{"title":"政府绩效评价对组织环境绩效的影响","authors":"Seungwon Yu, G. Shin, Suhee Kim","doi":"10.1080/15309576.2023.2184400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Using GPE performance gaps (the difference between actual and standard levels of performance), this article explores the relationship between the GPE outcomes of public organizations and their environmental performance (EP). We utilize Korean GPE data related to qualitative/quantitative and financial/non-financial performance indicators that the government uses to evaluate public organizations. The GPE does not cover every important environmental activity in which public organizations may engage; the EP measure can incorporate results from all environmental activities, even those excluded from the GPE. Our investigation revealed that the EP of public organizations varied according to their GPE performance gaps. Low GPE performers favored GPE-included environmental activities over GPE-excluded environmental activities, but high GPE performers engaged in environmental activities were excluded from the GPE. A negativity bias occurs when public organizations adjust their environmental activities in response to GPE performance gaps. For environmental activities excluded from the GPE, low GPE performers avoided them more than high GPE performers engaged in them. These findings indicate the importance of a well-designed organizational performance evaluation for balanced engagement in environmental initiatives. This article is of theoretical interest to academics and has practical value for practitioners.","PeriodicalId":47571,"journal":{"name":"Public Performance & Management Review","volume":"46 1","pages":"771 - 792"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Government Performance Evaluation on Environmental Performance in Organizations\",\"authors\":\"Seungwon Yu, G. Shin, Suhee Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15309576.2023.2184400\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Using GPE performance gaps (the difference between actual and standard levels of performance), this article explores the relationship between the GPE outcomes of public organizations and their environmental performance (EP). We utilize Korean GPE data related to qualitative/quantitative and financial/non-financial performance indicators that the government uses to evaluate public organizations. The GPE does not cover every important environmental activity in which public organizations may engage; the EP measure can incorporate results from all environmental activities, even those excluded from the GPE. Our investigation revealed that the EP of public organizations varied according to their GPE performance gaps. Low GPE performers favored GPE-included environmental activities over GPE-excluded environmental activities, but high GPE performers engaged in environmental activities were excluded from the GPE. A negativity bias occurs when public organizations adjust their environmental activities in response to GPE performance gaps. For environmental activities excluded from the GPE, low GPE performers avoided them more than high GPE performers engaged in them. These findings indicate the importance of a well-designed organizational performance evaluation for balanced engagement in environmental initiatives. This article is of theoretical interest to academics and has practical value for practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Performance & Management Review\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"771 - 792\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Performance & Management Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2184400\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Performance & Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2184400","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of Government Performance Evaluation on Environmental Performance in Organizations
Abstract Using GPE performance gaps (the difference between actual and standard levels of performance), this article explores the relationship between the GPE outcomes of public organizations and their environmental performance (EP). We utilize Korean GPE data related to qualitative/quantitative and financial/non-financial performance indicators that the government uses to evaluate public organizations. The GPE does not cover every important environmental activity in which public organizations may engage; the EP measure can incorporate results from all environmental activities, even those excluded from the GPE. Our investigation revealed that the EP of public organizations varied according to their GPE performance gaps. Low GPE performers favored GPE-included environmental activities over GPE-excluded environmental activities, but high GPE performers engaged in environmental activities were excluded from the GPE. A negativity bias occurs when public organizations adjust their environmental activities in response to GPE performance gaps. For environmental activities excluded from the GPE, low GPE performers avoided them more than high GPE performers engaged in them. These findings indicate the importance of a well-designed organizational performance evaluation for balanced engagement in environmental initiatives. This article is of theoretical interest to academics and has practical value for practitioners.
期刊介绍:
Public Performance & Management Review (PPMR) is a leading peer-reviewed academic journal that addresses a broad array of influential factors on the performance of public and nonprofit organizations. Its objectives are to: Advance theories on public governance, public management, and public performance; Facilitate the development of innovative techniques and to encourage a wider application of those already established; Stimulate research and critical thinking about the relationship between public and private management theories; Present integrated analyses of theories, concepts, strategies, and techniques dealing with performance, measurement, and related questions of organizational efficacy; and Provide a forum for practitioner-academic exchange. Continuing themes include, but are not limited to: managing for results, measuring and evaluating performance, designing accountability systems, improving budget strategies, managing human resources, building partnerships, facilitating citizen participation, applying new technologies, and improving public sector services and outcomes. Published since 1975, Public Performance & Management Review is a highly respected journal, receiving international ranking. Scholars and practitioners recognize it as a leading journal in the field of public administration.