Coping with targets: performance measurement in The Netherlands police

Jaap A. Hoogenboezem · Dirk B. Hoogenboezem

25 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Productivity and Performance Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Public Policy and Administration Research Policing Practices and Perceptions Accounting and Organizational Management

Abstract

Purpose The article aims to understand why performance management schemes or targeting were introduced in the Dutch police organisation after 2002. This question is relevant for two reasons. First, Dutch political culture is traditionally not overly concerned with performance of public organisations, and second, police work seems especially averse to targeting. Design/methodology/approach The article explores changes in Dutch politics, and especially the rise and agenda of Pim Fortuyn, a flamboyant politician who disrupted the traditional political relations in the Dutch polity, and who put government performance on top of the political agenda. Analysis of secondary sources is used to track the response of police management, and field work is used to investigate the reactions of street level police officers. Findings The introduction of targeting is directly attributable to changes in the polity. As such, they represent a pendulum swing that will move back, especially when the limitations of targeting will become clear, and when the political discourse has moved on to topics other than public accountability. Practical implications Managers of public organisations could learn from this case that political pressure can have far‐reaching consequences, which cannot always be ignored, and can lead to far‐reaching effects in the organisation, that may be counterproductive. Originality/value This article asks simple questions: Why are Dutch police forces using performance contracts involving targets negotiated between the department of home affairs, the mayor and the police chief? Why were they introduced from 2002 on? And will they be a lasting practice in the Dutch police?

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

References

1981Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services 1985Crime and Human Nature 1975The politics of accommodation: Pluralism and democracy in the Netherlands 1984Two Cultures of Policing: Street Cops and Management Cops.

Cited by

2010Performance management in service operational settings: a selective literature examination 2022A Paradox of Ethics: Why People in Good Organizations do Bad Things 2008Results‐based agreements for the police in The Netherlands 2019Beyond crime rates and community surveys: a new approach to police accountability and performance measurement 2012Performance measurement and management in Portuguese law enforcement 2008Defining Performance in Public Management: A Survey of Academic Journals 2010Use and sensemaking of performance measurement information by local government managers 2012A tough nut to crack: performance measurement in specialist policing

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.