Best Practices: Performance Measures for Public Works

“Never mistake activity for achievement.”  John Wooden

One of the most frequently asked questions during my consultations with leaders of public works organizations is, “How should we measure performance and what should we be measuring?”

That is an excellent question.

If you are providing information to citizens and elected officials today, my guess is you are simply providing data on what has been done. I typically see measures related to potholes patched, miles of road maintained, signs replaced, tons of material hauled to the landfill, money spent on categories, and the like.

While keeping track of what has been done may be important, if it is not tied to what citizens expect, they will likely not care very much. They may simply see that you are spending a bunch of money, filling the local landfill and driving around in trucks.

What needs to be considered first is why does public works exist? Public works plays a key role in communities that is often under-appreciated.

• Keeping the public safe
• Maintaining some of the most valuable assets paid for by tax dollars
• Striving to perform work in sustainable or “green” ways
• Working to be cost effective and responsible
• Attracting businesses and new residents to the community

Shouldn’t your performance measures be tied to the reasons you exist?

Isn’t a measure related to potholes patched an indicator roads are performing at a level that requires patching? If the number of potholes patched goes down year over year, was performance better or worse? Don’t citizens want fewer potholes to exist?

Measuring activity can actually drive workers to patch more potholes just so this year looks better than last year.  Consider these charts based upon reports from a large U.S. city. 

Are things getting better or worse?

Without some tie to expected performance it’s difficult to tell. It could be that this community’s roads are improving and that there has been a concerted effort to get citizens more engaged in reporting problems.

Just as likely, it could be that pothole patching is falling behind and there are more requests as a result. It’s nearly impossible to tell. That’s why tying fewer potholes to proactive maintenance practices would be a much more effective measure of performance.

 Consider another example. MUTCD Retroreflectivity standards are going into effect over the course of the next several years. For some communities this may drive the replacement of a large number of signs. One option would be to simply report on the number of signs replaced. A taxpayer may legitimately question whether or not the effort and cost is worth it.

However, if you tie the improvement in nighttime visibility due to new signs to reduced accidents in the community, (which is why the standards exist in the first place) you have a much more compelling story to tell.

 So what should you measure?

First, consider what you want your citizens to think of you. Then create measures targeted at true indicators of performance. There is no one size fits all list. It may be that a fresh perspective can help you get started. Don’t hesitate to ask for help.