Purpose

The purpose of this article is to examine whether the incentivizing type of performance appraisal (typical of New Public Management) has indeed been superseded by a post-New Public Management (NPM), developmental type of performance appraisal in European Civil Services.

Design/methodology/approach

The literature review lead to a unidimensional, twofold typology: incentivizing (NPM) and developmental (post-NPM) performance appraisal. The empirical basis of the research is two surveys conducted among top civil servants in 18 European countries.

Findings

First, there are crucial discrepancies between performance appraisal systems in contemporary European central government administrations and current theorizing on performance appraisal. Contrary to our expectations developed on the basis of the latter, “developmental” and “incentivizing” do not seem to be two distinct types of performance appraisal; rather, they are two independent dimensions, defining altogether four different types of performance appraisal systems.

Practical implications

The authors results give orientation to policymakers and public service managers to engage in designing or applying performance appraisal systems, in particular by identifying assailable presumptions underlying many present-time reform trends.

Social implications

Citizens and communities are direct stakeholders in the development of public service performance appraisal both as possible or actual employees of public service organizations and as recipients of public services.

Originality/value

The paper proposes a new fourfold typology of performance appraisal systems: incentivizing, developmental, symbolic and want-it-all.

中文翻译：

---

欧盟国家公务员个人绩效评估体系的变化模式：朝着发展模式或激励模式发展

目的

本文的目的是检查激励型绩效评估（新公共管理的典型特征）是否确实被后新公共管理（NPM），即欧洲公务员制度中的发展型绩效评估所取代。

设计/方法/方法

文献综述导致了一种一维的双重类型学：激励（NPM）和发展（NPM 后）绩效评估。该研究的实证基础是对 18 个欧洲国家的高级公务员进行的两次调查。

发现

首先，当代欧洲中央政府行政部门的绩效评估体系与当前的绩效评估理论之间存在重大差异。与我们在后者的基础上制定的期望相反，“发展性”和“激励性”似乎并不是两种截然不同的绩效评估类型；相反，它们是两个独立的维度，共定义了四种不同类型的绩效评估系统。

实际影响

作者的结果为政策制定者和公共服务管理者提供了参与设计或应用绩效评估系统的方向，特别是通过识别许多当前改革趋势背后的有问题的假设。

社会影响

公民和社区是公共服务绩效评估发展的直接利益相关者，他们既是公共服务组织的可能雇员，也可能是实际雇员，也是公共服务的接受者。

原创性/价值

这篇论文提出了一种新的四重绩效评估系统类型：激励型、发展型、象征型和万能型。