Abstract
We make the following points. (1) The performance of National Statistical Institutes (NSI) is of interest to a wide variety of groups: users of official statistics, respondents, the funders of the activity, employees and, first and foremost, the management of the NSI. We argue that, of all these needs, those of management are (or should be) the most comprehensive. Hence satisfying these needs will typically also meet the needs of most others. (2) We argue that while the assessment of all aspects of performance is crucial, not all of these are measurable. Hence we emphasize performance assessment rather than performance measurement. (3) We discuss performance monitoring under the following headings: (a) information quality, including relevance, accuracy, timeliness, accessibility, interpretability, coherence; (b) financial performance, with emphasis on an effective project based cost recording system; (c) respondent relations; and (d) human resources management. (4) We conclude by emphasizing that a balanced approach to the measurement of its own performance can only serve to strengthen an NSI's reputation for objectivity and impartiality – which, in turn, is perhaps the single most important determinant of its effectiveness.