The blog introduces Results-Based Management (RBM), emphasizing its significance in public sector reform as outlined in “Reinventing Government”. It discusses the historical context of RBM, its endorsement by key organizations, and the challenges of implementing standardized practices. The focus is on ensuring effectiveness and accountability in public expenditures for optimal results.

The is the first full blog introduced in series proposed by my blog, ‘The RBM Plan!‘.  This blog will cover: 

A Brief History of RBM: A short history of RBM with a particular focus on Canada and the United Nations. 

The RBM Promise

The United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank and Global Affairs Canada strongly endorse RBM.  It offers a systematic method for program design and RBM promises to answer the questions:

• What did we spend the money on?
• Did we get what we were promised?
• In retrospect, was the expenditure good value for our donors/taxpayers and did it benefit those intended?‘. 

The for-profit world has done a better job of being results orientated.  Here is a fictional conversation that could happen: ‘If you invest in my company, I will build a factory and produce widgets.  There is a good market and price for widgets, as a result a good projected return on your investment‘.  A simplification but true enough.  Unfortunately, things are a bit more complex in the public sector.

The Distant RBM’ings of Time

Governments and public sector organizations are much more input rather than output focus.  We have this much money, how much can we do with it.  The British Parliamentary tradition of Committee of Supply and budget secrecy reinforces this.  Keynesian economics, access to debt and the steady flow from income taxes changed the game for governments in the 20th century.  Suddenly there was money to satisfy more of the wants and needs of the public.

While civil society was a beneficiary of this increased spending, by the 1970’s and 80’s nations, provinces and even cities were going broke.  There may be multiple levels of government but there is only ever one taxpayer.  With higher taxation and seemingly greater waste, that one taxpayer wanted results. 

Reinventing Government 

In the 1990’s a book came out that solidified a zeitgeist of changing how public services were delivered.  “Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector” by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler.  This book started a series of profound changes in governments and international organizations.  The UN adopted RBM by the end of the decade and in Canada, the book sparked both the ‘Klein Revolution‘ in Alberta and the ‘Common Sense Revolution‘ in Ontario lead by premier Mike Harris.  

Echoes and remnants of these movements continue in governments through concepts such as ‘evidence-based decision making‘.  Ultimately much of the impetus to create a more entrepreneurial or agile form of public service has been stalled in the past decades and has been replaced with a return to higher debts and a focus on inputs and expenditures. 

Nevertheless, the RBM spirit and concept – what are we trying to achieve – is still alive and well in some public sector organizations and its underlying promise, “Are we getting what we wanted and paid for?” should not be forgotten. 

RBM Defined

So what is RBM? While there are numerous definitions (see Annex I below for a few variations), generally they agree on the following points:

• A Management process to ensure activities are being applied to the priorities of the organization.
• Uses systematic tools and processes to identify what should be done and how success will be measured.
• Through performance reporting and analysis, focuses on continuous learning and improvement to the process.

The following graphic from Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs provides an excellent example of what RBM is meant to do: [1]

Wanted: RBM-Standardized

As the annex below suggests, there is no shortage of advice on how to implement RBM.  Virtually every United Nation organization that funds programming has a how-to guide.  Many national governments, in particular Canada, have published material for both funding organizations and implementing partners.  

Unfortunately, an acknowledged standard or benchmark has not emerged although the UN, Canada and USAID are often cited as filling at least some of this void.  There is a bias even in these gold standards towards jumping in and starting to do RBM with only a cursory consideration of the Time, Talent and Treasure needed to create the underlying conditions to support the People, Process, Product of RBM.  

Given the lack the standardization, pity the country, organization or implementing partner wanting to implement a RBM process and culture but not knowing where to start. 

Before leaving the history of RBM, let’s take short interlude and visit an organization that has been working on it since the turn of the 21st Century, the United Nations.  

Notes and References

1. Poate, Derek, and Ann Bartholomew. “Evaluation Report 2011:2: Results-Based Approach in Finnish Development Cooperation.” Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, 2011.
2. Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Working Party on Aid Evaluation. “Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management.” OECD, 2010.
3. Prom-Jackson, Sukai. “RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT  IN THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS OF PROGRESS AND POLICY EFFECTIVENESS; FULL REPORT Joint Inspection Unit; Geneva,” 2017.
4. United Nations Development Group. “RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT HANDBOOK.” United Nations Development Group, October 2011.
5. Vähämäki, Janet. “Learning from Results-Based Management Evaluations and Reviews.” OECD, October 2018.
   • See Table 1. Purpose(s) of results based management for other definitions.
6. Global Affairs Canada. “Results-Based Management Policy Statement 2008.” Government of Canada, October 18, 2016.

Annex I: Definition Examples

The following definitions of RBM are offered.  While not an exhaustive list, they do provide an overview of what RBM means to different organizations. 

• OECD: A management strategy focusing on performance and achievement of outputs, outcomes and impacts. [2]
• United Nations: management strategies in individual United Nations system organizations based on managing for the achievement of intended organizational results by integrating a results philosophy and principles in all aspects of management and, most significantly, by integrating lessons learned from past performance into management decision-making. [3]
• United Nations Development Group: A management strategy by which all actors, contributing directly or indirectly to achieving a set of results, ensure that their processes, products and services contribute to the achievement of desired results (outputs, outcomes and higher level goals or impact). [4]
• Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation: Management strategy aimed at achieving important changes in the way organisations operate, with improving performance in terms of results as the central orientation. Its primary purpose is to improve efficiency and effectiveness through organisational learning, and secondly to fulfil accountability obligations through performance reporting. [5]
• Global Affairs Canada: [6] RBM is a life-cycle approach to management that integrates strategy, people, resources, processes, and measurements to improve decision making, transparency, and accountability. RBM is essential for CIDA’s senior management to exercise sound stewardship in compliance with government-wide performance and accountability standards. The approach focuses on achieving outcomes, implementing performance measurement, learning, and adapting, as well as reporting performance. RBM means:
  • defining realistic expected results based on appropriate analyses;
  • clearly identifying program beneficiaries and designing programs to meet their needs;
  • monitoring progress toward results and resources consumed with the use of appropriate indicators;
  • identifying and managing risks while bearing in mind the expected results and necessary resources;
  • increasing knowledge by learning lessons and integrating them into decisions; and
  • reporting on the results achieved and resources involved.