Public Value Scorecard
In his 2013 book, Recognizing Public Value (reference below, p. 110), Mark Moore describes the Public Value Scorecard as a framework that “translates an abstract idea of public value creation into a concrete set of performance measures that can both monitor value creation in the past and guide managerial action necessary to sustain or create greater value in the future.”
The three graphical elements of Public Value Scorecard as illustrated in Moore’s book can be found in the three Atlas pages: Public Value Account, Operational Management, and Political Management. Its lineage can be traced to the Kennedy School’s Value-Capacity-Support Model. An integrated graphical depiction of the Public Value Scorecard is provided in Shayne Kavanagh’s 2014 review of Recognizing Public Value (reference below), and is reproduced below:
Public Value Scorecard = Public Value Account
+ Operational Capacity Perspective + Legitimacy and Support Perspective
“Though the public value account will help mobilize and build legitimacy and support, and animate and guide operational capacity, its primary purpose is to force a definition of public value. Public value is only one corner of the strategic triangle, so Recognizing Public Value combines the public value account with two other documents (one for each remaining corner of the triangle) to create a complete “public value scorecard.” [The image above] summarizes the key elements Moore presents. The darkened sections have direct linkages to the public value account or another corner of the strategic triangle.”
“The operational capacity perspective will probably be familiar to most public managers. Moore does advocate for a few concepts, however, that are not part of the approach to performance management for most public sector organizations. These include continuous improvement methodologies (e.g., Lean / Six Sigma), structured management of innovation, and active development of volunteer efforts from the community and other forms of co-production (rather than necessarily relying on direct production by public employees).”
“The legitimacy and support perspective asks managers to consider the extent to which the organization’s mission is aligned with the community’s values, including those of segments of the community that might not normally be engaged with the government. It also asks managers to think about the organization’s standing with formal authorizers (e.g., the governing board), the media, and general citizenry, as well as influential individuals outside of the formal organization and the standing of the organization in larger policy discussions (e.g., political campaigns, the campaign promises of current elected leaders). The last two rows consider legislative actions that could affect the organization and how citizens are engaged in helping to produce public services (e.g., volunteers).”
Mark H. Moore (2013), Recognizing Public Value, Harvard University Press.
Shayne Kavanagh (2014), Defining and Creating Value for the Public, Government Finance Review, October, pp. 57-60, at http://www.gfoa.org/sites/default/files/GFROct1457_0.pdf, accessed 12 September 2017. [Note: the boxes in the lower figure above have been transposed to visually align better with the image from the Kennedy School’s Value-Capacity-Support Model.]
Atlas topic and subject
Page created by: Ian Clark, last modified on 20 March 2018.
Image: Mark H. Moore (2013), Recognizing Public Value, Harvard University Press, p. 110, accessed 12 September 2017.