Is it really performance that is measured? A reflection of the South African Government’s performance management system.

Abstract

The institutionalisation of performance management in the South African public service is a post-1994 intervention necessitated by the need to counteract the legacy of poor performance in public service institutions. Performance management as an integrated system is not a standalone intervention, but has direct links with other organisational processes. At both the micro-and macro-levels, PMS (performance management system) recognises institutional performance relationships between individuals’, teams’ and departments’ performance contributions for attaining government performance targets. These institutional performance relationships in the South African public service have attracted excessive attention, whilst their performance impact in communities has been overlooked. In addition, the interdependence between the dichotomies of PMS: institutional performance relationships and performance impact have also been overlooked. In the South African context, this condition creates a disparity in terms of which government employees are rewarded for outstanding performance, whilst targeted beneficiaries express dissatisfaction, often with violent protests, over government’s performance in the delivery of basic services. The protestors cite poor service delivery in prioritised key performance areas of the South African Government. The granting of performance rewards to government employees is an expression of performance excellence, which should translate into quality service delivery. Such delivery should not only meet the levels of service delivery expectations of targeted communities, but should also result in their total satisfaction. The article is founded on the basis that any disparity between targeted beneficiaries’ service expectations and level of satisfaction can be linked directly to government progress in PMS implementation.