Individual Performance

From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment

Lotte Bøgh Andersen, Eskil Heinesen, Lene Holm Pedersen

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    Performance is perhaps the most central concept in public administration research, and this article discusses theoretically and investigates empirically how we can obtain more consistent performance measures. Theoretically, we combine existing arguments in public administration with institutional theory and the sociology of professions. Empirically, we ask whether different measures of individual performance produce different results. The investigated performance measures vary with regard to risk of common data source bias, standardization of assessment criteria, and external verification of the assessment. Our investigated explanatory variables are intrinsic motivation, public service motivation, and job satisfaction. Combining survey and administrative data for 747 lower secondary school teachers (teaching 5,679 students in 85 schools), we analyze 4 different measures of the same performance dimension for the same teachers: the teachers’ self-reported contributions to students’ academic skills, the students’ marks for the year’s work given by the teacher, marks in oral exams with one external examiner and the teacher, and marks in written exams with at least one external examiner. The associations are systematically stronger when the performance measure comes from the same data source as the explanatory variables, but when separate data sources are used and the measurement scale is institutionalized, the level of external verification does not matter much. Based on institutional theory and the sociology of professions, we develop a theoretical argument that can explain this.
    Original languageEnglish
    JournalJournal of Public Administration Research and Theory
    Volume26
    Issue number1
    Pages (from-to)63-78
    Number of pages24
    ISSN1053-1858
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Cite this

    @article{0ec60480ccd14fda84b225144c91b68f,
    title = "Individual Performance: From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment",
    abstract = "Performance is perhaps the most central concept in public administration research, and this article discusses theoretically and investigates empirically how we can obtain more consistent performance measures. Theoretically, we combine existing arguments in public administration with institutional theory and the sociology of professions. Empirically, we ask whether different measures of individual performance produce different results. The investigated performance measures vary with regard to risk of common data source bias, standardization of assessment criteria, and external verification of the assessment. Our investigated explanatory variables are intrinsic motivation, public service motivation, and job satisfaction. Combining survey and administrative data for 747 lower secondary school teachers (teaching 5,679 students in 85 schools), we analyze 4 different measures of the same performance dimension for the same teachers: the teachers’ self-reported contributions to students’ academic skills, the students’ marks for the year’s work given by the teacher, marks in oral exams with one external examiner and the teacher, and marks in written exams with at least one external examiner. The associations are systematically stronger when the performance measure comes from the same data source as the explanatory variables, but when separate data sources are used and the measurement scale is institutionalized, the level of external verification does not matter much. Based on institutional theory and the sociology of professions, we develop a theoretical argument that can explain this.",
    author = "Andersen, {Lotte B{\o}gh} and Eskil Heinesen and {Holm Pedersen}, Lene",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.1093/jopart/muv010",
    language = "English",
    volume = "26",
    pages = "63--78",
    journal = "Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory",
    issn = "1053-1858",
    publisher = "Oxford University Press",
    number = "1",

    }

    Individual Performance : From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment. / Andersen, Lotte Bøgh; Heinesen, Eskil; Holm Pedersen, Lene.

    In: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2016, p. 63-78.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Individual Performance

    T2 - From Common Source Bias to Institutionalized Assessment

    AU - Andersen, Lotte Bøgh

    AU - Heinesen, Eskil

    AU - Holm Pedersen, Lene

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - Performance is perhaps the most central concept in public administration research, and this article discusses theoretically and investigates empirically how we can obtain more consistent performance measures. Theoretically, we combine existing arguments in public administration with institutional theory and the sociology of professions. Empirically, we ask whether different measures of individual performance produce different results. The investigated performance measures vary with regard to risk of common data source bias, standardization of assessment criteria, and external verification of the assessment. Our investigated explanatory variables are intrinsic motivation, public service motivation, and job satisfaction. Combining survey and administrative data for 747 lower secondary school teachers (teaching 5,679 students in 85 schools), we analyze 4 different measures of the same performance dimension for the same teachers: the teachers’ self-reported contributions to students’ academic skills, the students’ marks for the year’s work given by the teacher, marks in oral exams with one external examiner and the teacher, and marks in written exams with at least one external examiner. The associations are systematically stronger when the performance measure comes from the same data source as the explanatory variables, but when separate data sources are used and the measurement scale is institutionalized, the level of external verification does not matter much. Based on institutional theory and the sociology of professions, we develop a theoretical argument that can explain this.

    AB - Performance is perhaps the most central concept in public administration research, and this article discusses theoretically and investigates empirically how we can obtain more consistent performance measures. Theoretically, we combine existing arguments in public administration with institutional theory and the sociology of professions. Empirically, we ask whether different measures of individual performance produce different results. The investigated performance measures vary with regard to risk of common data source bias, standardization of assessment criteria, and external verification of the assessment. Our investigated explanatory variables are intrinsic motivation, public service motivation, and job satisfaction. Combining survey and administrative data for 747 lower secondary school teachers (teaching 5,679 students in 85 schools), we analyze 4 different measures of the same performance dimension for the same teachers: the teachers’ self-reported contributions to students’ academic skills, the students’ marks for the year’s work given by the teacher, marks in oral exams with one external examiner and the teacher, and marks in written exams with at least one external examiner. The associations are systematically stronger when the performance measure comes from the same data source as the explanatory variables, but when separate data sources are used and the measurement scale is institutionalized, the level of external verification does not matter much. Based on institutional theory and the sociology of professions, we develop a theoretical argument that can explain this.

    UR - http://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=960238831455&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

    U2 - 10.1093/jopart/muv010

    DO - 10.1093/jopart/muv010

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 26

    SP - 63

    EP - 78

    JO - Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

    JF - Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

    SN - 1053-1858

    IS - 1

    ER -