Should a performance measurement system be based upon a set of mutually consistent goals

However the question of whose goals are to be recognized is resolved, the problem of what to do when goals are inconsistent is likely to remain. Assume, for example, that a probation program has two goals:

(1) to enhance the capability of the client to function effectively in society (2) to protect the community by minimizing criminal activity on the part of the probationer.

Following the first goal might lead a probation officer to tolerate a greater level of deviant behavior in the short run to provide probationers with opportunities to learn to make alternative choices. Yet "deviant behavior" is an outcome inconsistent with the second goal.

Should a performance measurement system be based upon a set of mutually consistent goals? Many policy areas reflect inconsistent and sometimes conflicting values held by our society. It is not the task of performance measurement (or of designers of performance measurement systems) to resolve these conflicts.

Such conflict resolution is a function of the political process. Performance measurement can best serve that process by identifying multiple outcomes of public-sector programs and leaving the assessment of their relative importance to those people who will use performance information.

Given that goals may be inconsistent and even conflicting, should a performance measurement system be developed around some basis other than comparing actual performance with goals? Not setting up a priori goals might be analogous to the goal-free evaluation proposed. This approach to evaluation compares outcomes to needs instead of to goals. However, determining what constitutes a need (or what constitutes desirable accomplishments) is the same as setting goals ex post facto. The main difference between a priori goals and ex post facto goals may be who decides the goals for a program.

Where, then, does one find a program's goals? Good places to look for goals include the legislation (if any) that established the program; records of legislative committee hearings at which the program was discussed; annual, comprehensive, or master plans of the organization responsible for implementing the program; executive orders establishing the program; applications for grants to help fund the program; annual reports; brochures communicating to the public what the program does; and the narrative section of the budget request.