1. Performance Management in Finland
Heikki Joustie

2. Introduction in early nineties
Budgetary reform – emerged appropriations
Devolution of executive powers towards the frontline managers
Use of performance agreements to combine result targets and money available
Abolishment of detailed regulations
Focus on result targets rather than resource allocations

3. Evaluation in
The role of Ministries as political steerers – too vague
Defining the result targets – too soft
Use of indicators – unevenly developed
Outcomes and outputs – messed together
Heavy critisism from Parliament – unclear targeting and reporting

4. Reform 2004 Restructuring the performance presentation in the budget
Separation of outcomes and outputs between different levels – clarifying the hierarchical responsibilities of ministries and agencies
main title: outcomes of a ministry
chapter: outcomes of policy sectors
budget line: outputs of an agency or other type of an actor

5. Performance prism Societal impact targets (outcomes)
Societal impacts: outcomes
Societal
effectiveness
ACCOUNTABILITY
Operational performance:
outputs
How operations and use of finances have influenced the societal impacts
MANAGEMENT BY RESULTS
Operational efficiency
economy
productivity
profitability
cost-recovery rate
Outputs and quality management
commodities and public goods
service ability and quality
Operational results (outputs)
Human resources development

6. The role of Parliament
Performance management pattern changed the essence of the budget authority of Parliament
This happened without any explicite change in the Constitution
Parliament has after hesitation accepted it’s new role as a strategic decisionmaker

7. Statesmanship dilemma
Politicians want to figure out as statesmen in the nations history; this means concentrating on broad lines and strategies
To become a statesman needs to be re-elected, which means ”promising” operative details in electoral campaigns

8. The Parliament and performance management
When adopting a role as a strategic decision maker, the Parliament wants more clearly defined outcome targets and reports
The Central Government has committed itself to fulfil these requirements
This means extended use of measurement and evaluation practicies specifically on the outcome level
Use of indicators remains a real challenge for ministries