The legitimacy and rationality of performance measurement systems. A case study

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the paper is to identify and explain the institutional mechanisms that shape performance measurement systems. In the empirical research of a system for evaluating the quality of scientific activities, measurement practices were explained using the constructs of contending legitimacy and counter-coupling. Methodology/approach: The research was conducted using a case study method. A very broad and diverse set of empirical material concerning the assumptions and application of selected measurement practices were analysed using the method of qualitative content analysis. Findings: The analysis of the empirical material revealed the impact of the divergent logics of an academic career in Poland. The multidimensional heterogeneity of the institutional environment was reflected in two identified layers of performance measurement practices related to logics: meritocratic and pragmatic-populistic. It has been shown that these layers were merged in the current evaluation system through blackboxing and legitimacy labelling tactics, creating a construction that is characteristic of counter-coupling. Research limitations/implications: The adopted research strategy means that the conclusions of the research should be verified by subsequent studies of the practices of measuring various types of achievement. Originality/value: The findings confirm that legitimacy in a heterogeneous and dynamic institutional environment has a specific impact on accounting practices, including performance measurement systems. The demonstrated mechanism of the influence of contending legitimacy explains why performance measurement practices may seem irrational from the perspective of normative recommendations.