Content area
Full Text
1 Introduction
In recent years there has been increasing global pressure on all levels of governments to improve performance. In Australia, this has been reflected in the increased number of government programs, particularly in the areas of health, employment, social welfare, education and defence (Codd, 1991; [76] Parker and Guthrie, 1993; [12] Clark and Corbett, 1999; [73] O'Faircheallaigh et al. , 1999; [45] Hoque and Moll, 2001). For several decades, performance measurement has been used as an internal informational tool to evaluate departmental operations and make program and budgetary decisions ([38] Ho and Ni, 2005). However, the large body of recent literature on new public management (NPM), benchmarking and balanced scorecards (BSCs) demonstrates the level of interest in the public sector for the use of performance measures not only for internal, but also for external reporting to a wide variety of stakeholders including media, community and external funding agencies ([48] Ittner and Larcker, 1998; [6] Bevir et al. , 2003; [10] Cavalluzzo and Ittner, 2004; [37] Herawaty and Hoque, 2007). NPM is the most recent paradigm change in how the public sector is to be governed ([64] Lane, 2000). In contrast to the long-standing importance of rule compliance, NPM emphasises managing for outcomes ([40] Hood, 1995; [51] Kaboolian, 1998; [62] Lapsley, 1999). The increased attention on performance evaluation by public sector managers, consultants and academics reflects the increased pressure on public sector organisations (PSOs) to improve performance to remain viable in today's competitive and global operating environment and to demonstrate this to external as well as internal stakeholders.
There is also a growing concern with sustainability, the impact of organisational activities on the environment and society as well as the more traditional aspect of economic viability. The implementation of information systems for performance management provides opportunity to incorporate measures aligned with sustainability outcomes and provide reportable indicators. There has been a considerable increase in sustainability reporting in the private sector but little in PSOs ([91] Unerman et al. , 2007, see also www.globalreporting.org). This is significant in that the commitment to report publicly, thus making performance visible, drives performance improvements. Local authorities and state owned water companies have done more than other PSOs with water companies having regularly submitted reports to the ACCA Australia...