The use of Management by Objective and Results based Management across the world has

been triggered by the growing concerns and pressure from both internal and external
stakeholders for governments to provide more tangible and demonstrable results. This essay
will examine the compare and contrast of the two systems as a tool for performance appraisal
by the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education.

Management by Objectives (MBO) can be defined as the setting of objectives as part of a

strategy, departmental and personal targets being supplementary to and co-ordinated with the
main objective of the organisation Pitfield (1997). Stoner 1982 defined it as a participatory
process which actively involves managers and staff at every organisational level committing
to setting individual goals that tie in with the organisational mission in. MBO can also be
defined as a process or system designed for supervisory managers in which a manager and his
or her subordinate sit down and jointly set specific objectives to be accomplished within a set
time frame and for which the subordinate is then held directly responsible.

Results-Based Management (RBM) is a public sector management strategy aimed at

improving performance management with a central focus on performance results (outcome
and impact) RBMG, (2003); OECD, (2002). Meier (2003) defined RBM process as a
management strategy aimed at achieving important changes in the way organisations operate,
with improving performance in terms of results as the central orientation. Simply stated RBM
is a management tool used to focus on the results in activities with the aim of providing
interventions to improve service delivery while providing transparency and achieve projected
results or outcomes.

The most important tool the Head of a school has in setting and achieving goals is his/her
staff. For MBO to be successful and to achieve results the Head must: first, be able to instill
1

in the workers a sense of vital commitment and desire to contribute to organizational goals;
second, control and coordinate the efforts of the workers toward goal accomplishment; and,
last, help his or her subordinates to grow in ability so that they can make greater contributions
Tracy (1994).

In a practical setup MBO may involve the Head of a school and Heads of Department
generating a set of written performance goals, criteria and timetables for their
accomplishment which are communicated to subject teachers. The teachers also bring
specific objectives and measures that they see as appropriate or contribute to better
accomplishment of the job. Together they develop a group of specific goals, measures of
achievement, and time frames in which the subordinate commits himself or herself to the
accomplishment of those goals. The teacher is then held responsible for the accomplishment
of the goals. The manager and the subordinate may have occasional progress reviews and
monitoring meetings, but at the end of the set period of time, the subordinate is judged on the
results the he or she has achieved.

A major goal of the process is to enhance the superior-subordinate relationship, to strengthen

the motivational climate and improve performance Beach (1985). The MBO approach
introduces an element of dialogue into the process of passing plans and objectives from one
organizational level to another. The Head and Heads of Departments get together and jointly
agree on objectives, and areas of responsibility. Heads of Department communicate to their
subordinates and assist them in setting their individual targets. The supervisor in this instance
helps guide the goal setting process and ensures that it relates to the realities and needs of the
school. The process is participatory and the supervisor plays a supportive role this leads to the
subordinate becoming vested in the needs of the organisation and motivated to achieve

results. This approach aims to create empowered employees, who are clear about their roles
and responsibilities, and therefore able to contribute to the achievement of organisational as
well as personal goals.

RBM on the other hand provides the administration of a school with a management
framework and tools for strategic planning, risk management, performance monitoring and
evaluation with the purpose of improving efficiency and effectiveness through organisational
learning. It aims to shift the focus of activities from outcomes to the attainment of results.
Similar to the MBO however, the identification of results is carried out in line with
organisational objectives set at top management by the Head of the school. According to Col
et al (2006), each subordinate level defines anticipated results of its own work to contribute to
the achievement of higher level objectives for the organization as a whole.

For example the overall objective of the school administration may be to improve the school
OLevel pass rate. For this to be achieved all departments have to align their efforts to
improving the quality and quantity of passes of the students. In addition the setting of
expected results requires that supervisors and subordinates must share a dialogue to ensure
agreement, this removes the interpersonal and psychological barriers Tracey (1994) that may
prevent subordinates from achieving results as they become vested in organisational
activities. Successful implementation of RBM is dependent on a school administrations
ability to create a management culture that is focussed on results. An emphasis on outcomes
requires first and foremost a results-oriented management culture that will support and
encourage the use of the new management approaches. This means that schools have to
establish a set of desired values and behaviours, and take actions to foster these while
avoiding the undesirable ones.

The RBM strategy comprises two key components namely planning and performance
measurement UNESCO (2008). At the planning stage it ensures that there is a necessary and
sufficient sum of the interventions to achieve an expected result. It is also at this stage that
resources are allocated to ensure that the expected results can be achieved. During the
implementation stage RBM helps to ensure and evaluate that all available financial and
human resources continue to support the intended results. The Adaptation Fund Board (2009)
adds learning as a third component to the system while most organizations incorporate the
learning aspect into performance measurement. This activity is also included in the MBO
process. Emphasis in RBM is placed on evaluation with the intent of providing interventions
to ensure the stated result is achieved.

The difference between RBM and MBO lies in the scope and focus of their activities. RBM
focuses school administrations on tangible results to be delivered, clarifies delivery of service
to students and addresses their needs/problems, and promotes systematic performance
analysis for improved transparency with the ministry as well as parents. MBO focuses on
inputs and outputs, all the organisations energy and resources are directed towards achieving
the objectives Rist and Stame (2011). MBO can be considered to be a static process which
assumes full organisational control over outcomes and fixed relationships between inputs and
outputs it is rare for objectives to be altered after they have been agreed upon Myers (2009).
RBM is dynamic it can be adapted to volatile operating environments which cause the
organisation to re-evaluate and allocate more resources to ensure that results are achieved in
some cases previously decided results may be changed to accommodate an ever changing
environment.

The Results Based Management system calls for institutions to take responsibility for their
actions and demonstrate the impact of that action. It requires that organizations articulate how
public funds will be spent on services and products that have an impact on people's lives and
is supported by evidence with the projects achievement determined by verifiable indicators
Kusek and Rist, (2001). MBO measures performance by monitoring processes involved in
achieving objectives. If processes are failing more resources may not be necessarily allocated,
the organisation may simply define a new process to be used instead. MBO is more
development oriented RBM is more of a business approach due to the use of budgeting and
justifying of costs Myers (2009).

According to Rist and Stame (2011) MBO originated in centrally managed administrations
for example for use in the private sector in large companies, while RBM is designed to fit
decentralised organisational structures for example, in the Ministry of Primary and Secondary
Education RBM is conducted at national, provincial and district level in the administration
offices and respective schools.

Myers (2009) believes that the strengths of MBO include that it builds a good working team,
provides a long term planning process for the organisation, and develops staff and personnel.
RBM has the following strengths as compared to MBO, as a process it provides stakeholder
management, shows action or change towards results quickly, builds good partnerships and
identifies sustainability issues.

In conclusion both MBO and RBM are useful tools in organising financial and human
resources in achieving objectives. They help administration focus its efforts within a given
time frame and ensure that employees feel vested and part of the overall organisational thrust

and hence are motivated to work. However it can be said that the RBM has more strength in
providing more accountability and transparency by administration to various stakeholders
through its evaluation process.

References
1. Adaptation Fund Board (AFB). (2009) Results Based Management Framework,
Adaptation Fund Board Meeting 16-18 November 2009, Bonn, Germany.
2. Beach D.S. (1985). Personnel- The Management of People at Work. Fifth Edition,
Macmillan Publishing Company, New York
3. Col J-M, Holzer M, Posner P, Rubin M (2006). Results-Based Management in
Thailand Evaluation Report. Bangkok, Thailand.
4. Kusek J.Z and. Rist, R.C. (2001) Building a Performance- Based Monitoring and
Evaluation System, Journal of the Australasian Evaluation Society. Vol.1, No.2,
December 2001
5. Meier. W. (2003). Results-Based Management: Towards A Common Understanding
Among Development Cooperation Agencies. Ottawa, Canada.
6. Myers J. (2009). The Undressed Manager. Readworthy Publications, New Delhi
7. Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2002). RBM in
the development co-operation agencies: a review of experience. Development
Assistance Committee (DAC), Paris, France.
8. Pitfield. R.R (1997) Business Organisation. MacDonald and Evans, Plymouth
9. Plunket W. R and Attner, R. F (1983) Introduction to Management. Kent Publishing
Company, Massacheusetts, Boston

10. Results-Based Management Group (RBMG) (2003). Results-Based Management:

Towards a Common Understanding among Development Cooperation Agencies,
Ottawa, Canada
11. Rist. C. R, Stame N (2011). From Studies to Streams: Managing Evaluative Systems.
Transaction Publishers, New Jersey
12. Stoner J.A.F (1982). Management. Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey
13. Tracey W. R (1994) Human Resource Management and Development Handbook.
American Management Association, New York
14. UNESCO Bureau of Strategic Planning (2008).UNESCO Results-Based
Programming, Management and Monitoring (RBM) Guiding Principles, UNESCO
Paris, France.