Integrated data management and performance measurement systems in local government networks: A systematic literature analysis

Author/s Luca Mazzara, Francesco Bergamaschi, Giulia Leoni
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/2 Language Italian
Pages 26 P. 91-116 File size 334 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2022-002005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper aims at systematically reviewing and analyzing the literature on performance measurement and management systems in the inter-municipal relationships, also considering the related combination with big data, business intelligence, analytics, blockchain, as well as artificial intelligence. The public management literature, in fact, highlights the need of extending the boundaries of performance management systems from an organizational to an interorganizational dimension to deal with change and unpredictability. Moreover, although this importance of integrated data management is recognized within the local government network context, there seems to be a lack of systematization on performance management and measurement system studies. This paper not only analyzes and interprets performance management systems in the local government network context, but also provides a picture of what has happened in this field over the past decade. Thus, the paper provides evidence on how and why the field changes and it summarizes the main insights for future research.

Keywords: Local government network, Performance management, Measurement systems, Integrated data management, Literature review

  1. AA. VV. (2021), The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews, Systematic Reviews, 10(1), pp. 1-9.
  2. Ammons D.N., Roenigk D.J. (2015), Benchmarking and interorganizational learning in local government, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), pp. 309-335.
  3. Andrews R., Bellò B., Downe J., Martin S., Walker R.M. (2021), The Motivations for the Adoption of Management Innovation by Local Governments and its Performance Effects, Public Administration Review, 81(4), pp. 625-637.
  4. Barretta A. (2019), Ruolo del controllo nel sostegno alla collaborazione inter-organizzativa: il caso delle reti cliniche, Azienda Pubblica, 32(3), pp. 293-320.
  5. Barrutia J.M., Echebarria C. (2019), Drivers of exploitative and explorative innovation, Public Management Review, 21(3), pp. 446-472.
  6. Bel G., Fageda X., Mur M. (2014), Does cooperation reduce service delivery costs? Evidence from residential solid waste services, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), pp. 85-107.
  7. Bel G., Warner M.E. (2015), Inter‐municipal cooperation and costs: Expectations and evidence, Public Administration, 93(1), pp. 52-67.
  8. Bjurstrøm K.H. (2021), How interagency coordination is affected by agency policy autonomy, Public Management Review, 23(3), pp. 397-421.
  9. Bovaird T., Loeffler E. (2013), We’re all in this together: harnessing user and community co-production of public outcomes. Birmingham: Institute of Local Government Studies.
  10. Bowman A.O.M., Parsons B.M. (2013), Making connections: Performance regimes and extreme events, Public Administration Review, 73(1), pp. 63-73.
  11. Broadbent J., Laughlin R. (2009), Performance management systems: A conceptual model, Management Accounting Research, 20(4), pp. 283-295.
  12. Broadbent J., Laughlin R. (2013), Accounting control and controlling accounting: Interdisciplinary and critical perspectives, Emerald Group Publishing, UK.
  13. Caglio A., Ditillo A. (2008), A review and discussion of management control in inter-firm relationships: Achievements and future directions, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7-8), pp. 865-898.
  14. Cardoni A. (2015), La rendicontazione nelle reti di impresa: research in action in “Sanità Net”, Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia Aziendale, 2, pp. 180-200.
  15. Castellano N. (2011), Modelli e misure di performance aziendale: analisi della letteratura e spunti di ricerca, Management Control, 1, pp. 41-64.
  16. Cepiku D. (2006), Le reti di amministrazioni pubbliche nella prospettiva economico-aziendale, Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia Aziendale, 106(7/8), pp. 470-487.
  17. Cohen G. (2018), Cultural fragmentation as a barrier to interagency collaboration: A qualitative examination of Texas law enforcement officers’ perceptions, The American Review of Public Administration, 48(8), pp. 886-901.
  18. Cordeschi R. (2007), AI turns fifty: revisiting its origins, Applied Artificial Intelligence, 21(4-5), pp. 259-279.
  19. Costumato L. (2021), Collaboration among public organizations: a systematic literature review on determinants of interinstitutional performance, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 34(3), pp. 247-273.
  20. Davenport T.,(2018), From analytics to artificial intelligence, Journal of Business Analytics, 1(2), pp. 73-80. DOI: 10.1080/2573234X.2018.1543535.
  21. Denyer D., Tranfield D. (2009), Producing a systematic review, in Buchanan D.A., Bryman A. (eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods, Sage, pp. 671-689.
  22. Dudau A.I., Favotto A., Kominis G., Sicilia M. (2020), Building trust in public sector networks: the role of rhetoric and persuasion, Financial Accountability & Management, 36(2), pp. 134-150.
  23. Fedele M., Moini G. (2006), Cooperare conviene? Intercomunalità e politiche pubbliche, Rivista italiana di politiche pubbliche, 1(1), pp. 71-98.
  24. Fisman R., Khanna T. (1999), Is Trust a Historical Residue? Information Flows and Trust Levels, Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organisation, 38(1), pp. 79-92.
  25. Flamholtz E. (1979), Organizational control systems as a managerial tool, California Management Review, 22(2), pp. 50-59.
  26. Galizzi G., Rota S., Sicilia M. (2017), Aggregazioni e cooperazioni tra enti locali: una review della letteratura, Azienda Pubblica, 3.
  27. Guarneros-Meza V., Downe J., Martin S. (2018), Defining, achieving, and evaluating collaborative outcomes: a theory of change approach, Public Management Review, 20(10), pp. 1562-1580.
  28. Guthrie J., Ricceri F., Dumay J. (2012), Reflections and projections: a decade of intellectual capital accounting research, The British Accounting Review, 44(2), pp. 68-82.
  29. Haenlein M., Kplan A. (2019), A brief history of artificial intelligence: On the past, present, and future of artificial intelligence, California Management Review, 61(4), pp. 5-14.
  30. Head B.W., Alford J. (2015), Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management, Administration & Society, 47(6), pp. 711-739.
  31. Hobson S., Anand R., Yang J., Lee J., Wang Y., Xu J.M. (2012, July), Improving service coordination in municipal government with the Shared Data Manager, Proceedings of 2012 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics (pp. 19-24).
  32. Holsapple C., Lee-Post A., Pakath R. (2014), A unified foundation for business analytics. Decision Support Systems, 64, pp. 130-141.
  33. Holzer M., Fry J. (2011), Shared services and municipal consolidation. A critical analysis, Public Technology Institute, Alexandria, USA.
  34. Hulst R., Van Montfort A. (eds.) (2007), Inter-municipal cooperation in Europe, vol. 238, Springer, Dordrecht, NL.
  35. Jimenez B.S. (2017), When ties bind: Public managers’ networking behavior and municipal fiscal health after the Great Recession, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(3), pp. 450-467.
  36. Kapucu N., Hu Q. (2016), Understanding multiplexity of collaborative emergency management networks, The American Review of Public Administration, 46(4), pp. 399-417.
  37. Kelman S., Hong S., Turbitt I. (2013), Are there managerial practices associated with the outcomes of an interagency service delivery collaboration? Evidence from British crime and disorder reduction partnerships, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(3), pp. 609-630.
  38. Kooiman, J. (2003), Governing as governance, Sage, USA.
  39. Kurunmäki L., Miller P. (2011), Regulatory hybrids: Partnerships, budgeting and modernising government, Management Accounting Research, 22(4), pp. 220-241.
  40. La Valle S., Lesser E., Shockley R., Hopkins M.S., Kruschwitz N. (2011), Big data, analytics and the path from insights to value, Sloan Management Review, 52(2), pp. 21-31.
  41. Leoni G., Bergamaschi F., Maione G. (2021), Artificial Intelligence and Local Governments: the case of Strategic Performance Management Systems and Accountability, in Visvizi A, Bodziany M. (eds), Artificial Intelligence and Its Context. Security, Business and Governance, Springer.
  42. Leon-Moreta A., Totaro V.R. (2021), Workforce Capacity in Municipal Government, Public Administration Review, 81(2), pp. 273-285.
  43. Madsen D.Ø., Risvik S., Stenheim T. (2017), The diffusion of Lean in the Norwegian municipality sector: An exploratory survey, Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), pp. 1-25.
  44. Malmi T., Brown D.A. (2008), Management control systems as a package. Opportunities, challenges and research directions, Management Accounting Research, 19(4), pp. 287-300.
  45. Mancini D. (1999), L’azienda nella rete di imprese: la prospettiva del controllo relazionale. Giuffrè, Milano.
  46. Mancini D. (2011), L’azienda-rete e le decisioni di partnership: il ruolo del Sistema informativo relazionale, Management Control, 1, pp. 65-97. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2011-001004
  47. Mandell M., Keast R., Chamberlain D. (2017), Collaborative networks and the need for a new management language, Public Management Review, 19(3), pp. 326-341.
  48. Marchi L. (1993), I sistemi informativi aziendali, Giuffrè, Milano.
  49. Marchi L. (2011), L’evoluzione del controllo di gestione nella prospettiva informative e gestionale esterna, Management Control, 3, pp. 5-16. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2011-003001
  50. Marchi L., Mancini D. (2009), Gestione informatica dei dati aziendali, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  51. Massaro M., Dumay J., Guthrie J. (2016), On the shoulders of giants: undertaking a structured literature review in accounting, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(5), pp. 767-801.
  52. Massaro M., Moro A., Lucas M. (2012), Approcci formali e informali al controllo negli innovation network. La relazione tra leve del controllo e fattori della fiducia, Management Control, 1, pp. 27-54. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2012-001003
  53. Mazzara L. (1996), Gli indicatori per l’analisi di efficacia, in Farneti G., Mazzara L., Savioli G. (a cura di), Il sistema degli indicatori negli enti locali, Giappichelli, Torino.
  54. Mazzara L., Sangiorgi D., Siboni B. (2010), Public strategic plans in Italian local governments: a sustainability development focus?, Public Management Review, 12(4), pp. 493-509.
  55. Meyfroodt K., Desmidt D., Goeminne S (2019), Do Politicians See Eye to Eye? The Relationship between Political Group Characteristics, Perceived Strategic Plan Quality, and Strategic Consensus in Local Governing Majorities, Public Administration Review, 79(5), pp. 749-759.
  56. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G. (2009), Preferred reporting for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement, British Medical Journal, 338, b2535.
  57. Mortenson M.J., Doherty N.F., Robinson S. (2014), Operational research from taylorism to terabytes: a research agenda for the analytics age, European Journal of Operational Research, 241, pp. 583-595.
  58. Osborne S.P., Nasi G., Powell M. (2021), Beyond co‐production: value creation and public services, Public Administration, 99(4), pp. 641-657.
  59. Paolini A. (1993). Il controllo strategico: uno schema d'analisi. Giuffrè, Milano.
  60. Pistoni A., Songini L. (2002), Reporting e valore. Misurazione delle performance aziendali, Milano, Egea.
  61. Preite D., De Matteis F. (2019), Innovazione di processo nello sviluppo del sistema dei controlli negli enti locali. Innovazione di processo nello sviluppo del sistema dei controlli negli enti locali, Management Control, 3, pp. 79-98.
  62. Provan K.G., Kenis P. (2008), Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), pp. 229-252.
  63. Provan K.G., Milward H.B. (2001), Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public‐sector organizational networks, Public Administration Review, 61(4), pp. 414-423.
  64. Schoute M., Budding T., Gradus R. (2018), Municipalities’ choices of service delivery modes: The influence of service, politial, governance, and financial characteristics, International Public Management Journal, 21(4), pp. 502-532.
  65. Silvi R. (1995), La progettazione del sistema di misurazione della performance aziendale, Giappichelli, Torino.
  66. Siverbo S. (2014), The implementation and use of benchmarking in local government: a case study of the translation of a management accounting innovation, Financial Accountability & Management, 30(2), pp. 121-149.
  67. Sorrentino D., Mussari R., Ruggiero P. (2021), Performance e co-produzione dei servizi pubblici: la problematica della misurazione. Performance e co-produzione dei servizi pubblici: la problematica della misurazione, Management Control, 2, pp. 115-141.
  68. Steccolini I. (2019), Accounting and the post-new public management: Re-considering publicness in accounting research, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(1), pp. 255-279.
  69. Tomkins C. (2001), Interdependencies, Trust and Information in Relationships, Alliances and Networks, Accounting, Organizations & Society, 26(2), pp. 161-191.
  70. Tranfield D., Denyer D., Smart P. (2003), Towards a methodology for developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic review, British Journal of Management, 14(3), pp. 207-222.
  71. Van den Bekerom P., Torenvlied R., Akkerman A. (2017), Constrained by red tape: How managerial networking moderates the effects of red tape on public service performance, The American Review of Public Administration, 47(3), pp. 300-322.
  72. Vermiglio C., Noto G., Bolívar M.P.R., Zarone V. (2021), Disaster management and emerging technologies: a performance-based perspective, Meditari Accountancy Research. DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2021-1206
  73. Warner M.E., Aldag A.M., Kim Y. (2021), Privatization and intermunicipal cooperation in US local government services: balancing fiscal stress, need and political interests, Public Management Review, 23(9), pp. 1359-1376.
  74. Watson H.J. (2009), Tutorial: business intelligence – past, present, and future, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 25(39), pp. 488-510. DOI: 10.17705/1CAIS.02539
  75. Zemánková A. (2019), Artificial intelligence and blockchain in audit and accounting: Literature review, WSEAS, Transactions on Business and Economics, 16, pp. 568-581.

Luca Mazzara, Francesco Bergamaschi, Giulia Leoni, Gestione integrata dei dati e misurazione della performance nei network inter-municipali: un’analisi sistematica della letteratura in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 2/2022, pp 91-116, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2022-002005