Strategic responses to Performance Measurement in Nonprofit ...

20
IV. Presentation of the results of the empirical studies
1. Performance Measurement
One multiple-choice question was directed to explore if performance measurement systems
are at all relevant. Only 12 % of the participating institutions did not have a performance
measurement system (Greiling 2009). The answers showed a strong tendency to a “do it
yourself approach”, which is totally in line with the demand that performance measurement
systems, if they operationalize an organization‟s strategy, should be tailor-made. Table 1
provides an overview over the performance measurement systems employed:
Type numbers %
No performance measurement and quality management system Anzahl 39 12 %
Self-developed performance measurement system 246 72 %
Self-developed financial performance measurement system 229 67 %
DIN ISO 9000 ff. 126 37 %
Self-developed quality management system 103 30 %
Other performance measurement systems 50 15 %
Financial performance measurement system (e.g. ROI) 48 14 %
EFQM 41 12 %
Balanced Scorecard
Source: author‟s compilation
Table 1: Implemented performance measurement system
30 9 %
That DIN ISO 9000 ff scored so high was caused by the fact that many organizations which
provided care for persons with disability returned the questionnaire and that also this
particular performance measurement framework was popular among the multicare non-profit
providers. Other well known performance or quality management frameworks like EFQM or
the ROI-performance measurement system did not score so high. In general it can be stated
that the more complex a performance measurement system gets the less likely it is that it gets
implemented. The balanced scorecard scored particular low. Only 50 non-profit providers
implemented the balanced scorecard.
Figure 2 differentiates the findings according to the different types of providers.