- Trust, based on past behavior and perceived legitimacy, plays a crucial role in fostering effective accountability relationships.
Contextual Factors Influencing Accountability
- Social, legal, moral, and attributional environments create varying expectations that affect how accountability functions.
- Environments of blameworthiness, liabilities, and attributions influence mechanisms like scapegoating, legal compliance, and role-based expectations.
Contingent Human Behavior and Accountability
- Research shows accountability effects depend on individual perceptions, audience legitimacy, and timing of account giving.
- Cognitive effort in accountability can sometimes worsen decision quality, highlighting its complex effects.
Broader Perspectives on Accountability and Performance
- The relationship between account giving and performance is not straightforward; it is shaped by expectations, trust, and context.
- A comprehensive understanding requires identifying “M” factors within various social and institutional settings to explain performance outcomes.
Implications for Public Management Reforms
- Current reforms often rely on untested assumptions linking accountability to performance.
- A shift in focus toward understanding social mechanisms and contextual variables is necessary for effective governance improvements.
Theories and Concepts of Accountability
- Accountability is a central theme across public administration, ethics, and organizational control.
- Different frameworks explore accountability’s ethical, social, and institutional dimensions, emphasizing trust, responsibility, and expectations.
Organizational Control and Management Systems
- Managerial accounting, performance measures, and strategic management are key tools for organizational control.
- Theories highlight the importance of transparency, performance measurement dysfunctions, and the role of control systems in organizational effectiveness.
Social and Cultural Influences on Accountability
- Cultural differences shape perceptions of responsibility, blame, and moral judgment.
- Emotions like shame and guilt influence social bonds and accountability practices across societies.
Social Mechanisms and Institutional Structures
- Social mechanisms explain how institutions and social processes produce collective rationality.
- Institutional isomorphism and embeddedness influence organizational behaviors and conformity within fields.
Public Sector Reforms and Governance Models
- Reforms like New Public Management and governance networks aim to improve efficiency and accountability.
- Challenges include balancing market mechanisms, network governance, and traditional bureaucratic controls.
Ethical and Psychological Aspects
- Ethical theories and psychological research examine moral responsibility, blame, and the effects of accountability on behavior.
- Apologies, blame avoidance, and emotional responses are critical in managing social and organizational accountability.
Performance Measurement and Policy Implementation
- Performance metrics and results-based management are central to accountability reforms.
- Dysfunctional effects, such as gaming and misaligned incentives, pose ongoing challenges.
Social and Political Dynamics
- Power, trust, and political manipulation influence accountability processes.
- Social constructs like reputation and social bonds impact public and organizational trust.
Social Mechanisms in Governance
- Social mechanisms underpin political and organizational processes, affecting policy outcomes.
- Understanding these mechanisms helps explain how governance structures operate and adapt.