Measuring performance and effectiveness for MÃƒÂ¤ori ... - Te Puni Kokiri

MÄTAURANGA KNOWLEDGE 

Ka möhio, ka mätau, ka ora: He ia körero 

Measuring performance and effectiveness for Mäori: 

Key themes from the literature

Mä te rongo, ka möhio; Mä te möhio, ka märama; 

Mä te märama, ka mätau; Mä te mätau, ka ora. 

Through resonance comes awareness; through awareness 

comes understanding; through understanding comes 

knowledge; through knowledge comes life and wellbeing. 

2 

R E A L I S I N G M Ä O R I P O T E N T I A L 

MÄTAURANGA KNOWLEDGE 

WHAKAMANA INFLUENCE 

RAWA RESOURCES 

+ + = 

TE IRA TANGATA LIFE QUALITY 

1 2 3 4 

1 

Mätauranga – Building of knowledge and skills. 

This area acknowledges the importance of knowledge to building 

confidence and identity, growing skills and talents and generating 

innovation and creativity. Knowledge and skills are considered as a 

key enabler of Mäori potential as they underpin choice and the power 

to act to improve life quality. 

2 Whakamana – Strengthening of leadership and decision-making. 

3 Rawa – Development and use of resources. 

4 Te Ira Tangata – The quality of life to realise potential. 

The framework above identifies three key 

enablers that are fundamental to Mäori achieving 

Te Ira Tangata (improved life quality) and realising 

their potential. All our written information has 

been organised within these three key enablers 

or Te Ira Tangata. 

DISCLAIMER This publication is intended to provide information on the matters contained 

herein. It has been written, edited and published and made available to all persons and 

entities strictly on the basis that its authors, editors and publishers are fully excludedfrom 

any liability or responsibility by all or any of them in any way to any person or entity 

for anything done or omitted to be done by any person or entity in reliance, whether 

totally or partially, on the contents of this publication for any purposes whatsoever. 

© Te Puni Kökiri 2013 ISBN 0-478-34528-5 March 2013

C O N T E N T S 

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

5 INTRODUCTION 

5 Nature of the literature 

5 Key distinctions 

5 Methodology 

8 DEVELOPING AND REPORTING AGAINST MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS FOR MÄORI 

8 A key introductory question: why measure and report performance by ethnicity 

9 No one-size-fits-all – performance measurement is selective 

9 Guidance on measuring for Mäori 

10 Measuring performance for Mäori – what and whose benchmarks 

10 Different priorities and preferences of Mäori service users 

10 Involve citizens in the development of measures and reporting on performance 

12 Measurement as part of performance improvement 

13 COMPARATIVE MEASURES – GOOD PRACTICE FOR MÄORI 

13 The importance of comparative analysis for Mäori 

13 Achieving meaningful comparisons between ethnic groups 

15 Capturing variation within Mäori 

16 Comparative impact measures or results 

17 Comparative analysis in particular types of measures 

20 MÄORI-SPECIFIC MEASURES AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS 

20 The ability of Mäori to succeed as Mäori 

20 Mäori-specific measures are attuned to Mäori realities and Mäori world views 

21 Wellbeing for the individual and the group 

21 Measures capturing whänau advancement 

22 Strength-based measures of advancement in contemporary Te Ao Mäori 

23 Measures for Mäori as part of a measurement framework 

23 Te Hoe Nuku Roa and Hua Oranga frameworks 

25 KEY IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES FOR MEASURING PERFORMANCE FOR MÄORI 

25 Good quality data and robust data analysis 

25 Organisations need the right capability 

26 Staff need to feel confident of the reasons for measuring performance for Mäori 

27 The need for forethought 

27 The need for long-term commitment 

27 The need for collaboration 

28 CONCLUSION 

29 GLOSSARY 

32 APPENDIX ONE 

34 APPENDIX TWO 

36 APPENDIX THREE 

38 BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

2 

INTRODUCTION 

This report highlights the key themes of the 

literature on measuring and reporting on 

the performance of government services in 

relation to Mäori (or other indigenous people). 

It provides illustrative examples particularly in 

relation to employment services, but will be of 

interest to practitioners involved in measuring 

the performance of any government services 

that are provided to Mäori. 

The literature reviewed falls into three main 

categories: international academic literature, 

domestic academic literature, and domestic 

practitioner literature (particularly ‘official 

guidance’ on performance measurement from 

central agencies). 

Overall, there is relatively little literature about 

measuring or reporting on the performance 

of government services in relation to Mäori or 

indigenous peoples. However, there is a larger 

body of domestic literature addressing the 

problem of measuring overall Mäori wellbeing 

(as opposed to the performance of particular 

services). This strand of the literature is included 

in this review, as it holds some lessons that can 

be applied to performance measurement. 

There is a clear opportunity to strengthen 

New Zealand’s own official guidance, which 

contains little current advice about how to 

undertake performance measurement and 

reporting in a way that is responsive to the 

needs of Mäori (or other ethnic groups). An 

opportunity exists to build on documents 

such as The Treasury’s 2012 guidance for the 

preparation of departmental annual reports. 

MEASURING PERFORMANCE FOR 

MÄORI IN ORDER TO IMPROVE 

SERVICES 

At present the government is implementing 

its Better Public Services reforms, which 

aim towards better results achieved more 

efficiently. The corollary of this emphasis on 

results is that public service agencies need 

performance measurement systems that can 

track results and provide information to drive 

service improvement. 

The domestic literature emphasised that there is 

a legitimate need to measure performance and 

wellbeing for Mäori, who may have different 

needs – and different views of what makes 

for an effective service – from the majority 

population. Mäori authors argue strongly that it 

would be a mistake for government to behave 

as if ethnicity did not exist, as this would 

compromise the achievement of best outcomes 

(e.g. Durie, 2004). 

NEXUS BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL 

AND DOMESTIC ACADEMIC 

LITERATURE 

Who needs to know, and for 

what purpose 

There is a nexus of views between the domestic 

and international academic literature: 

performance measurement is selective. What 

gets measured and how it gets measured 

depends on the interests of those engaged in 

commissioning and doing the measurement. 

Given the need to select between a wide 

range of possible measures, a key question in 

performance measurement should be “Who 

needs the information, and for what purpose” 

T E P U N I K Ö K I R I 

M E A S U R I N G P E R F O R M A N C E A N D E F F E C T I V E N E S S F O R M Ä O R I : K E Y T H E M E S F R O M T H E L I T E R A T U R E

(Gill and Russell, 2011, p.8). As Durie expresses 

the question from a Mäori perspective: against 

what and whose benchmarks should Mäori 

gauge progress 

MÄORI PARTICIPATION IN THE 

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 

PROCESS 

The international literature makes a very 

strong case for engaging citizens and service 

users in the design and development of 

performance measures. The more citizens 

are involved, the more public buy-in and 

the more the information will be used and 

seen as credible. Similarly, Mäori writers 

emphasise the importance of engaging 

Mäori consumers to better understand Mäori 

consumer needs and aspirations. Measuring 

performance for Mäori rests on ascertaining 

what Mäori value and consider to be an 

important or a positive outcome. 

Two main approaches to performance 

measurement for Mäori 

The literature reflects two main approaches 

in measuring the effectiveness of government 

services for Mäori: 

• comparative measurement, which compares 

ethnic differences in universal or generic 

performance (e.g. the total rate of people 

exiting from the benefit system into 

employment, compared with the exit rate 

for Mäori clients); and 

• Mäori-specific measurement, which is 

attuned to Mäori realities and world views, 

and which aims to assess performance 

against Mäori norms. 

Discussion of comparative 

measurement 

Mäori academic literature affirms that 

comparative measures, particularly in 

combination with Mäori-specific measures, 

can provide useful information. Other strands 

of the domestic literature tend to concentrate 

only on comparative measurement. 

Common practice is to provide measurement 

information that compares Mäori with 

non-Mäori. Some of the academic literature 

questions the validity of these comparisons, 

as ‘non-Mäori’ is not an ethnic group. A 

more valid comparison may be achieved by 

providing a full breakdown to compare results 

with those of other specific ethnic groups (i.e. 

Mäori, Pacific, and New Zealand European). 

Characteristics of Mäori-specific 

measurement 

Mäori-specific measures might seek to capture 

results at the level of collectives rather than 

individuals. Capturing the perspectives of the 

individual Mäori client, the client’s whänau, 

and the service provider gives a robust 

perspective of what the service has achieved. 

There are many other ways in which the 

‘norms’ of Te Ao Mäori might be reflected 

in agencies’ performance measurement. For 

example, a measure of adequate housing 

might take into account the provision for 

extended families and manuhiri. 

This is not to say, there is such a thing as a 

single, monolithic ‘Mäori view’ of what is 

important in service performance or overall 

Mäori wellbeing. Durie (2003a, p. 312) 

3 

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

4 

suggests that there are some commonlyheld 

views on these matters within Mäori 

society, but at the same time he and other 

Mäori academics emphasise diversity. As 

noted above, the engagement of Mäori in the 

development of performance measures will 

help to determine what is most important. 

Implementing Mäori-specific 

measurement 

Most agencies are not used to measuring 

performance in this way. Mäori-specific 

measures will require new data collection 

mechanisms or a reinterpretation of existing 

data. There may be some trial and error 

involved before the measures are introduced. 

OTHER USEFUL INFORMATION 

Overcoming barriers to performance 

measurement for Mäori 

The domestic academic sources noted that 

performance measurement for Mäori can be 

highly politicised. It can also be hampered by a 

lack of good quality data on Mäori customers 

and robust analysis of ethnicity data. 

Overcoming these barriers requires agencies 

to: build the right technical and policy 

capability; exercise strong leadership; and 

build an organisational culture that fosters 

and supports Mäori perspectives. 

Opportunities to use more 

sophisticated analysis 

It is important that agencies understand the 

diversity of the Mäori population, and what 

that means for the delivery of their services. 

It should be possible to identify particular 

cohorts within the Mäori population that 

hold a particular stake in the services being 

delivered. Particular cohorts may be at greater 

risk of poor outcomes or lessened access 

to the services. One source suggests that 

agencies have the opportunity to employ 

a regression analysis of performance data 

to identify and address differences in the 

effectiveness of their own local offices. 

Collaboration 

Some of the literature notes that agencies 

who are serving the same clients should 

collaborate to improve data and share 

performance information. This message of 

collaboration is entirely consistent with the 

government’s Better Public Services reforms. 



PART 1 : INTRODUCTION 

1.1 PURPOSE 

This review is intended to furnish key themes 

and findings that will assist practitioners 

involved in measuring and reporting on the 

performance of any government services that 

are provided to Mäori. It offers illustrative 

examples in relation to employment services, 

but is intended to be widely applicable across 

the government sector. 

1.2 NATURE OF THE LITERATURE 

The review covers the international and 

domestic literature on measuring and reporting 

on the effectiveness of government services 

for Mäori. The literature reviewed falls into 

three main categories: international academic 

literature, domestic academic literature, and 

practitioner literature (e.g. ‘official guidance’ 

on performance measurement issued by central 

agencies and the Office of the Controller and 

Auditor-General). 

1.3 KEY DISTINCTIONS 

Performance measurement refers to the 

process of measuring progress towards goals 

or outcome targets that are expected from 

a service or the activities of an agency. This 

entails assessing the cost-effectiveness with 

which ‘inputs’ (e.g. monetary and human 

resources) are turned into ‘outputs’ (e.g. goods 

and services provided to customers), and the 

effectiveness with which ‘outputs’ produce 

the desired impacts or outcomes. Performance 

measurement should concentrate on impacts 

and outcomes that are achievable and 

reasonably within the delivery agency’s control. 

Table One on page 7 provides live examples of 

these kinds of performance measures. 

Population-level outcomes, such as changes 

in the national employment rate, are useful 

indicators of societal wellbeing, but are 

usually beyond the reach of performance 

measurement (see Figure One, below). For 

example, it is reasonable to assume that Work 

and Income’s activities have some effect on 

the national employment rate, but impossible 

to measure or quantify that effect given the 

myriad of other influences on that indicator. 

Thus, the 2008 spike in unemployment 

was influenced more by global economic 

conditions than a change in the quality of 

any particular government service. Table 

One below provides a few examples of input, 

output and impact quality better practice 

measures for Mäori from agencies' recent 

accountability documents. 

Having made this distinction explicit, it is 

important to acknowledge that a significant 

amount of the domestic literature reviewed 

deals with the theory of measuring Mäori 

wellbeing, with many of the outcomes 

discussed being at a population level. This 

domestic literature is included in the review 

because many of its themes and lessons 

are also applicable to agency performance 

measurement. 

1.4 METHODOLOGY 

This report represents a summary of five 

different strands of literature review, 

undertaken simultaneously. This resulted in the 

following internal working papers, the findings 

of which have been brought together and 

summarised in this report: 

• An international literature review (Gill and 

Russell, 2011); 

5 

I N T R O D U C T I O N

6 

• A review of what the official requirements 

and primary guidance say about good 

practice in developing and reporting 

against effectiveness measures for outputs 

for Mäori (Te Puni Kökiri, 2011a); 

• A summary of good practice guidance and 

requirements (Te Puni Kökiri, 2011b); 

• A desktop analysis of performance 

reporting by the Ministry of Social 

Development (MSD) in relation to its Job 

Search Service 2002/03 to 2011/12 (Te Puni 

Kökiri, 2011c); and 

• Towards a Mäori perspective of good 

practice in developing and reporting 

against measure of performance 

effectiveness for a front-line employment 

service for Mäori on the unemployment 

benefit (Te Puni Kökiri, 2012). 

More detail on each of the working papers, 

and the methodologies used, is presented in 

Appendix One. 

Other contributing factors 

( e.g.: world economy; contributions 

of other services and policies; etc ). 

Figure One – dimensions of a performance story 

D I M E N S I O N S O F M E A S U R A B L E P E R F O R M A N C E 

Inputs Outputs Impacts / 

Intermediate 

Outcomes 

Population-level 

Outcomes 

Resources that go 

into a service or 

programme 

Example: 

Increased capability 

to deliver a quality 

service for Mäori 

Relevant measures: 

• costs 

• staff trained 

and qualified 

• proprtion of 

Mäori staff 

• staff cultural 

competencies 

Goods and services 

supplied to 

stakeholders 

Example: 

x service provided to 

n number of Mäori 

customers 

Relevant service 

quality measures: 

• timeliness 

• accuracy 

• entry and 

completion rates 

• quality standards 

• volume 

Immediate effect 

of outputs on 

stakeholders 

Example: 

The service made 

x difference to n 

number of Mäori 

clients 

Relevant quality 

impact measures: 

• % of clients 

demonstrating 

positive gains 

over time 

• % of target 

group reached 

D I F F I C U L T Y I N A T T R I B U T I O N 

Broader states 

or conditions of 

society, the economy 

or environment 

Example: 

Improvement 

in employment 

outcomes for Mäori 

Relevant measures: 

• % of Mäori 

working - age 

population in the 

labour force / not 

in the labour force 

• employment and 

unemployment 

rates 

• customer 

satisfaction 

• coverage and % of 

target population 

reached 

• customer and 

stakeholder 

satisfaction 

• NEET rates 

• income levels 



Table One – examples of performance measures from agencies’ public reporting 

Inputs 

Input Result Source 

7 

Ministry of Social 

Development’s Aka Matua 

programme which supports 

Mäori and Pacific managers 

to complete a master’s 

degree in Public Policy 

Six Mäori and Pacific 

managers supported 

MSD Annual Report 2010/11 

Developed a Mäori cultural 

competency for their staff 

to enhance their capability 

to deliver for Mäori. To be 

embedded in performance 

management, recruitment 

and personal development 

processes 

Not reported 

Ministry of Education 

Annual Report 2010/11 

Outputs 

Output target Budget standard Source 

90% of clients express 

satisfaction with Victim 

Support Services 1 

90% Vote Justice Information 

Supporting the Estimates 

2012/13 

Impacts 

Impact target Budget standard Source 

Reduce truancy rates for 

frequent truants in Years 

9 and 10 by 1.0%, with 

separate targets for Mäori 

and Pacific. 

Mäori 2.5% 

Pacific 1.5% 

Vote Education 

Information Supporting the 

Estimates 2012/13 

Impact target Reported result Source 

The proportion of UB 

jobseekers who exit a main 

benefit into employment 

and achieve six months 

employment 

61.8% (not publicly 

reported by ethnicity) 

MSD Annual Report 2011 

1 Agency reporting does not generally provide ethnic breakdowns of output quality measures, such as customer satisfaction. See State 

Services Commission (2011a) for an analysis of Mäori customer satisfaction from the cross-Government Kiwis Count 2009 survey. 

I N T R O D U C T I O N

PART 2 : DEVELOPING AND REPORTING AGAINST 

MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS FOR MÄORI 

8 

2.1 A KEY INTRODUCTORY 

QUESTION: WHY MEASURE 

AND REPORT PERFORMANCE 

BY ETHNICITY 

It cannot be assumed the need to measure 

and report performance by ethnicity will be 

intuitively accepted. Much of the domestic 

academic literature notes that performance 

measurement by ethnicity can be controversial, 

especially where Mäori are concerned. The 

official guidance material is thin on this 

question, with nothing comprehensive since 

guidance released by the Controller and 

Auditor-General in 1998. It is therefore 

worthwhile to recap some of the main 

arguments in the literature pertaining to the 

necessity of measuring performance for Mäori. 

The importance to New Zealand 

of Mäori success 

A number of authors refer to the relatively 

young age structure of the Mäori population, 

meaning that Mäori will make up a greater 

proportion of the potential workforce. 

Business New Zealand’s Chief Executive has 

been quoted as saying: “If Mäori and Pasifika 

don't succeed in the next twenty years; New 

Zealand will fail as a nation. It's that simple” 

(Human Rights Commission, 2011a, p.32). This 

being the case, it would be worth the effort 

for government agencies to ensure that their 

services are equally effective for Mäori. 

The realities of contemporary 

New Zealand 

Durie (2005b) suggests that policies, 

programmes and practices that purport to be 

“blind” to race and ethnicity mask diversity, 

compromise best outcomes and foster an 

assimilatory approach. Elsewhere (2004) he 

suggests that it is illusory to act as if race and 

ethnicity do not play a large and increasing 

part in New Zealand life. 

The drive for service improvement 

The government’s Better Public Services 

reforms emphasise agencies working together 

towards the efficient achievement of 

enhanced results. Almost all of the ten “result 

areas” established by the government relate to 

social services of which Mäori are significant 

consumers. This creates further momentum 

for the public service to develop measurement 

systems that can: track results; provide 

information to drive service improvement; and 

assure taxpayers that government services are 

as effective as possible for all consumers. 

Mäori interest in performance 

measurement 

Performance information will also be of interest 

to members of ethnic groups themselves, 

who might like to know how they faring 

from government services, and who ought to 

be part of the conversation about ongoing 

improvements to those services. Several 

leading Mäori academics note this type of 

measurement is very important for Mäori. 

Rights-based arguments 

Collecting and analyzing data by ethnicity is 

supported by the recommendations of several 

UN Human Rights bodies (Callister, 2007; 

Human Rights Commission, 2011a, p.9). Mäori 

academic writers tend to see this approach as 

a legitimate equity endeavour, consistent with 

the Treaty of Waitangi. 



2.2 NO ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL – 

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 

IS SELECTIVE 

Academic literature in agreement 

The international and domestic academic 

literature is mostly in agreement that there is 

no one-size-fits-all ‘best practice’ performance 

measurement and management system. The 

international academic literature and some 

domestic academics emphasise that measuring 

performance is a social activity; it depends 

upon who wants to know the performance 

story and for what purposes (Dormer, 2010; 

Durie and Kingi, 2010; Gill and Russell, 2011). 

Much of the international academic literature 

tends to emphasise that “performance 

information itself is not comprehensive or 

objective but incomplete and ambiguous. It is 

subject to selective measurement, presentation 

and interpretation based on the interests of 

the actors involved” (Moynihan (2008, p.24) 

discussed in Gill and Russell (2011, p.8). 

De Bruijn (2006, p.56) uses the metaphor of 

floodlighting a statue: “Illuminating the statue 

from several different perspectives creates 

a different image each time. Each image is 

correct but a single perspective always gives a 

distorted image.” 

The quest for best practice 

“This is in marked contrast with the 

practitioner literature which tends to 

emphasise ‘best practice’ and the associated 

notions of the golden thread or one integrated 

set of performances information” (Gill and 

Russell, 2011, p.8). Commenting on best 

practice in the international literature review 

Gill and Russell (2011, p.8) noted that “Pollitt 

and Bouckaert, (2003) suggest: What we are 

dealing with here is best described as a kind 

of a religion ... a system of belief founded on 

faith (sourced from OECD, 2009, p.36)”. 

Official performance measurement 

requirements and guidance in the New 

Zealand state sector can be regarded as 

statements of ‘practitioner best practice’ 

(see, State Services Commission and Treasury, 

2008; The Treasury, 2008; Controller and 

Auditor- General, 2008, 2009a, 2009b, 2011). 

However, that guidance is not consistent. 

See, for example the FABRIC performance 

measurement principles in State Services 

Commission and Treasury (2008); revised 

audit requirements in Controller and Auditor- 

General (2009a); and Controller and Auditor- 

General (1998) guidance, discussed below. 

There is no current or up-to-date 

comprehensive guidance for measuring 

the effectiveness of mainstream services 

or outputs for Mäori within the corpus of 

technical requirements that agencies are 

required to use for measuring performance. 

2.3 GUIDANCE ON MEASURING 

FOR MÄORI 

The most relevant guidance in this area was 

released by the Controller and Auditor-General 

in 1998. It advised agencies to: 

• estimate total service demand trends (is it 

growing or shrinking), how many customers 

are repeat users and the characteristics of 

major customer groups; 

• identify the proportion of their customer 

base that is Mäori (by age and gender) 

in different regions or districts. This 

information is important for ascertaining 

coverage measures; 

9 

D E V E L O P I N G A N D R E P O R T I N G A G A I N S T M E A S U R E S O F E F F E C T I V E N E S S F O R M Ä O R I

10 

• monitor and evaluate: proposals for 

improvements to systems, service design 

and policy; service uptake and impact on 

Mäori by age and gender and region, or 

urban/rural; the extent to which the service 

has met Mäori needs and expectations; and 

capability to improve outcomes for Mäori; 

• produce performance measures to assess 

progress towards objectives and outputs 

and changes in outcomes for Mäori; and 

• include appropriate service delivery 

standards for Mäori in contractual 

arrangements with providers. 

Guidance to departments on preparing annual 

reports states that: “Departments should also 

consider how significant achieving outcomes 

for different population groups is in achieving 

Ministerial priorities and whether the annual 

report should specifically cover progress for 

different population groups” (The Treasury, 

2010, 2012a, p.8). 

2.4 MEASURING PERFORMANCE 

FOR MÄORI – WHAT AND WHOSE 

BENCHMARKS 

Several domestic academic writers, including 

Humpage (2002) and Durie and Kingi (2010), 

concur with the international literature that 

measuring performance is highly subjective. 

Measuring outcomes and performance for 

Mäori from a Mäori perspective in turn rests 

on ascertaining and measuring what Mäori 

consider to be important and not anyone else 

(Humpage, 2002). 

Measuring the performance of a mainstream 

service for Mäori starts from the question: 

Who wants to know and why And what do 

or would Mäori (consumers) regard as good 

performance Mäori have their own views on 

what constitutes good performance including 

outcomes from mainstream services and an 

agency for Mäori. This is supported in the 

international literature which found – “what 

managers’ think is important in terms of 

performance can often differ from what 

citizen and service users think is important. 

This can generate what Ho (2008, p.206) terms 

as an undesirable “performance perception 

gap” (Gill and Russell, 2011, p.9). Similarly, 

Gill and Russell (2011, p.13) suggest “what 

is ‘good’ will in turn depend on whose 

perspective is being privileged”. 

2.5 DIFFERENT PRIORITIES 

AND PREFERENCES OF MÄORI 

SERVICE USERS 

The State Services Commission’s analysis of 

its Kiwis Count 2009 survey confirmed that 

Mäori held a slight difference in expectations 

of public services. “Whilst the drivers of 

satisfaction for Mäori are the same as for the 

New Zealand population overall, except that 

‘the service experience met your expectations’ 

is not a driver for Mäori. Being treated fairly 

is the most important driver for Mäori” (State 

Services Commission, June 2011a, p.12). 

2.6 INVOLVE CITIZENS IN THE 

DEVELOPMENT OF MEASURES AND 

REPORTING ON PERFORMANCE 

The case for engaging with citizens 

There are common threads across the 

literature reviewed for engaging Mäori as 

citizens and significant users of services in 

decisions about what to measure and what is 

good performance. The international literature 

lends support to the view that performance 

measurement systems need to include the 

perspectives of everyone involved, including 

citizens and clients (de Lancer Julnes 2001; 

Ho, 2008; OECD, 2009 discussed in Gill and 

Russell, 2011). 



“In brief there is a prima facie case for 

engaging citizens and service users in the 

design and development of performance 

measures. The more citizens are involved the 

more buy-in and the more likely it will be used 

and credible” (Ho, 2008). This engagement 

may also build the public capital of the 

organisation concerned by reducing public 

apathy about the public service” (Gill and 

Russell, 2011, p.9). 

This point is stated in another way by Thomas 

(2006, p.66) “performance measurement … 

should involve consultation with the key 

stakeholders and the public at large, so 

that the results of the PMM [Performance 

Measurement Management] system have more 

legitimacy and support, especially among the 

people most directly affected by programs”. 

Although silent on specific user groups, 

official guidance emphasises the importance 

of agencies engaging with stakeholders and/ 

or significant user groups of services to agree 

on the appropriate measures, including direct 

measures of quality (Controller and Auditor- 

General, 2002, 2009; The Treasury, 2008). 

External measures of output quality that focus 

on the purchaser or consumers of the output 

are a better test of real performance rather 

than the standards set and evaluated by the 

provider itself (The Treasury, 2008). 

The case for engaging Mäori 

Kingi (2003) argues that: measures need to 

consider what is important or relevant to 

the Mäori individuals receiving the service; 

and outcomes for Mäori derive from a Mäori 

world view. (Durie, Kingi and Graham 2012, 

p.42) recently advised “that effectiveness 

was in part linked to an agency’s ability to 

engage successfully with Mäori……It was 

further stressed that engagement must be 

meaningful and viewed as an opportunity to 

better understand the needs of Mäori and 

to ensure that outcomes for Mäori are fully 

maximised”. They also emphasise, at page 32, 

that “consumer satisfaction measures [are] 

based on the simple premise that consumer 

needs and preferences should be met. To 

improve access to, and use of public services, 

Mäori preferences, choices and decisions must 

be fully considered”. 

Williams (2000) and Kawharu (2001, p.2) 

suggest at the very least, any discussion about 

outcomes and government effectiveness for 

Mäori should allow Mäori to participate in the 

decision about what kind of measure is used 

Humpage (2002, p.193). 

Reporting to Mäori and the wider 

public on performance 

Both the international literature generally (de 

Lancer, 2001; de Bruijn, 2006, p.59; Thomas, 

2006, p.63; OECD, 2009), and domestic 

literature emphasise the importance of 

using performance information to reflect 

on performance and improve the service 

delivery effectiveness and reporting results 

to stakeholders. The 1998 Controller and 

Auditor-General guidance required agencies 

to provide feedback to Mäori. However, it does 

not specify which Mäori. 

Durie and Kingi (2010) suggest for reporting to 

Mäori at least against Mäori-specific impact 

measures, it is important that Mäori clients and 

participants receive reported information on 

their overall progress, or lack of it. 

“If outcome measures are to be useful, 

information concerning their use and 

application must be made available 

to Mäori….[service providers]. Such 

information dissemination mechanisms 

will necessarily require a broad range of 

strategies. The costs associated with this 

process, and training in particular, will 

also need to be considered” (Durie and 

Kingi, 2010, p.32). 

11 

D E V E L O P I N G A N D R E P O R T I N G A G A I N S T M E A S U R E S O F E F F E C T I V E N E S S F O R M Ä O R I

12 

2.7 MEASUREMENT AS PART OF 

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT 

Under official requirements agencies 

are expected to make full and good use 

of performance information in their 

accountability documents, as part of a cycle 

of continuous improvement and review. 

This is consistent with the expectation that 

departments will take a systematic approach 

to continuous improvement and actively seek 

opportunities to learn from benchmarking 

studies (Controller and Auditor-General, 1999, 

p.107; State Services Commission, 2010b). 

Sources in the international and domestic 

literature including from Mäori academics 

concur that the process for good performance 

measurement is an iterative journey. This 

means periodically assessing whether the data 

being collected remains the most relevant to 

collect (Controller and Auditor-General, 2002, 

p.51), and whether the measures are capturing 

the most significant aspects of performance 

for their Minister and stakeholders, and for 

their own continuous improvement (Controller 

and Auditor-General, 2002, 2008, 2009b, 2011; 

The Treasury, 2008). 

The Treasury (2008, p.16) suggests that 

perfect measures are rare. Kingi (2003, p.9) 

suggests that for most outputs “the possibility 

of an optimal outcome is also unrealistic. A 

questionnaire cannot for example ask ‘as a 

result of an intervention are you now cured’. 

That is of course unless cure is the most 

probable or expected outcome”. He adds: “We 

must remember the measurement is not the 

endpoint rather an indicator of whether or not 

the prime objective … has been satisfied.” 



PART 3 : COMPARATIVE MEASURES – 

GOOD PRACTICE FOR MÄORI 

3.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF 

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 

FOR MÄORI 

Mäori academics Durie and Kingi (2010) 

emphasise that comparative measures 

for Mäori are important for measuring 

effectiveness and impacts for Mäori. Universal 

indicators (e.g. the total employment rate) 

without comparative measures are insufficient 

measures of need and outcome (Durie, 2005b). 

The purposes of comparative measurement can 

include ensuring: 

• the effectiveness and efficiency of 

government services in achieving the aims of 

those services, such as meeting Ministerial 

priorities (The Treasury, 2012a, p.8); and 

• equitable outcomes between different 

population groups (OECD, 2009; Human 

Rights Commission, 2010; 2011a, p.12). 

3.2 ACHIEVING MEANINGFUL 

COMPARISONS BETWEEN 

ETHNIC GROUPS 

Mäori vs. non-Mäori comparisons 

Mäori compared to non-Mäori is the most 

commonly used comparative measure. The 

Department of Corrections, for example, gives 

such a measure in its annual report in relation 

to the successful completion of communitybased 

sentences and orders. 

However, Mäori academic authors have 

criticised this approach because: 

• Durie suggests: “Sometimes more relevant 

benchmarks may be found with other iwi, 

or in other indigenous communities. It is 

misleading to use crude comparisons with 

non-Mäori as a type of shorthand for best 

outcomes, or to assume that Mäori/non- 

Mäori comparisons always provide useful 

information about Mäori progress” (Durie, 

2003a, p.202); 

• ‘non-Mäori’ is not an ethnic group, but 

a collection of specific ethnic groups 

experiencing disparate outcomes; and 

• it may mask differing results achieved for 

different ethnic groups such as between 

Europeans and Pacific peoples, the latter 

of whom are much closer to Mäori in socioeconomic 

status than other groups included 

in the non-Mäori category (Statistics New 

Zealand, 2001a, p.90, 2001b, pp.63-71; 

Humpage, 2002, pp.178-9). 

Full analysis by ethnicity as 

better practice 

Comparing Mäori against other specific ethnic 

groups is more consistent with ensuring equity 

between those groups. Such an approach 

is endorsed by the OECD (2009) and UN 

Committee for the Elimination of Racial 

Discrimination (Human Rights Commission, 

2010, p.3-4; 2011a, p.12). “Another function of 

the outcome indicators may be as a check on 

the crucial social issue of equity. Are individual 

clients in similar situations being treated 

equally .... Such measures might reasonably 

cover the distribution of key services by socioeconomic 

groups” (OECD, 2009, p.83). 

Equity and discrimination 

The concern about equity is all the more 

important in view of the need to counter 

discrimination, which does occur in New 

13 

C O M P A R A T I V E M E A S U R E S – G O O D P R A C T I C E F O R M Ä O R I

14 

Zealand according to a number of the 

sources. Several sources state that Mäori 

experience racial discrimination in the labour 

market (Alexander, Genc and Jaforullah, 

2003; Durie, 2005b; Robinson, Cormack and 

Cram, 2007, p.33; NZIER, 2009), and that 

perceptions of ethnicity and skin colour are 

linked with this disadvantage (see Chang, and 

Dodd, 2001; Dannette et al., 2011; Carter and 

Gunasekara, 2012). 

The Human Rights Commission (2010) has 

issued guidance emphasising that measures 

must be: 

• necessary to address disadvantage or 

ensure equality with other members of the 

community for groups against whom it is 

unlawful to discriminate; 

• carried out in good faith, and tailored to 

reduce the actual disadvantage of the 

group it is aimed at; 

• proportional to the degree of underrepresentation 

or disadvantage; and 

• temporary –“lasting only until the issue 

it is designed to address is substantively 

resolved”. 

Illustrative examples: measures that would lend themselves to ethnic comparisons 

A number of employment outcome measures currently in use would be suitable for comparison 

between Mäori and other specific ethnic groups (i.e. New Zealand European and Pacific peoples): 

• the labour force participation rate; 

• the employment and unemployment rate; and 

• the not in employment or education or training (includes caregivers) rate (NEET). 

NEET rates can be employed not only as an outcome measure but also as a coverage measure, for 

example the percentage of NEET accessing a particular service. 

Table Two – NEET type measures from MSD’s 2012/15 Statement of Intent (SOI) 

Ministry outcome - More young people are in education, training and work 

Intermediate 

Outcome 

Measure Target Comment / 

Current Result 

More young 

people are in 

education, training 

or employment 

without needing 

a benefit 

The proportion of Youth Services (Youth 

Payment) recipients or Youth Services 

(NEET) participants, who gained a main 

benefit within three months of exiting 

either service 

Decreasing 

proportion 

New measures 

for 2012/13 

The proportion of Youth Services (NEET) 

participants who are in full-time 

education, approved training or workbased 

learning, leading to at least an 

NCEA Level 1 qualification 

Decreasing 

proportion 

New measures 

for 2012/13 



3.3 CAPTURING VARIATION 

WITHIN MÄORI 

Identifying consumers most 

likely to benefit 

There is considerable diversity and 

heterogeneity within the Mäori population. 

Understanding this diversity is essential 

for policy making. For example Leggatt- 

Cook (2008) found that gender differences 

in pathways and types of employment are 

particularly significant for women who 

identify as Mäori only. Policies may have 

different effects on Mäori living in different 

circumstances. 2 “Services need to take into 

account different types of variation within the 

Mäori population”, such as geographic and 

gender differences (Ringold, 2005, p.7). 

While it may be easy to assume that Mäori 

ethnicity is a proxy for lower socio-economic 

status, Durie (2005b, pp.24-5) urges caution. He 

argues that ethnicity and socio-economic status 

are both relevant considerations in performance 

measurement, but are not the same thing: 

“The strong relationship between ethnicity 

and adverse socio-economic circumstances 

has sometimes led to an assumption that 

one is a proxy measure for the other. Being 

Mäori, for example, is often seen as a 

synonym for being poor and being poor 

is sometimes seen as the distinguishing 

characteristics of Mäori and Pacific peoples. 

While there is a significant correlation 

between the two measures – ethnicity 

and socio-economic status – they do not 

measure the same phenomena… Recent 

research, however, has demonstrated 

that not only is class distinguishable from 

ethnicity, but that universal indicators by 

themselves are insufficient measures of need 

and outcome”. 

The literature variously identifies specific 

cohorts within the Mäori population who 

may be at particular risk of adverse outcomes. 

These include: 

• those with low or very low family 

or household income levels (Durie, 

2005b; Danette et al., 2011; Carter and 

Gunasekara, 2012); 

• those with no qualifications or qualifications 

less than Level 4 on the New Zealand 

Qualification Framework (MSD, 2003a, 

2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c; Dixon and 

Crichton, 2007; NZIER, 2009); 

• single men with the above variables and/or 

with drug and alcohol problems or a prison 

conviction (The Salvation Army, 2006); and 

• Mäori living in rural areas without access 

to employment or education opportunities 

accessible to Mäori living in cities (Ringold 

(2005, p.7) drawing upon Maani, 2002). 

Targets for Mäori including for those 

with ‘high’ need, at the service level 

The Treasury (2004) has suggested that 

if services to reduce ethnic gaps are not 

accompanied by services to the ‘needy’ in 

other population groups, there could be 

arguments that people with similar needs are 

not receiving the same treatment. It suggests 

the best option is to capture performance for 

Mäori (and other ethnic groups), by ethnicity 

and another indicator of need. The rationale 

for such targets need to be fully understood 

by the agency and sector. The targets need to 

be supported with leadership, and adequate 

resources to monitor, evaluate and reflect on 

performance (The Treasury, 2004, 2006). 

15 

2 See also Cunningham et al. (2006). 


16 

‘Sole’ vs. ‘mixed’ Mäori – different 

shades of Mäori ethnicity 

There is debate in the literature on the merit 

of capturing outcome performance within 

ethnic groups by intra-ethnic variation to get 

a fuller picture of the complexity of outcomes 

across and within ethnic groups. 

In favour of such an analysis, Humpage 

(2002, pp.180-1) suggests: 

“Because ‘sole’ Mäori are more likely to be 

distributed among the deprived deciles than 

‘mixed’ Mäori. Yet when the ‘sole’ Mäori 

category is used alone, figures are underestimated. 

Ideally, ‘sole; ‘mixed’ and ‘total’ 

Mäori categories should be combined to 

show the ‘bigger picture, starting with the 

simplest (‘total’) and gradually moving on 

to more complex and detailed (‘sole’ and 

‘mixed’) analysis, because reliance on either 

external or internal indicators can favour 

one interpretation of the disparity issue… 

MOH (2001:24) asserted that combining 

these categories would avoid very simple ‘on 

average’ conclusions being made in an area 

where considerable complexity exists”. 3 

However, Kukutai (2004) says such an approach 

is limited. In differentiating needs within 

the Mäori population, a critical variable is 

orientation towards the Mäori ethnic group 

(e.g. the group a person identifies most strongly 

with). This dynamic cannot be captured in 

a crude ‘sole’ Mäori versus ‘mixed’ Mäori 

dichotomy. Durie et al. (2003b, p.100) suggest 

“the only significant differences lie between 

Mäori who identify as Mäori (either solely or in 

combination with other ethnicities) and those 

who are descended from Mäori but identify as 

non-Mäori (Kukutaki, 2003)”. Te Puni Kökiri 

concludes therefore that any analysis involving 

disaggregation of this nature should be 

approached with caution. 

3.4 COMPARATIVE IMPACT 

MEASURES OR RESULTS 

Multiple sources, including official 

requirements, MSD’s Performance 

Improvement Framework Review, and 

writings by Mäori academics, emphasise the 

importance of impact measures. Impacts are 

to be directly linked or attributable to the 

entity’s activities. 

Examples of impact measures for 

employment services 

There is a range of generic impact type 

measures in MSD’s 20012/15 and 2011/14 

SOIs for their employment service Job Search 

Service and its Appropriation Tailored Sets of 

Services to help people into work or achieve 

independence (see Appendix Three). 

It is also notable that these measures are 

capable of disaggregation by ethnicity, but 

such an analysis is not provided. MSD’s 

Performance Improvement Framework 

(PIF) review noted difficulties in outcome 

monitoring and evaluation, and suggested 

some improvements in that regard (State 

Services Commission, May 2011b, pp.34-5). 

However, that review did not address MSD’s 

performance for Mäori. 

From an academic perspective, Gill and Dormer 

(2011, p. 297) suggest Work and Income 

staff generally perceive that paying benefit 

entitlements and placing people in jobs is 

not complex or difficult to measure, but the 

organisation’s role in social development is. 

Although “social development outcomes are 

3 Sole Mäori are those who are identified in the data as having only Mäori ethnicity, ‘mixed’ Mäori are those identified in the data 

as having Mäori and at least one other ethnicity), and total Mäori (the total of all those with Mäori ethnicity). 



quantified in the annual Social report, sense 

is made of this information via subjective 

evaluation (“gut feeling”) rather than by the 

application of a formal logic of cause and 

effect” (Dormer, 2010, p.55). 

Illustrative examples: 

potential impact measures for 

employment services for Mäori 

The literature identifies several 

meaningful impact measures for 

Mäori receiving employment services 

including measuring: 

• incremental steps to employment 

such as addressing health or training 

barriers and increasing participation 

and having this reflected in outcome 

measures and contracting guidelines 

(MSD, 2003a, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c); 

• the effectiveness of sequential 

interventions (Perry, 2007); 

• whether exiting a benefit marks 

a move to employment, and if so, 

the impact of that employment 

on individual and whänau/family 

wellbeing (see Englert, 2001; 

Stolte, 2006; MSD, 2007; Dixon 

and Crichton, 2007) and long-term 

employment and income prospects. 

Best way to measure the impact of 

an intervention for Mäori is through 

multiple perspectives 

Durie and Kingi (2010) emphasise the best 

way to measure the impact of an intervention 

for Mäori is through data from multiple 

perspectives, such as the Mäori client, the 

service provider, and family/whänau member, 

with quantified weightings for their responses. 

By obtaining the perspectives of these three 

key stakeholders a more balanced impression 

of outcome could be obtained. It is possible to 

measure impact status at several points in the 

service delivery process: at assessment, while in 

receipt of the service and on exiting the service. 

3.5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS IN 

PARTICULAR TYPES OF MEASURES 

The whole range of performance measures 

included in figure one (see above, Part 1) lend 

themselves to comparative measurement. 

It is worth discussing briefly the literature 

that relates to measures of coverage and 

accessibility; customer satisfaction; and the 

comparative performance of different service 

delivery sites. 

Coverage and service accessibility 

Coverage or reach are important measures of 

service adequacy for Mäori, as they focus on 

customer accessibility or uptake of services. 

“Coverage really matters. Outputs must reach 

the groups or area where need exist”, and 

“poor ability to target effective outputs on 

areas of need will limit value for money” (The 

Treasury, 2008, p.11 and p.5). 

The domestic literature on public services 

shows that Mäori are more likely to experience 

greater barriers to accessing state services 

than some other population groups (State 

Services Commission, 2011a, pp.6, 12) 4 . 

Examples of coverage measures include: 

percentage of population in need of receiving 

the output; percentage of target group who 

meet entry criteria; percentage of target group 

who did not access or use the service; and 

transit time (or other barrier to use). 

17 

4 See also: Ministerial Advisory Committee on a Mäori Perspective for the Department of Social Welfare, 1988; Te Puni Kökiri, 

1996a, 1996b; Ministerial Inquiry into Department of Work and Income, 2000. 


18 

Customer satisfaction measures 

Whilst the international literature identified 

a range of common customer satisfaction 

measures of effectiveness of services it “is not 

clear whether these expectations are equally 

shared by indigenous people in New Zealand 

when utilising public services” (Gill and 

Russell, 2011, p.15). Mäori may have different 

priorities and perceptions of service quality. 

The State Services Commission’s 2009 Kiwis 

Count Survey (also discussed above at section 

2.5) found the drivers of satisfaction for 

service quality were slightly different for 

Mäori, relative to non-Mäori. Mäori were a 

little less satisfied with the quality of services 

than non-Mäori. Mäori rated 19 out of 26 

frequently used services as low quality (SSC, 

2011a, p 11), and reported lower levels of trust 

in public services than non-Mäori. 

The report recommended to improve the 

experience of Mäori customers, agencies 

need to ensure “staff are competent, keep 

their promises and treat Mäori fairly. Earlier 

research has shown that for Mäori; staff being 

non-judgemental and treating people with 

respect are key elements of fair treatment” 

(State Services Commission, 2011a, p.17). 

Durie et al. (2012, p.32) drew upon He Taura 

Tieke, a framework for effective health services 

for Mäori, to identify the following aspects of 

service delivery that are important to Mäori 

consumers: 

• access; 

• information; 

• informed choice; 

• trust and respect; and 

• participation and seamlessness. 

Other literature (Donnell and Social Programme 

Evaluation Unit, Department of Social Welfare, 

1985; Te Puni Kökiri, 1996a, p.18, 1996b, 2009; 

Ministerial Inquiry into the Department of Work 

and Income, 2000; Englert, 2001; The Salvation 

Army, 2006, p.64; State Services Commission, 

2009a; Whänau Ora Taskforce, 2009) added 

the following characteristics: 

• privacy; 

• full understandable information disclosure; 

• consistent information across phone 

channels and sites; 

• staff and information that is sensitive to 

Mäori world views and cultural practices; 

• staff adequately trained and knowledgeable 

about other services; and 

• an extended focus not just on the 

individual Mäori consumer but if possible 

so that whänau can use and strengthen 

their own resources and expertise. 

The State Services Commission encourages 

agencies to use the Common Measurements 

Tool 5 for ascertaining customer satisfaction 

(State Services Commission, 2010b). 

5 The tool allows state sector agencies to measure client satisfaction and identify service delivery improvements for service users 

in a format that can allow international benchmarking with Canada and other jurisdictions that adopt it. 



Raising performance between 

sites/offices 

19 

Drawing upon Molsely and Moller’s (2007) 

study of employment services in Germany the 

international literature review highlighted a 

standard finding that there is considerable 

variation in the relative efficiency of individual 

sites or local offices (Gill and Russell, 2011, 

p.18). Regression analysis may be able to 

unpack the relative contributions of different 

variables in explaining differences in results 

achieved. Hence there is scope for agencies 

that deliver front-line services to Mäori to 

raise the average performance of individual 

office sites by increasing the performance 

of the lowest quartile of local offices to the 

national average. 


PART 4 : MÄORI-SPECIFIC MEASURES AND 

THEIR CHARACTERISTICS : THE LESSONS 

FROM LITERATURE ON MÄORI WELLBEING 

20 

4.1 THE ABILITY OF MÄORI TO 

SUCCEED AS MÄORI 

A number of Mäori authors argue that Mäori 

wellbeing should be measured against Mäorispecific 

outcome indicators that are derived 

from their own culture and resources. 

In Te Puni Kökiri’s view, this argument can be 

equally valid for the measurement of agency 

or service performance. If only comparative 

measures are used, this assumes that Mäori 

must become ‘as good as’ other ethnic 

groups, when Mäori may aspire to be better 

or different. This has been called at times a 

deficit approach (Durie, 2003a, p.202; Durie 

et al., 2012, p.45). 

4.2 MÄORI-SPECIFIC MEASURES 

ARE ATTUNED TO MÄORI REALITIES 

AND MÄORI WORLD VIEWS 

Durie (2003a, 2006) argues the Mäori-specific 

approach moves away from a comparative 

approach. The aim is not to compare Mäori 

with non-Mäori (or any other specific ethnic 

group), but to assess norms that are attuned 

to Mäori realities and Mäori world views 

(Durie, 2006). Durie argues that although 

universal indicators and measures can 

be applied to Mäori, as they can to other 

populations, there are additional unique 

characteristics of Mäori that require special 

measurement. Although Mäori are far 

from homogenous: “There are nonetheless 

sufficient commonalities to warrant 

treatment as a distinctive population…..” 

(Durie, 2003a, p. 312). 

Capturing participation as Mäori requires the 

use of Mäori-specific measures related to 

personal wellbeing. Mäori-specific measures 

are attuned to contemporary Mäori realities 

and Mäori world views (Durie, 2004). It 

is important to note the emphasis on 

contemporary Mäori society, as indigenous 

cultures are dynamic and responsive to the 

realities and needs of ‘their time’ (Henriksen, 

2008, p.36). 

Examples of Mäori-specific 

measurement 

For instance, a Mäori-specific measure of 

adequate housing might take into account 

the level of provision for extended families 

and manuhiri. A measure of educational 

attainment might include measures that 

relate to the use and knowledge of Mäori 

language. Similarly Mäori-specific indicators 

for employment might include employment in 

Mäori-designated positions, participation in 

affirmative action programmes or participation 

in employment that supports Mäori cultural 

development (Durie, 2003a, p.315). It may 

also include ascertaining if the employment 

supported Mäori staff to be Mäori (e.g. 

whether the employment supports te reo 

Mäori in the workplace, and other Mäori 

cultural practices, such as leave or flexible 

working hours for tangi and other cultural 

responsibilities). 

The challenges posed by existing 

data collection methods 

In a similar vein, and in the context of 

measuring performance for Mäori, Statistics 



New Zealand (2002) explains that historically 

governments have had their own reasons 

to collect statistics on Mäori, and that 

this has meant that Mäori statistics have 

tended to meet specific government needs 

(concurring with Durie’s view), rather than 

overall development aspirations of Mäori. 

Mäori statistics tend to represent non-Mäori 

analytical frameworks and philosophical 

approaches, fail to represent Mäori realities, 

and are based on the underlying assumptions 

that some Mäori have questioned the 

relevance of that data. 

4.3 WELLBEING FOR THE 

INDIVIDUAL AND THE GROUP 

A key difference between Mäori writings and 

the domestic and international literature is 

their emphasis on measuring wellbeing for not 

just the individual but the group. Durie has 

consistently argued that indicators should be 

able to capture both the individual and the 

group (see Durie, 2003c; Durie et al., 2005c). 

Durie (2003a) suggests that in order to promote 

positive Mäori participation in society as 

Mäori 6 and in Mäori society, Mäori-specific 

measures must include some measurement at 

a level wider than the individual; otherwise 

they will not adequately reflect a Mäori 

world view. Humpage (2002, pp.192-3) notes: 

“Key indicators of economic status such 

as…..employment……do not account for the 

collective economic status of whänau (extended 

family), hapu and iwi. Nor do they take note of 

the culturally significant relationships between 

individuals and hapu/iwi or other Mäori groups 

(Kawharu, 2001, pp.3-4)”. 

4.4 MEASURES CAPTURING 

WHÄNAU ADVANCEMENT 

Whänau – the foundation Mäori 

institution and most effective 

change agent 

Durie and several other Mäori academics 

(Durie, 2003a, 2003c, 2006; Durie, Fitzgerald, 

Kingi and Stevenson, 2003b; Durie et al., 

2005c; Durie and Kingi, 2010) say that 

measuring the impact of a service on a client’s 

whänau is important because whänau is the 

foundation Mäori institution. Whänau has the 

potential to point its own members towards 

good outcomes in both the generic and Mäori 

sense. Whänau have also been identified as 

the most sustainable and effective agents of 

change for Mäori. 

The strength of using both individual 

and whänau measures 

Client and whänau impact measures (for 

service delivery) should include three different 

perspectives of the impact or outcome 

achieved, those of: the client and service 

provider; and a member of the client’s 

whänau. This would involve ascertaining their 

views of progress or lack thereof, against 

pretested questions at practical intervals 

(Durie and Kingi, 2010, p.36). 

The theory of measuring 

whänau impacts 

Therefore what is needed are measures that 

ascertain: how an intervention impacts 

on Mäori customers’ wellbeing as Mäori, 

and their relationships with their whänau 

21 

6 Mäori participation in society is about being able to participate while retaining a Mäori identity (Durie, 2003a, p.309). 

M Ä O R I - S P E C I F I C M E A S U R E S A N D T H E I R C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S : T H E L E S S O N S F R O M L I T E R A T U R E O N M Ä O R I W E L L B E I N G

22 

including their capacity to perform those tasks 

expected of whänau (Durie and Kingi, 2010); 

and the status of whänau by assessing their 

capacities to perform those tasks expected of 

whänau (Durie, 2003c). Key characteristics of 

whänau relationships are: collective identity, 

interdependence, mutuality, reciprocity and 

shared responsibility within a Mäori context. 

Whänau is more than the socio-economic 

status of individual members. A whänau’s 

strengths or weaknesses cannot be fully 

measured by adding together the sum total of 

indicators based on the circumstances of its 

individual members. 

Durie et al. (2012, p.39) suggest Mäori-specific 

wellbeing measures (whänau or otherwise) 

are likely to have maximum utility if they are 

able to be applied across a range of agencies, 

sectors, and organisations, regardless of the 

size or operational design. 

4.5 STRENGTH-BASED 

MEASURES OF ADVANCEMENT IN 

CONTEMPORARY TE AO MÄORI 

A measure of Mäori wellbeing and other 

Mäori specific measures should emphasise 

progressive advancement rather than the 

management of adversity. Several Mäori 

authors see this as relevant to aspirations 

towards self-determination. O’Sullivan (2006, 

p.7) asserts that “Mäori perceive development 

as development as Mäori, not advancement 

by assimilation”. In other words, development 

for Mäori “includes their desire to take charge 

of their own development [as Mäori, not just 

as citizens]; an ongoing interest in selfdetermination, 

autonomy, and involvement 

in policies and programmes that affect them” 

(Ringold, 2005, p.8). Mäori have their own 

perception of their world and how it should 

evolve. Durie (2003a, p.312) points out that 

under the Mäori-specific approach the aim 

is to assess outcomes for Mäori against 

contemporary norms common amongst Mäori, 

not to compare Mäori with any other ethnic 

population group or collective of groups. 

Care is needed to ensure the measures reflect 

the diverse cultural realities of Mäori and are 

not shaped by views which are outdated, too 

constrained, or out of alignment with the 

contemporary environment (Durie and Kingi, 

2012, p.40). 

Integrated approach 

Models of Mäori development and social 

advancement have all stressed the need for an 

integrated approach to Te Ao Mäori outcome 

states. “A deficit in any of the domains would 

constitute an unhealthy position (for Mäori 

at least) and irrespective of how favourable 

the other outcome domains are. To this end, 

Mäori measures of effectiveness are likely to 

be mutually reliant – that is a positive outcome 

might only be achieved when all constructs 

show positive gains” (Durie et al., 2012, 

p.41). Agencies need to do more to: recognise 

Mäori potential and capacity and strengths, 

particularly within the community; and use 

that information to address Mäori concerns 

(Durie et al., 2012, p.42). Durie et al. (2012, 

p.50) argue that agencies should explore the 

“opportunities to exploit the positive aspects of 

Mäori society, Mäori endeavour, Mäori culture 

or Mäori success…” Their work and Hua Oranga 

also suggests that agencies with a provider arm 

might be best placed to trail such measures. 



4.6 MEASURES FOR MÄORI 

AS PART OF A MEASUREMENT 

FRAMEWORK 

Mäori outcomes require multiple dimensions 

and indicators/measures of performance 

reflecting the holistic nature and concepts of 

Mäori wellbeing. Mäori-specific or cultural 

measures might best be employed as part 

of a framework to measure improvement 

in Mäori outcomes. The framework should 

capture wellbeing for the individual and Mäori 

groups, such as whänau (as discussed above), 

and the Mäori population as a whole. Ideally 

the framework would capture indicators and 

measures of advancement for other significant 

Mäori groups such as hapu and iwi. 

Developing and trialling a framework 

In building such a framework, Durie and Kingi 

(2010, p.31) suggest practitioners need to start 

from an analysis of what the literature says 

are important outcomes or impacts from an 

intervention for, and according to, Mäori clients. 

As with mainstream universal and 

comparative measures, such a framework of 

Mäori-specific measures would need to be 

trialled prior to implementation. Importantly, 

this would help to refine the outcome or 

impact dimensions that are important to 

Mäori clients and the key aspects of whänau 

advancement to be captured. 

Durie et al. (2012, p.41) also point out that 

either new data collection mechanisms will be 

needed or the reinterpretation or analysis of 

existing information will be required. 

4.7 TE HOE NUKU ROA AND HUA 

ORANGA FRAMEWORKS 

The literature review found a limited number 

of Mäori-measurement framework examples 

in the public domain. Significant frameworks 

were Te Hoe Nuku Roa and Hua Oranga, 

the groundbreaking indigenous health 

measurement framework in the health sector. 

The Hua Oranga framework has impact 

measures which capture Mäori customer cultural 

enhancement (or not) during, and at the end of 

an intervention (Durie and Kingi, 2010). 

Te Hoe Nuku Roa was developed from a 

longitudinal Massey University study involving 

550 households and is in use in the health 

and housing sectors. It is a study built on 

a relational framework made up of four 

interacting axes: paihere tangata (human 

relationships); Te Ao Mäori (Mäori culture 

and identity); ngä ähuatanga noho-ä-tangata 

(social-economic circumstances); and ngä 

whakanekeneke (change over time). Each axis 

forms a pütake (root), from which subsets, 

ngä peka (branches), take form, resulting in 

ngä rau (leaves), the areas of inquiry that will 

provide essential information both to quantify 

and qualify ngä peka and ngä pütake. 

The benefit of this framework is one axis 

can be linked with items on the other. This 

provides for the creation of a more complete 

profile of Mäori than has been possible in 

the past. Most descriptions of Mäori have 

suffered from cross-sectional limitations 

and a single sectoral interest (Te Pümanawa 

Hauora Research Centre for Mäori Health and 

Development, undated). 7 

23 

7 In 2009 the study applied the Healthy Housing Index to 80 homes in the Nelson/Marlborough region, gathering 

information on the structure and conditions of various homes. 

M Ä O R I - S P E C I F I C M E A S U R E S A N D T H E I R C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S : T H E L E S S O N S F R O M L I T E R A T U R E O N M Ä O R I W E L L B E I N G

24 

Illustrative example: applying elements of Te Hoe Nuku Roa to employment 

By way of illustration as to how the framework could be used in a multitude of settings, 

key points of connection between measuring the effectiveness of a mainstream employment 

service for, and with, Mäori, and the Te Hoe Nuku Roa framework are underlined in 

Table Three below. 

Table Three - Te Hoe Nuku Roa framework 

Ngä Pütake 

Axes 

Ngä Peka 

Subsets 

Ngä Rau 

Focused units of inquiry 

Axis 1 

Paihere Tangata 

Human Relationships 

Individual 

Family 

Household 

Whänau 

Household 

Roles and relationships 

Whänau cohesion 

Interdependence 

Axis 2 

Te Ao Mäori 

Mäori Identity 

Mana ake 

(personal identity) 

Taonga tuku iho 

(cultural heritage) 

Ngä rawe a Rangi räua kö Papa 

(natural resources) 

Whakanohohanga Mäori 

(Mäori institutions) 

Ethnic affiliation 

Language 

Tikanga 

Land 

Fisheries 

Forests 

Environment 

Marae 

Hapu activities 

Iwi links 

Axis 3 

Ngä ähuatanga noho ä tangata 

Socio-economic circumstances 

Oranga tangata (wellbeing) 

Whai taonga (societal standing) 

Whai huanga (economic position) 

Health 

Education 

Housing 

Employment 

Lifestyles 

Income 

Axis 4 

Ngä Whaka-nekeneketanga 

Change over time 

Changing household dynamics 

Wider interactions 

Shift in cultural identity 

Altered circumstances 

Mobility 

Stability 

Realisation of aspirations 

Vulnerability Impact of external factors 

New groupings 



PART 5: KEY IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES FOR 

MEASURING PERFORMANCE FOR MÄORI 

5.1 GOOD QUALITY DATA AND 

ROBUST DATA ANALYSIS 

The availability of reliable data will be a 

key challenge for agencies in carrying out 

performance measurement by ethnicity (Durie 

et al, 2012; Ringold, 2005). 

Ethnicity data 

The fluid nature of ethnicity poses one of the 

main challenges. People in New Zealand, as 

in other countries, may change the ways in 

which they identify themselves over time, or 

they may identify themselves differently in 

different environments, such as at work and at 

home (Statistics New Zealand, 2005). 

Ethnicity data is based on self-identification, 

but that self-identification, for a variety of 

reasons, is not always possible. When selfidentification 

is not possible, proxy responses 

are often collected. This creates inaccuracies 

because in these cases the individual has 

their ethnicity identified by a third party 

on their behalf, based on the third party’s 

perception of the individual’s ethnic identity. 

Nonetheless, agencies are expected to comply 

with Statistics New Zealand’s classification 

standards on ethnicity. 

Kukutai (2004) suggests agencies ought 

to be more forthcoming on how Mäori is 

defined, and the assumptions about why and 

how it is deployed. There are guidelines for 

the state sector on how to use the non- 

Mäori group in ethnicity statistics (Statistics 

New Zealand, 2005). 

Many mainstream services would benefit from 

Mäori-inclusive evaluations (Thomas, 2002), 

which would provide information that informs 

improvement. There would also be benefit 

in agencies sharing data sets and the results 

of evaluations to build an evidence base 

about progress towards desired longer term 

outcomes (State Services Commission, 2011b). 

5.2 ORGANISATIONS NEED THE 

RIGHT CAPABILITY 

In order to maintain ethnicity data quality, 

agencies need the right leadership, and technical 

and policy expertise to drive demand for it. 

Leadership 

When agencies set ethnicity targets they 

need to be supported by a champion at senior 

management level (The Treasury, 2004, 2006). 

Mäori under-represented in key 

public sector roles 

One of the main themes that emerges from 

the literature is the under-representation of 

Mäori in the public service in many influential 

roles: chief executive; senior management; 

middle management; policy; professional; and 

technical roles (State Services Commission, 

2003a, 2010a, 2010c, 2011c; Human Rights 

Commission, 2011a). A number of sources note 

that diversity is important for effectiveness 

of public services (OECD, 2009 discussed in 

State Services Commission, 2010c, and Human 

Rights Commission (2011a, p.32). 

Durie (2004, p.6) suggests that: “Increasing 

the level of direct involvement of Mäori in 

the State is important and can be justified 

on several grounds but unless the effort 

leads to demonstrable benefits for Mäori the 

exercise becomes one of primarily creating 

equal employment opportunities rather than 

25 

K E Y I M P L E M E N T A T I O N I S S U E S F O R M E A S U R I N G P E R F O R M A N C E F O R M Ä O R I

26 

specifically advancing Mäori people. The 

equal employment goal is not insignificant 

but it is a different aim from achieving best 

outcomes for Mäori.” One impediment is the 

“innate tendency for a dominant group to 

tend to appoint people like themselves and 

listen more to people like themselves – often 

unaware of the bias involved” (State Services 

Commission (2004), discussed in Human 

Rights Commission (2011a, p.33). 

Durie et al. (2012, p.44) suggest that for 

agencies that have high numbers of Mäori 

clients, one measure of an effective Mäori 

workforce is the extent to which the agency 

has a corresponding high number of Mäori 

staff employed at various levels, particularly at 

managerial or senior levels. 

The responsibility of all 

public servants 

It is also worth noting that effectiveness for 

Mäori is not just the responsibility of Mäori 

staff, but a Crown responsibility for all public 

servants (Ministerial Advisory Committee on a 

Mäori Perspective for the Department of Social 

Welfare, 1988, pp.78-9; Love, 2001, discussed 

in Humpage, 2002, p.186; The Families 

Commission, 2012). Durie et al. (2012, p.44) 

place importance not just on the numbers 

of Mäori staff in key positions, but also the 

extent to which all staff throughout an agency 

understand Mäori perspectives. 

Systems and structures 

Systems and structures can also play a 

part. For example, policy advice is often not 

developed with the implications of Mäori and 

Pacific peoples in mind, and there is currently 

no requirement to show Cabinet that policy 

advice has considered the direct or indirect 

implications of that advice for Mäori (Human 

Rights Commission, 2011a, p.31). 

Organisational culture needs to foster 

and support Mäori perspectives 

Durie et al. (2012, p.44) suggest what is needed 

is an organisational culture that fosters and 

supports Mäori perspectives, and that Mäori 

in senior positions are able to maintain their 

“Mäori-ness” without compromise. 

5.3 STAFF NEED TO FEEL 

CONFIDENT OF THE REASONS 

FOR MEASURING PERFORMANCE 

IN RELATION TO MÄORI (OR ANY 

OTHER ETHNIC GROUP) 

Focusing on Mäori can be 

politically contentious 

The arguments in favour of measuring 

performance in relation to Mäori have been 

stated above in Part One. Nevertheless, it can 

be difficult for the state sector and the wider 

public to accept the legitimacy of difference 

and indigenous aspirations (O’Sullivan, 

2006, p.8). Humpage (2008) suggests this 

is because focusing on Mäori or addressing 

ethnic inequity to improve the socio-economic 

status of Mäori tends to be perceived by the 

press and much of the state sector generally, 

as privileging Mäori on the basis of race 

over others. Humpage’s views are shared 

by O’Sullivan (2006) and the Human Rights 

Commission (2011a). 

In view of the above factors, government 

agencies can experience pressure to report 

on what is safe and easily measurable, with 

performance indicators for improving outcomes 

for Mäori selected to ensure they do not 

embarrass the chief executive or minister 

(Humpage (2008, pp 418-9). See also Gill 

and Russell, 2011). This also creates tensions 

between the purposes of collecting information 

for accountability and for service improvement. 

The former implies some risk averseness, while 

the latter implies a willingness to innovate (Gill 

and Schmidt, 2011, p.16). 



5.4 THE NEED FOR FORETHOUGHT 

Much of the international literature notes that 

developing good performance measures and 

reporting requires a lot of forethought around 

the behavioural implications that might result 

from particular indicators (Gill and Russell, 

2011, pp.10-12, 36-42). The international 

literature clearly identified examples of 

gaming and cheating in the delivery of 

employment services, and associated with 

performance measures of ethnicity based on 

administration data. 8 

More broadly the international literature noted 

the dynamics established by performance 

measurement of performance management 

means that four perverse laws operate, namely 

the laws of: 

• decreasing effectiveness (the system 

is perverted); 

• mushrooming (the system is bloated); 

• collective blindness (myopia based on 

short-sighted putting too much weight on 

production figures); and 

• preserving perverted systems (i.e. 

insufficient incentives for abandoning the 

system) (de Bruijn (2006, p.37) discussed in 

Gill and Russell, 2011, p.11). 

While it is not the topic of this literature 

review, international sources provided some 

useful advice about reducing perverse strategic 

behaviour (see, for example, de Bruijun, 2006). 

5.5 THE NEED FOR LONG-TERM 

COMMITMENT 

Successfully measuring and improving 

effectiveness for Mäori requires agencies to 

have a consistent and long-term commitment 

to measuring and improving outcomes for 

Mäori. This commitment is needed because 

changes in high level outcome states can 

take a long time to materialise. Other 

contributing factors include the challenging 

nature of improving high level outcomes for 

Mäori (Humpage, 2002, 2008; Human Rights 

Commission, 2011a). Developing robust Mäorispecific 

performance measures for the benefit of 

Mäori consumers of the service can take years. 

The Te Hua Oranga measurement framework tool 

took 10 years of trialling to develop. 

5.6 THE NEED FOR COLLABORATION 

Strong leadership is also required in order to 

ensue “a whole of government approach if 

the needs of diverse population groups are 

to be addressed effectively” (Human Rights 

Commission, 2011a, p.33). 

“The ability of an agency to work 

collaboratively with other agencies was 

considered essential and a critical measure of 

effectiveness (for measuring effectiveness from 

a Te Ao Mäori perspective), as was the ability 

of an agency to put in place interventions that 

were more holistic in nature and addressed 

multiple needs” (Durie et al., 2012, p.45). Many 

of the social issues experienced by Mäori 

consumers of social services are complex (as 

with other clients), often linked to a broad 

range of concerns, not able to be addressed 

by a single agency or even single intervention 

and therefore require integrated and 

comprehensive solutions. This is particularly 

true for agencies that seek to facilitate a 

whänau approach to resolve problems, and 

measure effectiveness for Mäori consumers 

and their whänau (Durie, et al., 2012). 

27 

8 One example was the use of unnecessary interventions targeted at the easy-to-place job seekers in order to improve the 

recorded performance of the measures. The list of hazards relevant to employment services includes: 

• cheating and gaming (Radnor, 2008); 

• creating unintended consequences (see Nun, Bickkerstaffe and Mitchell, 2009, on negative externalities); 

• excessive costs relative to the benefits (de Bruijn, 2006); and 

• displacement leading to worthwhile activities being de-prioritised (discussed in Gill and Russell, 2011, p.17). 

K E Y I M P L E M E N T A T I O N I S S U E S F O R M E A S U R I N G P E R F O R M A N C E F O R M Ä O R I

PART 6 : CONCLUSION 

28 

In summarising the domestic academic 

opinion, three main reasons emerge for 

measuring agency and service performance 

in relation to Mäori: 

• This performance information can feed 

continuous improvement to government 

services, increasing the transparency, 

efficiency and effectiveness of government 

spending. 

• Mäori, as indigenous people and Treaty 

partners, may have different interests and 

preferences, meaning that universal and 

comparative performance measurement 

may not always provide the best 

information. 

• Focusing on Mäori to achieve equity is 

consistent with our international human 

rights obligations and is endorsed by the 

UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial 

Discrimination and the OECD. 

Notwithstanding these arguments, a focus 

on Mäori can be politically contentious and 

requires some determination and leadership. In 

some cases, it also requires more sophisticated 

data capture and analysis, meaning that 

agencies would have to invest in their systems, 

capability, and organisational culture. 

In a significant nexus between the 

international and domestic academic 

literature, both sets of opinion conclude that 

there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ performance 

measurement framework. Designing a 

successful framework should take into account 

the needs of the stakeholders, including 

citizens and service users. Engaging those 

stakeholders can add legitimacy and public 

and political buy-in to the measures. 

Engaging with Mäori communities on these 

matters may bring into focus the need for 

Mäori-specific measures, which measure 

progress against Mäori-determined priorities 

and cultural preferences. 

It is clear that comparative measurement of 

ethnic differences in universal outcomes (e.g. 

the national employment rate) remains a valid 

tool. Some authors sound a caution against 

using traditional methods of comparative 

measurement in a way that would produce 

a ‘disparity’ analysis. Some also recommend 

providing full ethnic comparison (i.e. Mäori; 

New Zealand Europeans; and Pacific people), 

which offers a richer picture than the 

traditional Mäori/non-Mäori analysis. 

If there is a serious disconnection within 

the literature, it is between the academic 

literature and the ‘official requirements.’ The 

official requirements lack up-to-date advice 

on collecting and analysing performance 

information about Mäori or other ethnicities. 

The last comprehensive set of guidance from 

one of the central agencies was issued in 

1998, by the Controller and Auditor-General. 

This points the way to further work. The 

government is implementing its Better Public 

Services reforms, which aim towards better 

results achieved more efficiently. It has 

set specific targets for improved outcomes 

from services of which Mäori are significant 

consumers. It would be timely, then, to 

consider the findings of this literature review 

in the development of guidance and advice to 

the state sector. 



GLOSSARY 

Aspirational goals 

Expected performance that will not be 

achieved in the next year. 

Attribution 

The extent to which an impact or outcome 

can be directly assigned to the activities 

undertaken by an agency or agencies. 

Capability 

What an organisation needs in terms of access 

to leadership, people, culture, relationships, 

processes and technology, physical assets, and 

structures to efficiently deliver the goods and 

services required to achieve the results sought 

by the entity - whether those results are set by 

reference to government policy or by statute. 

Cost-effectiveness 

Describes the relationship between the level 

of resources used (costs) and progress toward 

a predetermined outcome (effect). The terms 

‘cost-effectiveness’ and ‘interventions’ are 

not formally defined in legislation, so a broad 

interpretation should be taken consistent 

with the expectation that the major activities 

that entities carry out add real value at a 

reasonable cost. Assessing cost-effectiveness, 

and identifying cost-effectiveness intentions, 

involves entities tracking performance over 

time to allow readers to understand whether 

the costs of services are justified by the 

impact and outcome results produced. 

Dimensions of performance 

Are the aspects or properties of performance 

that a particular performance measure can 

address. They include, but are not limited to, 

quantity, quality, timeliness, location, and cost. 

Disaggregation 

The process of deconstructing an output 

or outcome into their component parts, or 

reporting performance separately for different 

groups, e.g. population groups or product lines. 

Effectiveness 

The difference agencies make through the 

services they provide. Effectiveness focuses on 

the impact that has been achieved through 

the delivery of one or more outputs. 

Efficiency 

The price of producing a unit of output 

(‘technical efficiency’). Alternatively, it can 

mean the proportion of output reaching target 

groups (‘allocative efficiency’). To make valid 

comparisons the outputs or output mixes 

being compared must be homogenous. 

Elements of non-financial 

performance reporting 

Include inputs, outputs, impacts, and 

outcomes, which can be measured for the 

purpose of reporting and assessing the entity’s 

performance. 

Equal employment opportunity 

For the purposes of section 58 of the State 

Sector Act an equal opportunities programme 

means a programme that is aimed at the 

identification and elimination of all aspects 

of policies, procedures, and other institutional 

barriers that cause or perpetuate, or tend to 

cause or perpetuate, inequality in respect to the 

employment of any persons or group of persons. 

Intervention 

Interventions include legislation, policies, 

transfers, programmes and service delivery 

arrangements. 

29 

G L O S S A R Y

30 

Impact 

The contribution made to an outcome by a 

specified set of outputs, or actions, or both. 

Impacts are the contributions made to an 

outcome by a specified set of outputs. Often 

referred to as “intermediate outcomes”, they 

represent the relatively immediate or direct 

effect on stakeholders of the entity’s outputs. 

Intermediate outcome 

Articulates the effect that an agency’s 

services and interventions are having on New 

Zealanders. Intermediate outcomes allow an 

agency or sector to determine what difference 

it is making through the services it is providing 

with its outputs, and to discern progress 

towards the achievement of outcomes. 

Intervention logic 

The strategic and/or operational articulation 

of how one or more interventions will produce 

desirable outcomes for New Zealanders, 

including valid measures of success at the 

output, intermediate outcome and outcome 

levels of performance. 

Main measures 

Are the medium-term (at least threeyear) 

measures the entity uses to assess 

and report on its impacts, outcomes, or 

objectives, and the cost-effectiveness of its 

interventions. Main measures can cover the 

entity’s organisational health and capability 

to perform its functions and conduct its 

operations effectively, and any other matters 

necessary to understand its operating 

intentions and, for government departments, 

direction specified by their minister. 

Objectives 

The term “objectives” recognises that not 

all outputs and activities and departmental 

functions are intended to achieve “outcomes” 

as that term is defined above. Some 

outputs and activities and departmental 

functions – such as ministerial servicing, 

or managing certain core Parliamentary 

or government processes like drafting 

legislation or appointing departmental chief 

executives – do not target a direct societal, 

economic or environmental effect, and their 

effectiveness should not be judged on that 

basis. Nevertheless, they can be important in 

the context of departmental performance, and 

if so should be reported on. 

Outcome 

A state or condition of society, the economy or 

the environment and includes a change in that 

state or condition. 

Outputs 

Outputs are final goods and services – that 

is, they are supplied to someone outside the 

entity. They should not be confused with 

goods and services produced entirely for 

consumption within the department. Output 

classes are groups of similar outputs. 

Standard 

An intended level of performance within 

a stated timeframe. 

Whänau 

Can mean a whakapapa whänau (a whänau 

tied together by kinship) or a kaupapa whänau 

(a group tied together by other kinds of shared 

interests). It is possible to use similar outcome 

sets and measures for both. 



A P P E N D I C E S

APPENDIX ONE 

32 

INFORMATION ON THE WORKING/ 

BACKGROUND RESEARCH PAPERS 

FOR THIS REVIEW 

The international literature review 

This review was commissioned by Te Puni 

Kökiri from the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) 

at Victoria University; IPS literature analysis 

for Te Puni Kökiri on performance measures to 

improve service effectiveness for Mäori (Gill 

and Russell, 2011). Te Puni Kökiri supplied IPS 

with 48 recent contributions and 20 older 

sources from the international literature on 

performance measurement and management. 

• Internet searches were completed using a 

variety of search engines. 

• The reference sections of all the most 

pertinent literature were reviewed, and any 

relevant leads were pursued. 

• Several of the leading authors in 

the performance management and 

measurement field were approached for 

any references they were aware of that 

might be of relevance. 9 

• The IPS literature review supplemented Te 

Puni Kökiri’s literature review with a further 

30 articles or monographs. 

The official requirements review 

That report analysed canvassed 25 official 

primary guidance and requirement reports. 

There is no one up to-date “master document” 

to guide performance measurement on 

the public sector intranet in this area. The 

number of official requirements and guidance 

documents add to subject matter complexity. 

The summary requirements report 

The summary report summarised the above 

review and elaborated slightly with a few 

additional sources. The summary report 

covered: development requirements; 

principles; working out what to measure; 

hierarchy of measures; standards and targets; 

testing; performance management systems; 

data collection; reporting requirements for 

2011/12 accountability documents; leadership 

expectations; issues; and barriers. 

Employment-specific examples 

(“the desktop report”) 

This report analysed MSD’s performance 

reporting of its front-line services: for the 

appropriations: 10 

• Output Class D2.Output Expense: Services 

to minimise the duration of unemployment 

and move people into work (used from 

2002/03 to 2007/8); and 

• Tailored sets of services to help people into 

work and achieve independence (used from 

2008/09 onwards). 

9 The leading authors approached included Professor Patria de Lancer Julnes from the University of Baltimore, Associate Professor 

Alfred Tat-Kei Ho from Kansas University. Associate Professor Alfred Tat-Kei Ho confirmed this was internationally groundbreaking 

work and were keen to find out how Te Puni Kökiri got on (Ho, personal communication, 2011). Professor de Lancer Julnes, one 

of the world’s leading academics in this area, confirmed: “[She had] not come across any research that deals with performance 

measurement and monitoring for indigenous people. In fact, research on the inclusion of monitories in any kind of government 

endeavours tends to be scant” (de Lancer, personal communication, 2011). 

10 The Appropriation averaged just under $450 million per annum. 



The “Mäori Perspective” Report 

33 

This report was prepared by Kim Aiomanu, 

Monitoring Senior Analyst at Te Puni Kökiri. It 

consulted over 100 academic and practitioner 

reports and publications, sourced by Te Puni 

Kökiri library and internet searches. Dr Te 

Kani Kingi was asked to provide a comment 

on the report. He found that it “captures the 

main issues very well and it’s an excellent 

examination of the key issues for Mäori” 

(Kingi, personal communication, 2012). 

A P P E N D I X O N E

APPENDIX TWO 

34 

HUA ORANGA 

This framework/tool was developed in a 

mental health context, but upon examination 

Te Puni Kökiri believes it has potential to be 

adopted and adapted to other contexts, such 

as employment services the latter being an 

illustrative service examined in this 

literature review. 

HUA ORANGA MEASUREMENT 

QUESTIONS 

Particularly useful base-line questions from 

Hua Oranga that could be adopted for 

measuring the effectiveness of a mainstream 

employment service (like Job Search Service) 

for Mäori, from a holistic Mäori view of 

wellbeing are presented in the following table. 

ELEMENTS 

The tool proposes: 

• A more accurate impression of outcome 

could be obtained by capturing the client’s 

and clinician’s (or the person doing the 

intervention) impressions of outcome 

performance, along with the views of 

whänau. Key stakeholders are: clients; 

the service provider; and a member of the 

client’s whänau. 

• Four domains of outcome reflecting the 

holistic nature and concepts of Mäori 

health and wellbeing. 

• Five end points in the treatment process at 

which it makes sense to measure outcomes 

(assessment, inpatient, outpatient treatment, 

community care and discharge). The end 

points align with contemporary service 

structures and appreciate the need for a 

dynamic tool, capable of responding to a 

number of consumer treatment variables. 

• A set of questions that could be adopted for 

measuring the effectiveness of a mainstream 

service like Job Search Service for Mäori 

from a holistic Mäori view of wellbeing. 



Illustrative examples of Hua Oranga base-line questions that could be 

trialled for employment services 

35 

Table Four - Hua Oranga measurement questions 

Dimensions 

Questions for the dimensions 

Wairua Client – 

As a result of the 

intervention do 

you feel 

Service provider – 


intervention does the 

client feel 

Whänau – 


intervention does 

your relative/whänau 

member feel 

1 Dignity, respect More valued as a person 

2 Cultural identity Stronger in yourself as Mäori 

3 Personal contentment More content within yourself 

4 Spiritually 

(non-physical experience) 

Healthier from a spiritual point of view 

Dimensions 

Questions for the dimensions 

Whänau Client - 


intervention do 

you feel 

Service provider - 


intervention does the 

client feel 

Whänau– 


intervention does your 

relative feel 

1 Communication More able to communicate with your whänau 

2 Relationships More confident in your relationships with other people 

3 Mutuality Clearer about the relationships with your whänau 

4 Social participation More able to participate in your community 

A P P E N D I X T W O

APPENDIX THREE 

36 

Illustrative examples of generic impact measures for employment services 

Examples of generic impact measures for employment services from MSD’s recent SOIs are 

set out in Tables Five and Six below. 

Table Five - Measures for employment services from MSD’s 2012/15 SOI 

Ministry outcome - More people get into work and out of welfare dependency 

Intermediate Outcome Measure Target Comment/current Result 

Fewer clients are reliant 

on welfare 

The proportion of clients 

who get work before they 

require a benefit 

Increasing proportion New measures for 2012/13 


who are working part time 



who cancel their benefit and 

exit into employment 


Fewer clients require a 

benefit long term 


that are work ready 



who remain on a working 

age benefit for longer than 

12 months 

Decreasing proportion New measures for 2012/13 



Table Six - Measures for employment services from MSD’s 2011/14 SOI 

37 

Ministry outcome - More people get into work and stay in work 

Intermediate 

Outcome 

Measure Current Historic states 

and trends 

More clients get work 

before they require a 

benefit 

Proportion of people who do not require 

benefits within 28 days of attending a 

Work for You seminar: 

• Youth 

48.5% 

Increasing 

• General 

43.1% 

Increasing 

More clients are 

assisted to be workready 

Proportion of people who participated 

in the Job Search Service who do not 

remain on Unemployment Benefit for 

longer than 13 weeks 

45.2% Increasing 


preparing for work 

Proportion of people who participated 

in the Job Search Service who do not 

remain on Unemployment Benefit for 

longer than 13 weeks 

45.2% Increasing 


preparing for work 

Average cumulative time spent in 

employment (over a 12-month period) 

by people who exit: 

Unemployment Benefit 

38.6 weeks 

Increasing 

Work-ready Domestic Purposes Benefit 

and Sickness Benefit 

36.4 weeks 

Increasing 

More employers 

employ our clients 

Number of Unemployment benefit 

job seekers who get work through 

employer and industry partnership 

programmes and services and cancel 

their benefit 

New measure for 

2011/2012 

New measure - 

no trend available 

A P P E N D I X T H R E E

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

38 

Alexander, W., M. Genc and M. Jaforullah (2003) Mäori Disadvantage in the Labour Market, 

Dunedin: Department of Economics, School of Business, University of Otago of New Zealand 

Biddulph, F., J. Biddulph and C. Biddulph (2003) Best evidence Synthesis: The Complexity of 

Community and Family Influences on Children’s Achievement in New Zealand, Wellington: 

Ministry of Education 

Callister, P. (2007) Special Measures to Reduce Ethnic Disadvantage in New Zealand, Wellington: 

Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of Wellington 

Callister, P. (2008a) ‘Skin colour: Does it matter in New Zealand’, Policy Quarterly, 4, (1), pp.18-25 

Callister, P. (2008b) Skin colour: Does it matter in New Zealand Working Paper, Updated March 

2008, Wellington: http://callister.co.nz/skin-colour.pdf 

Carter, K. and F. Gunasekara (2012) Dynamics of Income and Deprivation in New Zealand, 2002- 

2009 A descriptive analysis of the Survey of Family, Income and Employment (SoIFE), Public 

Health Monologue series No 24, Wellington: Department of Public Health, University of Otago 

of New Zealand 

Chang, H. and T. Dodd (2001) ‘International Perspectives on Race and Ethnicity: An Annotated 

Bibliography’, Electronic Magazine of Multicultural Education [online journal]. 

Carter, K. and F. Gunasekara (2012) Dynamics of Income and Deprivation in New Zealand, 2002- 

2009 A descriptive analysis of the Survey of Family, Income and Employment (SoIFE), Public 

Health Monologue series No 24, Wellington: Department of Public Health, University of Otago 

of New Zealand 

Cunningham, C., B. Stevenson, E. Fitzgerald and R. Rolls (2006) Mäori Women in Aotearoa A 

Report for the Ministry of Women’s Affairs Analysing Data From Best outcomes for Mäori – Te 

Hoe Nuku Roa Executive Summary, Palmerston North: Research Centre for Mäori Health & 

Development, Massey University of New Zealand 

Dannette, M., D. Fergusson and J. Boden (2011) ‘Ethnicity and Pathways to Welfare Dependence 

in a New Zealand Birth Cohort’, Policy Quarterly, 7 (2), pp.14-22 

de Bruijn, H. (2006) “Managing performance in the public sector”, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge 

de Lancer Julnes, P. (2001) ‘Does Participation Increase Perceptions of Usefulness An Evaluation 

of a Participatory Approach to the Development of Performance Measures’, Public Productivity 

and Management Review, 24 (4), pp. 403-418 

de Lancer Julnes, P. (2011) Professor School of Public and International Affairs, University of 

Baltamore, email 1 June 2011 to Derek Gill for Te Puni Kökiri 

Department of Corrections (2011) Department of Corrections Annual Report 2010/11, Wellington: 

Department of Corrections 

Dixon, S. and S. Crichton (2007) ‘The Longer-Term Employment Outcomes of People Who Move 

From a Benefit to Work’, Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 31, http://www.msd.govt.nz/ 

about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/journals-and-magazines/social-policyjournal/spj31/31-the-longer-term-employment-outcomes-of-people-who-move-from-abenefit-to-work-pages137-157.html 



Donnell, A., and Social Programme Evaluation Unit, Department of Social Welfare (1985) Quality 

of Service to Unemployment Benefit Clients at Department of Social Welfare Reception Areas, 

Wellington: Department of Social Welfare 

39 

Dormer, R. (2010) Missing Links Doctoral Thesis submitted to Victoria University. Unpublished 

PhD thesis, School of Accounting and Commercial Law, Victoria University of Wellington 

Durie, M. (1995) ‘Te Hoe Nuku Roa Frameworks: A Mäori Identity Measure’, Journal of Polynesian 

Society, 104, pp. 461-470 

Durie, M. (1998) Te mana, Te käwanatanga: the politics of Mäori self-determination, Auckland: 

Oxford University Press 

Durie, M. (2002) ‘Universal Provision, Indigeneity and the Treaty of Waitangi’ Victoria University 

of Wellington Law Review, 33, (3/4), pp. 591-602 http://www.victoria.ac.nz/law/research/ 

publications/vuwlr/prev-issues/pdf/vol-33-2002/issues-3-4/durie.pdf 

Duire, M. (2003a) Ngä Kahui Pou Launching Mäori Futures, Wellington: Huia Publishers 

Durie, M., E. Fitzgerald, Te K. Kingi, S. McKinley and B. Stevenson (2003b) ‘Monitoring Mäori 

Progress Te Ngahuru: A Mäori Outcome Framework’, New Zealand Population Review, 

29 (1), pp.99-109 

Durie, M. (2003c) ‘Whänau Capacities: A Framework for Measuring Whänau Outcomes’, in Te Pa 

Harakeke 2004, 1, Otaki, Te Wänanga o Raukawa 

Durie, M. (2004) ‘Public Sector Reform, Indignity, and the Goals of Mäori Development 

Development’, Public Sector, 27 (2), pp.2-7 

Durie, M. (2005a) Mäori Development Trends and Indicators, paper presented at IAOS Satellite 

Meeting on Small and Indigenous Populations, Wellington: http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/ 

fms/Te%20Mata%20O%20Te%20Tau/Publications%20-%20Mason/M%20Durie%20 

Mäori%20Development%20trends%20&%20indicators.pdf 

Durie, M. (2005b) ‘Race and Ethnicity in Public Policy: Does it Matter’, Social Policy Journal of 

New Zealand, 24, pp.1-11 

Durie, M., T. Black, C. Cunningham, A. Durie, F. Palmer and C. Hawkins (2005c) The Parameters 

of Whänau Wellbeing: A report for Te Puni Kökiri, Palmerston North: Te Mata o Te Tau the 

Academy for Mäori Research and Scholarship, Massey University of New Zealand 

Durie, M. (2006) Measuring Mäori Wellbeing, Treasury Guest Lecture Series, Wellington: Massey 

University of New Zealand, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/media speeches/guest 

lectures/pdfs/tglsdurie.pdf Education Workforce 

Durie, M. and Te K. Kingi (2010) ‘Hua Oranga’ A Mäori Measure of Mental Health Outcomes, 

Palmerston North: School of Mäori Studies, Te Pümanawa Hauora, Massey University of New 

Zealand, http://www.earlypsychosis.org.nz/PDF/NZ/HuaOranga.pdf 

Durie, M., Te K. Kingi and M. Graham (2012) A framework for Measuring Te Ao Mäori 

Perspectives of Effectiveness prepared for Te Puni Kökiri, Palmerston North: Te Mata o Te Tau 

the Academy for Mäori Research and Scholarship, Massey University of New Zealand 

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Englert, J. (2001) The Application of Self Theory to the Case Management of the Young 

Unemployed. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Psychology, 

Victoria University of Wellington 

40 

Gill, D. and R. Dormer (2011) ‘Case Study – Work and Income: How staff define their role and 

the performance information they use’, in D. Gill (ed), The Iron Cage Recreated, Wellington, 

Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of Wellington 

Gill, D. and N. Russell (2011) IPS literature analysis for TPK on performance measures to improve 

service effectiveness for Mäori, Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, School of Government, 

Victoria University of Wellington 

Gill, D. and T. Schmidt (2011) ‘Organisational Performance Management: Concepts and Themes’ 

in D. Gill (ed), The Iron Cage Recreated, Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, School of 

Government, Victoria University of Wellington 

Gill, D. (ed). (2011) The Iron Cage Recreated, Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, School of 

Government, Victoria University of Wellington 

Henriksen, J. (2008) Research on Best Practices for the Implementation of the Principles of 

ILO Convention No. 169 Case Study 7: Key Principles in Implementing ILO Convention No. 

169, International Labour Office http://www.ilo.org/indigenous/Resources/Publications/ 

WCMS_118120/lang--en/index.htm 

Ho, A-Tat-Kei (2008) ‘Reporting Public Performance Information: The Promise and Challenges of 

Citizen Involvement' in W. Van Dooren and S. Van de Walle Performance information in the 

public sector: how it is used, Basingstoke [England]: New York: Palgrave Macmillan 

Ho, A-Tat-Kei (2011) Associate Professor and Director of Public Affairs Programs Iowa State 

University, email 22 June 2011 to Derek Gill for Te Puni Kökiri 

Human Rights Commission (2010) Guidelines on Special Measures to Ensure Equality, Wellington: 

Human Rights Commission 

Human Rights Commission (2011a) A fair go for all Structural Discrimination and Systemic 

Barriers to Ethnic Equality A discussion paper by the Human Rights Commission, Wellington: 


Human Rights Commission (2011b) Tüi Tüi Tuituiä Race Relations in 2010, Wellington: 


Humpage, L. (2002) Closing the Gaps The Politics of Mäori Affairs Policy. Unpublished PhD 

thesis, Department of Sociology, Massey University of New Zealand 

Humpage, L. (2008) ‘Relegitimating Neoliberalism Performance Management and Indigenous 

Affairs Policy’, Policy & Politics, 36 (3), pp. 413-429 

Kawharu, M. (2001) ‘Local Mäori Development and Government Policies’, Social Policy Journal of 

New Zealand Te Puna Whakaaro, 16, pp 1-15 

Kingi, Te K. (2003) ‘Developing Measures to Monitor the Impact of Outcomes on a Specific 

Cultural Group Such as Mäori’, paper presented at the Second Annual Measuring, Monitoring 

and Managing Outcomes in Health Conference, Auckland: New Zealand 

Kingi, Te K. (2012) Director of Te Mata o Te Tau the Academy for Mäori Research and Scholarship, 

Massey University of New Zealand, March email to Te Puni Kökiri 



Kukutai, T. (2004) ‘The Problem of Defining an Ethnic Group for Public Policy: Who is Mäori and 

Why Does It Matter’ in Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 23, pp. 86-108 

Leggatt-Cook, C. (2008) Gendered Pathways to Employment: An Analysis of the Experiences of 

Mäori, Mixed Mäori and Non-Mäori Young People, Research Report 2/2008 Auckland: Labour 

Market Dynamics Research Programme, Massey University of New Zealand 

41 

Love, N. (2000) ‘TPKS role to empower Mäori communities’ in Kökiri Paetae, 29 (September): 3, 

Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Maani, S. (2002) Education and Mäori Relative Income Levels Over Time: The Mediating 

Effect of Occupation, Industry, Hours of Work and Locality Working paper 02/17, 

Wellington: The Treasury 

Ministerial Advisory Committee on a Mäori Perspective for the Department of Social Welfare 

(1988) Puao-Te-Ata-Tu The report of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on a Mäori 

Perspective for the Department of Social Welfare, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministerial Inquiry into the Department of Work and Income (2000) Report of the Ministerial 

Inquiry into the Department of Work and Income, Wellington: The Minister 

Ministry of Health (2001) Monitoring Ethnic Inequalities in Heath, Public Health Intelligence 

Occasional Bulletin, no 4, Wellington: Ministry of Health 

Ministry of Social Development (2003a) Barriers to Employment Among Long-Term Beneficiaries: A 

Review of Recent International Evidence: Summary, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2003b) Mosaics, Whakaahu Papariki: Key Findings and Good 

Practice Guide for Regional Co-ordination and Integrated Service Delivery, Wellington: 

Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2007) Pockets of Significant Hardship and Poverty, Wellington: 

Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2008a) Briefing to the Incoming Government: Social Outcomes 

Briefing, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2008b) Briefing to the Incoming Government: Policy and Practice 

Briefing, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2008c) Briefing to the Incoming Minister Policy and Practice 

Briefing Part 2 Income and Employment for Adults, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2011) Ministry of Social Development Statement of Intent 2011- 

2014, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Ministry of Social Development (2012) Ministry of Social Development Statement of Intent 2012- 

2015, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Mosley, H. and K. Muller (2007) ‘Benchmarking employment services in Germany’, in J. de Koning, 

The evaluation of active labour market policies: measures, public private partnerships and 

benchmarking, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA: Edward Elga 

Moynihan, D. (2008) ‘Advocacy and Learning: An Interactive Dialogue Approach to Performance 

Information Use’, in W. Van Dooren and S. Van de Walle, Performance information in the 

public sector: how it is used, Basingstoke [England]; New York: Palgrave Macmillan 


New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (2009) Trends in Mäori Employment: A Historical 

Perspective and Look Ahead: Report for Te Puni Kökiri, Wellington: New Zealand Institute of 

Economic Research 

42 

Nunn, A., T. Bickerstaffe and B. Mitchell (2009) International review of performance management 

systems in Public Employment Services, Norwich: Department for Work and Pensions 

OECD (2009) OECD Measuring Government Activity Report, http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0, 

3746,en_2649_33735_42858259_1_1_1_1,00.html 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (1998) Part 4: Delivering Effective Outputs for Mäori, 

Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (1999) Towards Service Excellence: The Responsiveness of 

Government Agencies to their Clients, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (2002) Reporting Public Sector Performance, 

Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (2008) The Auditor-General’s observations on the 

quality of performance reporting, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (2009a) AG-4 (revised) (updated at March 2011) The 

Audit of Service Performance Reports, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (2009b) The Auditor-General’s Overview Statements 

of intent Examples of reporting, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller Auditor-General (2011) Central government: Cost-effectiveness and 

improving annual reports, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

Office of the Controller and Auditor-General (2012) Education for Mäori: Context for our 

proposed audit work until 2017, Wellington: Office of the Controller and Auditor-General 

O’Sullivan, D. (2006) ‘Needs, rights, nationhood and the politics of indigeneity’, MAI Review 2006 

1, Target Article 1, http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/index.php/MR/article/viewFile/1/1 

Perry, G. E. (2007) Economic Evaluation of Active Labour Market Policy in New Zealand 1989 to 

1997. Unpublished PhD thesis. Auckland: Department of Economics, University of Auckland 

Digital Doctoral Thesis https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/525 

Radnor, Z. (2008) ‘Hitting the Target and Missing the Point Developing and Understanding of 

Organizational Gaming’, in W. Van Dooren and S. Van de Walle, Performance information in 

the public sector: how it is used, Basingstoke [England]; New York: Palgrave Macmillan 

Ringold, D. (2005) Accounting for Diversity: Policy Design and Mäori Development in Aotearoa 

New Zealand, Wellington: Fulbright New Zealand, http://www.fulbright.org.nz/wp-content/ 

uploads/2011/12/axford2005_ringold.pdf 

Robson B., Cormack, D., Cram, F. (2007) ‘Social and Economic Indicators’, in B. Robson and R. 

Harris (eds), Hauora: Mäori Standards of Health IV, Wellington: Te Röpü Rangahau Hauora 

a Eru Pömare (the Eru Pömare Mäori Health Research Centre), University of Otago of New 

Zealand, http://www.hauora.Mäori.nz/hauora/ 

State Services Commission (June 2003) EEO Progress in the Public Service 2003 Report with 

special focus on Mäori, Wellington: State Services Commission 



State Service Commission (2003a) Public Service Policy Staff: including a focus on Mäori, 

unpublished presentation to Public Service Human Resource Managers, Wellington: State 

Services Commission https://psi.govt.nz/polnet/Shared%20Documents/Forms/Mäori%20 

Responsiveness.aspx 

State Services Commission (2004) International evidence on appropriateness of EEO group 

targets, Wellington: State Services Commission 

43 

State Services Commission (2009a) Understanding the Drivers Fact Sheets: You Were Treated 

Fairly Fact Sheet, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2009b) Understanding the Drivers Individual Circumstances Fact 

Sheet, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2009c) Understanding the Drivers ‘Staff Kept their Promises’ Fact 

Sheet, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2010a) 2010 Equity and Diversity Report - Diversity in the Senior 

Management in the Public Service, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2010b) A guide to using the Common Measurements Tool, 

Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2010c) Human Resource Capability (HRC) Survey of Public Service 

Departments as at 30 June 2010, Wellington: State Services Commission, 

State Services Commission (2011a) How Different Groups of New Zealanders Experience Public 

Services, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2011b) Performance Improvement Framework Formal Review of the 

Ministry of Social Development, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission (2011c) Human Resource Capability (HRC) Survey of Public Service 

Departments as at 30 June 2011, Wellington: State Services Commission 

State Services Commission & Treasury (2008) Performance measurement: Advice and examples on 

how to develop effective frameworks, Wellington: State Services Commission 

Statistics New Zealand (2001a) Labour Market Statistics 2001, Wellington: Statistics New Zealand 

Statistics New Zealand (2001b) Looking Past the Twentieth Century, Wellington: Statistics New Zealand 

Statistics New Zealand (2002) Towards a Mäori Statistics Framework: A Discussion Document, 

Wellington: Statistics New Zealand, http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_ 

communities/Mäori/towards-a-Mäori-stats-framework.aspx 

Statistics New Zealand (2005) Understanding and working with ethnicity data, a technical paper, 

Wellington: Statistics New Zealand, http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/ 

census_counts/review-measurement-of-ethnicity/papers.aspx 

Stolte, O. (2006) Training the Disadvantaged Unemployed Policy frameworks and community 

responses to unemployment. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Geography, Tourism and 

Environmental Planning, University of Waikato. 

Te Pümanawa Hauora Research Centre for Mäori Health and Development (undated). Best 

outcomes for Mäori Te Hoe Nuku Roa, Palmerston North: Massey University of New Zealand, 

http://www.tehoenukuroa.org.nz/about_us.htm 


Te Puni Kökiri (1996a) NZ Income Support Service: Review of Service Delivery to Mäori, 

Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Te Puni Kökiri (1996b) NZ Income Support Service: A Qualitative Report on Mäori Customer 

Satisfaction, Wellington, Te Puni Kökiri 

44 

Te Puni Kökiri (2009) The Dynamics of Mäori Jobseekers: Understanding the Dynamics that Affect 

the Labour Market Attachment of Mäori Jobseeker, Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Te Puni Kökiri (2011a) A review of what the official requirements and primary guidance say about 

good practice in developing and reporting against effectiveness measures for outputs for 

Mäori, Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Te Puni Kökiri (2011b) A Summary of good practice requirements as per official guidance and 

requirements, Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Te Puni Kökiri (2011c) Desktop analysis of trends in Ministry of Social Development’s 

performance measurement reporting of its employment services 2002/03 to 2011/12, report 

prepared by McKendry, C., Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

Te Puni Kökiri (2012) Towards a critical analytical Mäori perspective of good practice in developing 

and reporting against measures of performance and effectiveness for a front line mainstream 

employment service for Mäori on the unemployment benefit, Wellington: Te Puni Kökiri 

The Families Commission (2012) Safety of Subsequent Children Mäori Children and Whanäu 

A review of selected literature, Wellington: The Families Commission, http://www. 

familiescommission.org.nz/publications/research-reports/safety-of-subsequent-children 

The Treasury (2004) The Use of Ethnicity in Targeting, Wellington: The Treasury 

The Treasury (2006) Use of targets to Improve Health System Performance: English NHS 

Experience and Implications for New Zealand Working Paper 06/06, Wellington: The Treasury, 

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2006/06-06/ 

The Treasury (2008) Demonstrating Performance A Primer for Expenditure Review, Wellington: 

The Treasury, http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/guidance/reporting/demonstrating/ 

The Treasury (2010) Preparing the Annual Report Technical and Process Guide for Departments, 


The Treasury (2012a) Preparing the Annual Report Technical and Process Guide for Departments, 


The Treasury (2012b) Treasury Report: A descriptive analysis of income and deprivation in New 

Zealand, Briefing to the Minister of Finance, Wellington: The Treasury, http://www.treasury. 

govt.nz/publications/informationreleases/income-deprivation 

The Salvation Army (2006) Forgotten People: Men on their own, Manukau: The Salvation Army 

Policy Unit and Parliamentary Unit, http://salvationarmy.org.nz/uploads/ForgottenPeople.pdf 

Thomas, P. (2006) Performance measurement, reporting, obstacles and accountability, 

ANU Press: Canberra 

Whänau Ora Taskforce (2009) Whänau Ora: A Whänau-Centred Approach to Mäori Wellbeing: A 

Discussion Paper, Wellington: Ministry of Social Development 

Williams, J. Justice (2000) ‘Building the Constitution Conference’ in C. James (ed), Building the 

Constitution, Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of Wellington 



Te Puni Kökiri, Te Puni Kökiri House 

143 Lambton Quay, Wellington 6011, New Zealand 

PO Box 3943, Wellington 6140, New Zealand 

PHN Waea 04 819 6000 FAX Waea Whakaahua 04 819 6299 

www.tpk.govt.nz

Measuring performance and effectiveness for MÃƒÂ¤ori ... - Te Puni Kokiri

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?