Search results

An examination of the commonalities and differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector.

A literature review of 100 publications in international academic journals over the last 20 years.

The chapter develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarised as follows: Multi-dimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.

Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable.

Mutual learning between both sectors, for example the public sector can learn from the private sector on how to link strategy to the PMS and the private sector can learn from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS.

A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector.

There is no single way of achieving business success. The concept of knowledge management (KM) builds on the existing management practices, integrating them into a philosophy for improving performance. This paper aims to understand the various dimensions of KM and how they differ in public and private sector organizations in India. It also attempts to identify the dimensions where one sector is better than the other and areas needing improvement.

The paper uses a sample comprising 16 private and public sector organizations. A convenient sampling scheme was used. The extent of KM practices was evaluated with respect to dimensions, namely process, leadership, technology, culture and measurement.

The paper empirically shows that private sector organizations fare better statistically on all dimensions compared to public sector organizations. Although the private sector is ahead of the public sector on the raw mean scores of various dimensions, it has still a long way to go as the scores are below four on a scale of five. The scores are just satisfactory and there is further scope for improvement.

The study uses a sample of four public sector organizations and the findings may lack generalization. Therefore, it would be interesting to verify the findings using a larger sample size.

The paper can serve as a best practice document for public and private sector organizations interested in adopting KM for improving performance.

The paper tries to bring forth concern areas for KM in Indian public and private sector organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to report empirical research conducted in Saudi Arabia on the impacts of organizational policies and practices on the diversity management of the Saudi private sector. To this end, the Saudization policy and views of key respondents have been tested and discussed.

Primary data were collected through questionnaire surveys from the largest 11 private sector organizations listed on the Saudi Stock Market in the financial/banking, oil and gas, petrochemical, private higher education and private health service sectors. Statistical tools such as means and standard deviations and one-sample t-tests were used for analysis.

The findings suggest that Saudization, retention, pay with benefits and health insurance policies significantly affect the diversity management in the Saudi private sector. Therefore, there is a need to develop organizational policies that support the existence of foreign employees for private businesses in Saudi Arabia. Considering differences as strengths that can be utilized to enhance performance, a diverse workforce might better be able to serve diverse markets.

Collecting data from a closed environment such as Saudi Arabia is constrained by access difficulties, as well as inadequate literature on relevant diversity issues. However, the convenience sampling method and snowballing approach adopted in this study generated reliable data. As a result, this study has implications for both the multinational corporations operating in Saudi Arabia and Saudi owned companies operating in the West and intending to adopt and implement diversity management initiatives for branches in different countries. As such, further research on the gulf countries’ diversity management issues would be critical.

The current study is a first survey-based research endeavor on the topic of diversity management in the Saudi context. The findings contribute to the limited knowledge base on middle eastern countries, thus presenting new empirical evidence on the organizational policies and practices of Saudization, retention, pay and benefits and health insurance policies. The study of the Saudi case, thus adds value to the existing knowledge on diversity management.

This study examines unexplored horizontal accountability types between public, private and third sector actors within a hybrid organization. The case organization was applying a novel alliance model to generate service paths for heterogeneous clientele consuming cultural, educational, health and social services. It was first to do so in Finland.

This research is on a case study that used documents and interviews to examine the design of the horizontal accountability. The descriptive analysis focused on identifying what type of formal accountability system was designed (i.e. who is the account holder, and who is accountable and for what and why).

An imbalanced accountability system was identified because accountability obligations were unevenly distributed between public, private and third sector actors. The private sector was the most accountable for performance, and the third sector (i.e. voluntary sector) was the least accountable. As account holders, the public, private and third sector actors were judging their conduct as account providers. This created a biased horizontal accountability system. The hybrid's accountability system was dynamic because the contracts made to establish the hybrid included opportunities to change horizontal accountability if future changes to the external environment affect too drastically the potential to achieve the hybrid's goals.

Three new concepts are proposed for studying dysfunctional accountability systems: dynamic, biased and horizontally imbalanced accountability.

The paper aims to understand the different motivations / reasons for engaging in CSR initiatives by the organizations. In addition, the study also examines the relationship between CSR motivations and corporate social performance (CSP).

The data were collected from two power sector organizations: one was a private sector firm and the other was a public sector firm. A comparative analysis of the variables with respect to private and public sector organizations was conducted. A questionnaire survey was administered among 370 employees working in the power sector, with 199 executives from public sector and 171 from private sector.

“Philanthropic” motivation emerged as the most dominant CSR motivation among both the public and private sector firms. The private sector firm was found to be significantly higher with respect to “philanthropic”, “enlightened self-interest” and “normative” CSR motivations when compared with the public sector firms. Findings suggest that public and private sector firms differed significantly on four CSR motivations, namely, “philanthropic”, “enlightened self-interest”, “normative” and “coercive”. The CSP score was significantly different among the two power sector firms of public and private sectors. The private sector firm had a higher CSP level than the public sector undertaking.

Further studies in the domain need to address differences in CSR motivations and CSP across other sectors to understand the role of industry characteristics in influencing social development targets of organizations. Research also needs to focus on demonstrating the relationship between CSP and financial performance of the firms. Further, the HR outcomes of CSR initiatives and measurement of CSP indicators, such as attracting and retaining talent, employee commitment and organizational climate factors, need to be assessed.

The social issues are now directly linked with the business model to ensure consistency and community development. The results reveal a need for “enlightened self-interest” which is the second dominant CSR motivation among the organizations. The study makes a novel contribution by determining that competitive and coercive motivations are not functional as part of organizational CSR strategy. CSR can never be forced as the very idea is to do social good. Eventually, the CSR approach demands a commitment from within. The organizations need to emphasize more voluntary engagement of employees and go beyond statutory requirements for realizing the true CSR benefits.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how the institutional context influences human resource management (HRM) policies in the public and private sector in Nigeria.

The convergent parallel mixed methods approach was adopted for this study. Survey data were collected from 122 HR managers across public and private sector organizations in Nigeria as well as 13 qualitative interviews. ANCOVA was used to analyse quantitative data while thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data in order to understand the influence of institutions on HRM in the public and private sector in Nigeria.

Findings indicate that while coercive, mimetic and normative institutional mechanisms influenced HRM in both the public and private sector, the influence of coercive mechanisms was significantly higher in the public sector, largely due to the poor enforcement of labour legislation and attempts by private sector organizations to adopt neo-liberal approaches to HRM.

The study provides an understanding of the institutional context of HRM in Nigeria by highlighting how varying degrees of pressures from the environment create internal diversity in HRM approaches in the public and private sector.

The purpose of the paper is to explore HRM practices and HRM-performance (HRM-P) link in public and private sector organizations across three societal clusters: the Anglo, the Germanic, and the Nordic European.

The article is based on international Cranet HRM survey data collected from large private and public organizations.

According to results, HRM is more advanced in private companies than in public sector organizations, even across three societal clusters. Instead, the analyses related to HRM-P link in private and public organizations refer to interesting similarities but also differences between organizational sectors (public versus private) and societal clusters.

The main limitation is retaining in those performance indicators that are applicable in both private and public organizations: subjective measures of productivity and service quality, only. Performance measures relevant especially in the public sector (e.g. qualitative targets, attaining budget frames) were not available, and the operationalization of HRM as an index covering the main areas of HRM may have reduced differences between public and private organizations. More in-depth research designs are needed in public sector HRM-P research.

The paper contributes to HRM-P research by showing that the level of HRM and the HRM-P relationship varies to some extent according to sector and across Western societal clusters.

Project portfolio management (PPM) is a managerial technique used to seek the strategic goals of organizations improving their performance. The public sector has some characteristics that differ from the private sector, since their management approaches are different. The purpose of this paper is to compare the PPM’s practices and techniques in the public and private sectors.

This paper uses the study case methodology through eight case studies that were undertaken in Brazil: four in public and four in private sectors. The field research used semi-structured interviews that were analyzed using the NVivo software.

In both sectors, strategic alignment is the goal of PPM, and the same tools are employed. The public sector displays better process documentation and lower risk awareness than the private sector, showing an improvement point for the public sector. The selection and prioritization criteria differ from each sector, showing the difference in the strategic goals of public and private sectors.

The limitations of this paper are related to the number of organizations studied; however, the case studies represent organizations from different sectors and industries maximizing heterogeneity, but focusing on Brazil.

The prioritization and effective allocation of projects spending in the Brazilian public sector could be improved with the comparison of their current practices with the ones used in private sector, increasing its transparency and cost allocation.

This study broadens the understanding of PPM in the public sector, which is a gap in the academic literature, comparing its practices with those used in the private sector.

While the term “entrepreneurship” is not exclusively a private sector phenomenon, it is usually associated with private sector business activity and more specifically with small to medium enterprises. However, over the last two decades it has appeared in the public administration literature with increasing frequency. The recent research in public sector entrepreneurial activity makes an exploratory comparative analysis of the key components that are applicable from private sector entrepreneurship timely as the topic is emerging as an area of academic inquiry and research. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comparative analysis of private and public sector entrepreneurship using an analytical model from private and public sector entrepreneurship.

A clear understanding of the research issues involved requires an appreciation of the nexus between private sector entrepreneurship and the more limited research field of public sector entrepreneurship. The paper identifies and examines the historical and evolutionary research on entrepreneurship as a basis for analysis of public and private sector entrepreneurship.

The paper provides a comprehensive analysis that highlights key similarities, differences or a combination between public and private sector entrepreneurship and develops an existing model and framework for a systematic approach to the public sector entrepreneurial process.

Based on this exploration, new insights about public sector entrepreneurship are developed, practical implications for public sector entrepreneurs on how to approach public sector entrepreneurship more systematically and effectively are presented and opportunities for further research are identified.

The aim of this paper is to shed light on the procurement process of consulting services within the public sector and to benchmark the obtained results with practices in the private sector.

A two‐stage research design has been used. First, in‐depth personal interviews were conducted with six users of consulting services. The second stage involved a cross‐sectional survey of purchasers of a broad range of business advisory services. This included private as well as public purchasers.

It was found that the procurement process of consulting services in the public sector differs significantly from that of private companies. Further analyses indicate that purchasers from public and private organizations are equally satisfied with the results of consulting services.

The results of the study indicate that public sector organizations may need to develop new buying skills in market management, specification, competitive process, negotiation regulation and monitoring.

The paper suggests that a more high‐level management involvement is needed, recognizing the importance of the procurement function within the public sector and supporting highly trained staff in implementing strategic procurement initiatives.

The study provides unique insights on how consulting services are purchased in the public sector as well as in the private sector. Furthermore, the paper illustrates which purchase practices explain the satisfaction level of purchasers of consulting services.