DOES PERFORMANCE INFORMATION ABOUT PUBLIC SERVICES AFFECT CITIZENS' PERCEPTIONS, SATISFACTION, AND VOICE BEHAVIOUR? FIELD EXPERIMENTS WITH ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
| Author | OLIVER JAMES,ALICE MOSELEY |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12066 |
| Date | 01 June 2014 |
| Published date | 01 June 2014 |
doi: 10.1111/padm.12066
DOES PERFORMANCE INFORMATION ABOUT PUBLIC
SERVICES AFFECT CITIZENS’ PERCEPTIONS,
SATISFACTION, AND VOICE BEHAVIOUR? FIELD
EXPERIMENTS WITH ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
OLIVER JAMES AND ALICE MOSELEY
We evaluate a theory of the effectsof publishing performance information on citizens’ collective voice
to local providers about public service performance and the perceptions and attitudes that influence
their voice. Field experiments show that information about low absolute and relative performance of
local government household waste recycling services lowers citizens’ perceptions of performance,
and information about high absolute and relative performance raises perceived performance.
Relative information makes citizens judge local providers as being more responsible for outcomes
in the case of high performance, suggesting that systems for comparative performance reporting
increase local accountability for outcomes. Negativity bias is evident, with information about low
absolute performance reducing citizens’ satisfaction but information about high performance not
raising satisfaction. Information about low performance did not trigger collective voice protest
behaviour as hypothesized, suggesting that providers who need citizens’ collective voice the most
do not get it.
INTRODUCTION
Citizens’ collective ‘voice’ to public service providers about the performance of public
services involves citizens acting together to express their opinion. This voice is recognized
as a potential mechanism for improving public services, especially when triggered by
perceived low performance and dissatisfaction (Hirschman 1970; Lyons and Lowery
1989; Lyons et al. 1992; Dowding and John 2008, 2012; Gofen 2012). Separately, research
has mapped the growth of performance information about public services, notably in
scorecards, reports, and league tables, and their use by public managers and organizations
(Smith 1990, 1995; Hood et al. 1999; Behn 2003; Heinrich 2003; Propper and Wilson
2003; Bird et al. 2005; Van Doren and Van de Walle 2008). The effects of published
performance measures on citizens have received relatively little attention until recently
(James 2011a, 2011b; Charbonneau and Van Ryzin 2013). This article brings together
these two strands of research to evaluate a performance information theory of citizens’
responses to performance information.
The first section sets out the hypothesized effects of published performance information
on citizens’ voice behaviour and mechanisms that bring about voice, specifically their
perceptions of, and attitudes towards, performance. Summary information cues about low
performance lower citizens’ perceived performance and reduce their satisfaction whilst
summary cues about high performance raise perceived performance and satisfaction
(James 2011b). However, effects on citizen voice to providers about service performance
have not previously received attention. The performance information theory suggests that
lower perceptions of performance and lower satisfaction will trigger citizen voice as a form
of protest about the situation. We evaluate the effects of performance information about
Oliver James and Alice Moseley are in the Department of Politics, University of Exeter, UK.
Public Administration Vol. 92, No. 2, 2014 (493–511)
©2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
494 OLIVER JAMES AND ALICE MOSELEY
local household waste recycling services on citizens’ perceptions of service performance,
their satisfaction with services, and their voice, using a behavioural measure that gives
citizens an opportunity to comment to their local provider about service performance.
The effects of both relative and absolute forms of performance information are analysed.
Absolute performance information is about aspects of a service delivered by the provider
of the service. In contrast, relative performance information is information about the
local provider’s service compared to the service provided by similar units. Comparison
effects influence individuals’ assessments of their own and others’ performance through
provision of a benchmark and evaluative standard (Festinger 1954; Mussweiler 2003;
Moore and Klein 2008). Information about relative public service performance influences
citizens’ perceptions of performance and affects their satisfaction by providing an evalua-
tive standard of how performance compares with other locations. In addition, comparison
in which local performance is relatively high or low in an extreme way increases local
citizens’ belief that the local provider is responsible for these outcomes because the iden-
tity of the provider is an important difference between localities. Overall, especially by
acting on these perceptions and attitudes, the performance information theory suggests
that information about relatively low absolute and/or relative performance will trigger
citizen voice to local providers about service performance.
The second section defines two field experiments to evaluate the hypotheses, one for
a high performing local government and one for a low performing local government in
England for the service of household waste recycling. Experimental designs are relatively
uncommon in research on public services but their use is growing (Bozeman and Scott
1992; Boutron et al. 2010; James 2011a, 2011b; Margetts 2011; Charbonneau and Van Ryzin
2013). Each field experiment entails random allocation of relative and absolute information
about performance to local citizens to enable the causal effects of the information to be
identified. The field experiments offer good external validity by having local citizens
take part in the research using information about an important local service in a realistic
consultation exercise (Green and Gerber 2003; Harrison and List 2004).
The third section sets out the findings which are of high policy salience as well as
theoretical importance, with many jurisdictions making routine use of publicly reported
performance information, often including relative information. These systems are poten-
tially a way of improving public services through increased citizen participation which is
generally encouraged by policymakers (Lowndes et al. 2001; Duffy et al. 2005; Darlow et al.
2008). The findings show information effects on citizens’ perceptions of performance, citi-
zen satisfaction, and their assessments of local provider responsibility. However, collective
voice failed to occur as a behavioural response to low absolute or relative performance
information. The implications of these findings are discussed in the conclusion.
THE PERFORMANCE INFORMATION THEORY
Citizens get information about service performance from sources including personal expe-
rience with services, word of mouth from other citizens, and the media. However, formal
systems of published performance produced by auditors, inspectors, and other bodies
are increasingly evident, providing information about inputs, outputs, outcomes, and a
range of efficiency and effectiveness measures (Smith 1995; Hood et al. 1999; Marshall
et al. 2003; Moynihan 2006; Van Doren and Van de Walle 2008; James 2011a, 2011b). Many
systems now provide absolute, relative, or both forms of performance information. The
performance information theory of the relationship between information and citizen voice
behaviour sets out the effects on citizens of formal performance reporting systems. Service
Public Administration Vol. 92, No. 2, 2014 (493–511)
©2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial