Unraveling the Socio-Technical Tensions of Performance Measurement in Public Welfare Organizations

Abstract: In the name of efficiency, performance measurement has gained traction in public welfare organizations. The idea of performance measurement originates from views of all organizations rooted in scientific management notions that emerged during industrialization, as kinds of production units, according to an industrial logic. However, the primary objectives of public welfare organizations are to meet situational needs of individuals. Thus, applying performance measurement in public welfare organizations has resulted in tensions between social and scientific perspectives that have led to devaluation of welfare professionals’ reasoning and judgement in relation to performance measures. The purpose of the thesis is to unravel the sociotechnical tensions between performance measurement and public welfare practice by addressing the underlying logics in theory and praxis. In addition, the knowledge acquired from theory and praxis used to reflect on a practical case of performance measurement design, to advance the design of performance measurements in public welfare organizations and avoid dysfunctional effects. All six papers have contributed to elucidation of important aspects of the socio-technical tensions. First, they have provided theoretical insights regarding underlying logics and values (Paper I), and constructive and deconstructive approaches (Paper II) in public performance measurement research. Second, they have provided practical lessons showing how industrial values have obtained precedence in design, decision-making and management, as well as in the choice of data. In this sense, although they are based on a welfare logic, public welfare organizations are haunted by the ghost of industrialization, which has fueled anxiety among welfare workers, with dysfunctional consequences, as they have had to adjust to a measurement regime that does not sufficiently value their reasoning and judgement. Thus, welfare logic needs to be integrated into definitions of performance and its measurement.  Third, they have informed reflections on the design of performance measurements from an empirical case study. Together with the theoretical insights and practical lessons, the reflections reveal in detail how a welfare logic can be easily subordinated in the construction of performance measurement as welfare workers are often only involved in the use stage. In summary, this thesis makes a multi-level contribution to unraveling the socio-technical tensions of performance measurement in public welfare organizations, which I hope will be useful for public welfare performance measurement researchers, measurement practitioners, welfare professionals, and managers.