Introduction

The primary objective of this article is to analyze the model of results-based management (RBM), particularly during 2013 and 2014 under the current federal government of Mexico, and to highlight some elements and challenges regarding its implementation in the state of Baja California. The importance of RBM in Brazil is described to provide a contrasting case of the implementation of the model and some lessons for adaptation in Mexico. Baja California has had a government administration linked to the Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) since 1989, and this political party was reelected in 2013. The last two federal government administrations in Mexico under PAN (from 2000 to 2012) promoted a Performance Evaluation System (Sistema de Evaluación del Desempeño) (^{Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público [SHCP], 2007, 2010}) with mixed results (^{Sosa, 2011, p. 101}). A stronger role for the Mexican state in promoting better government performance should be considered key to competitiveness and well-being (^{Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OCED], 2011, p. 1}). The premise of this article is that the effective implementation of RBM implies changing or strengthening the values of a culture of management and institutionalizing that culture into decision-making processes. Without a change in the values of a culture of management (^{Fukuyama, 2004, p. 17}) within the Mexican federal government (because of its excessive hierarchy, control, authority, corruption, etc.), administrative reform proposals are unlikely to boost government performance and hence, national development.

This article uses the following methodology to advance its hypothesis: an analysis of the basic conceptual elements of RBM, followed by a discussion of the processes of the conceptual and operational integration of RBM at the national level in Brazil and Mexico and at the state level in the Mexican state of Baja California. The latter case examines the formulation of the RBM strategic plan created under the advisory aegis of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Emphasis is placed on the contradictions presented by the implementation of the RBM model in Mexico based on the original model outlined by ^{Martins and Marini (2010)} in the case of Brazil. The key variables for analysis are strategic vision, cultural values for change in management, strategic agenda, institutional capacity for implementation, and effective evaluation of the RBM model. The RBM model is methodologically relevant, having been shown to be one of the most successful intervention strategies for promoting development, as evidenced in Brazil in the period from 2000 to 2012.

This methodological proposal is developed as follows: section one ("The Mexican state and the process of governmental change") analyses the role of the Mexican state in the context of the shift toward new approaches to management in the international sphere; section two ("The history of RBM in Mexico") provides an introductory framework by examining previous RBM initiatives undertaken by the Mexican federal government since 2000; section three ("RBM and the experiences of Brazil and Mexico") highlights some elements of the RBM model in Brazil and mentions the link at the international level with the Mexican federal government regarding implementing; section four ("RBM in the state of Baja California") analyzes the context and elements RBM of the implementation of RBM at the state level; and section five ("The RBM proposal of the Mexican federal government, 2013-14") examines the RBM initiative undertaken by the national government and highlights opportunities for connecting the federal administration to the state of Baja California on the issue of RBM.

The Mexican state and the process of governmental change: History and proposals

The 1970s were a decade of crisis for the developed world, when expanding fiscal deficits led to a questioning of the welfare state, leading Anglo-Saxon countries to shift their gaze toward private management as a manner in which to solve the problems of the public sector. It is in this context that New Public Management (NPM) emerged in industrialized countries, primarily New Zealand, the United Kingdom, France and Australia, all of which introduced budgetary proposals focused on controlling spending and obtaining results, accompanied by legal and institutional reforms such as a strong process of privatization and accountability. NPM involves measures such as a) reducing the size of the public sector, b) decentralizing public organizations, c) more horizontal hierarchies, d) de-bureaucratization and competition, e) orientation toward the customer, f) evaluation of management, and g) changing the bureaucratic culture by an orientation toward results. As seen, a relation exists between NPM and the proposal of RBM, in which emphasis is on generating results with social effects. However, institutional conditions for the creation of public value implies internalizing a vision; strategic change; attention to cultural change in terms of effective transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls; and an effective implementation with an transversal approach and a strengthening of the processes of evaluation based on social results.

During the 1980s, reduced wages and the increased costs of productive services spurred governments in developed countries to implement diverse measures to render public resources more efficient. This process of change in international public administration has gradually affected Mexico; this influence is attributed to the configuration of the state and the character of management and public policies in Mexico, considering the following limitations:

In this context, it is necessary to reformulate the role of the Mexican state to generate more effective policies to promote development under an effective federalist system. The state is perceived as strategic, responsible and with capacities if a theoretical-conceptual model or perspective is present that allows the state to strengthen its performance. For ^{Aguilar, (2010, p. 2)} , this complexity in the definition of the role of the state and its processes of management is framed as a component of the problem with the validity of government leadership and not a problem of legal or institutional validity. Therefore, the problem faced by the public apparatus has moved from the subject-institution to government actions, that is, to the process of governing or governance. This shift implies internalizing a vision of strategic change that is both governmental and social, such as the promotion of cultural change in terms of effective transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls and the effective implementation and strengthening of evaluation based on social results.

According to ^{Aguilar (2010}):

(...) the problem is not the government, in the sense of governing, in the sense of the act of what it means to govern, government, or governance; in governing more than government, and that is due-among other reasons-to the fact that governing a) has certain scientific and technical components and not just institutional ones, and b) includes specific policies for relating to citizens (social, political, and economic agents) that should not contradict the legal prescription but also cannot be reduced to their mere observance (p. 3).

Therefore, the state, the government and its administration face-among other challenges-the dilemma of offering results based on their efficiency or strength in terms of institutional capacities. According to ^{Fukuyama (2004, p. 33)}, the "strength" of the state lies in the ability to plan and execute policies and enact laws; efficient administration with minimal bureaucracy; controlling graft, corruption and bribery; maintaining a high level of transparency and accountability in public institutions; and most importantly, the enforcement of laws.

These elements establish the importance of strengthened institutional capacities for the Mexican state, its governments and administrations, such that their absence has limited these processes of change and a state reform oriented toward strengthening decision-making processes to foster development.

To achieve more effective government functioning and social effects, it is necessary to implement a management model that can generate concrete results for citizens. Particularly important here are the variables of vision, cultural change and strategic agenda, defining capacities for implementation and evaluation. This situation has not necessarily been successful in Mexico because of management models focused only on limited administrative reforms incapable of engendering improved government performance and effective control of corruption. These models are components of an integral model oriented toward social effects (^{Moore, 1998, p. 59}), according to the various elements of strategic management (vision, strategy, leadership, direction, training, implementation, incentives, monitoring, evaluation, and redesign). In this context, states face a dilemma: how to promote better government performance with an insufficient culture of management to promote competitiveness and well-being. The contrast between a traditional approach to public administration and results-based governance is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Primary characteristics of traditional public administration and the results-based approach  

Source: ^{Villalobos, Policroniades and Mejía (2013}, p. 63).

The history of RBM in Mexico

The RBM approach has been implemented in Mexico for more than a decade following the transition of the federal government in early 2001 (^{Caso, 2011, p. 47}) and inspired by the experiences of Brazil and Chile. Its implementation was intended to allow the Mexican federal administration to strengthen government performance and adapt a model of results-based management using the framework by which such models had been implemented by the U.S. federal government since the 1990s (^{Moore, 1998, p. 16}) and by the Brazilian government since 2000. These models have affected the following variables: a vision of strategic change; attention to cultural change in favor of effective transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls; defining a strategic agenda; effective implementation by a transversal approach; and strengthening evaluation processes based on social results.

Experiences with RBM in Brazil and Mexico

RBM in the state of Baja California

The RBM proposal of the Mexican federal government, 2013-14

In December 2012, a change in the federal government administration in Mexico occurred, ending 12 years of PAN governments, whose management model is considered insufficiently effective for institutionalizing policies to promote government performance (^{Sosa, 2011, p. 102}), particularly in the area of increasing security and reducing organized crime. The new proposal by the federal government (for 2013-2014), under a different political party (the Partido Revolucionario Institucional [PRI]), has been characterized in the first two years by two strategies. The first, which is political in nature, is the signing of the Pact for Mexico, a political agreement between the three primary Mexican political parties. This pact was founded on the following concepts, which from a developmental perspective would help deepen the national democratic process:

A second strategy designed by the new federal administration promoted an open, results-based government centered on actions to manage policies and reforms promoted by the new administration, proposing the following priorities for public management:

Key aspects of the new federal administration include reforms on energy, education, and financial and housing policy. Lobbying and political management promoted by executives in the Mexican Congress were essential to this process but did not occur in the previous federal administration under PAN. Thus, Congress passed constitutional and legal reforms in 2013 that were proposed by the current administration, some of which had not been discussed in depth for years by the legislative branch and others that had been campaign proposals by then-candidate Enrique Peña. Consequently, both chambers focused on changes to the constitution, particularly in the areas of energy and telecommunications.

The key question is whether the management proposal presented by the new federal government will affect the variables of strategic vision and cultural change (transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls). This proposal may be considered a component of a strategic agenda for developing and strengthening the capacity for implementation and evaluation for better government performance, in accordance with the new structural reforms. From our perspective, the pertinence and quality of the management model are central to the promotion of national development. This significance is suggested by the successful experiences of Great Britain under Margaret Thatcher, the United States with the National Performance review in the first term of President Bill Clinton, and in Brazil with the RBM proposal to promote the Economic Action Plan (2000-2012) (^{Martins et al., 2013, p. 130}).

In Mexico, during his electoral campaign, then-candidate Enrique Peña emphasized the necessity to strengthen a model of the state based on RBM. However, during his first year in office, his administration paid little attention to this focus, instead prioritizing new policy proposals and reforms and ignoring the need to strengthen the capacity of the state. Institutional capacity appears to be essential, according to an analysis of the growth experiences of some Latin American countries as well on an international level. Institutional capacity is also essential as the basis for strategic and proactive states, which from the perspective of Rebeca ^{Greenspan (2013}), are solidified by the following elements:

However, from the perspective of the Latin American and Caribbean Institute for Economic and Social Planning (ILPES, the Spanish acronym) and the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) in 2010-2013, the elements that characterize the role of the state in this sense are as follows:

In sum, recent successes of the state in an international context have been based on strengthening the variables of vision and cultural change (transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls), defining a strategic agenda for development, and strengthening capacities for the implementation and evaluation of better government performance.

The importance of strengthening the development policies under the new Mexican administration was highlighted by Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean Alicia Bárcena (^{Saldaña, 2014}) in the following remarks:

Reforms must be based on the model of development that Mexico seeks. I think that it should seek a model in which equality is at the center, the path is structural change, and the central element is policy at the highest level. Every country should choose its own model. But in Mexico, a profound change is needed to close the large structural gaps. She assured that the Mexican government has fulfilled its duties with regard to the economy, "but now it should have intelligent and effective public spending, without losing sight of social and investment priorities, and focus more on science, technology, and investing".

The above clarifies the need for a strong and effective state (^{Fukuyama, 2004, p. 11}) in Mexico to promote development with the following challenges:

These management elements do exist in the case of the RBM model in Brazil (^{Martins et al., 2013, p. 111}), and such factors emphasize the importance of some central variables to consider: strategic vision, change in the values of a culture of management, a strategic agenda, and strengthening the capacities of implementation and evaluation. In sum, although the new federal government of Mexico has successfully designed policies and passed strategic reforms that did not exist 20 years ago, the government lacks an effective RBM model that would ensure concrete results from those policies and reforms.

The management model that has been advocated in this article contains some evidence that this model would help promote competition and well-being in countries such as Mexico. In other words, it will be difficult to promote national development using a traditional management model-centralized, with excessive authority, vertical, corrupt, inefficient, and with little transparency (see Table 1). Hence, to generate public value, the RBM proposal should include the following elements:

The effects of these management elements have been compared based on the experience of RBM in Brazil and according to the different variables of analysis. Meanwhile, the RBM model at the state level will continue to be promoted as a component of the framework of alternation in the new government between 2013 and 2018, assuming that the model will continue under the State Development Plan for 2014-2018. Among the elements that allow us to establish the importance of the RBM proposal, both in a new state administration in Baja California and at the federal level, are the following:

Conclusions

The primary objective of this article was to analyze results-based management (RBM) during two years of federal administration in Mexico, highlighting, in particular, its implementation in the state of Baja California. The importance of RBM in Brazil from 2000 to 2012 was discussed to compare the viability of the model. The premise holds that if the values of a culture of management are not established according to the terms proposed by ^{Fukuyama (2004, p. 11)} and are not permitted to affect the variables analyzed (vision, culture, agenda, implementation and evaluation), it is unlikely that a new model of management or administrative reform will generate public value. That is, excessive control, authority, hierarchy, centralization, corruption, etc., present obstacles to changes in management, processes of institutional development, improved performance in terms of defining a strategic agenda, achieving cultural change, and implementing policies that foster competitiveness and well-being.

This argument is based on the methodological strategy developed throughout this article. This strategy involves first a description of the changes in public management, based in particular on the successes of RBM internationally, and second, an analysis of the theoretical-methodological elements involved in the RBM model, based, in particular, on the central variables of analysis: vision, cultural values in management, definition of a strategic agenda, the implementation and processes of the evaluation of the policy. Case studies included the successful implementation of RBM in Brazil from 2000 to 2012, achievements and challenges in the model of RBM in the state of Baja California from 2010 to 2014, and elements and challenges of the new management proposal of the current federal administration in Mexico in 2013 and 2014. Based on this analysis, the general conclusions using the central variables examined here include the need to strengthen institutional capacities with regard to RBM, in particular, by internalizing a strategic vision and agenda; attention to cultural changes in terms of engendering efficient transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls; the implementation of these measures by a transversal approach; and strengthening the processes of evaluation based on social results at both the federal and state levels. In this sense, it is necessary to strengthen the focus on strategic integral management (vision, direction, leadership, strategy, implementation, agreements, incentives, evaluation, etc.) because limited information and institutionalization prevent the effective implementation of RBM. This situation devolves if the values of management remain traditional and do not change to promote increased efficacy, effectiveness, and more socially acceptable results in general. The lessons derived from the case of the Brazilian federal government (^{Martins et al., 2013, p. 134}) regarding RBM, and according to the variables analyzed in this article, represent successful practices that can be adapted to the circumstances of Baja California, the federal government in Mexico, and the Mexican administration in general.

Achievements regarding the implementation of the RBM model in Baja California can be summarized in terms of a focus that includes an orientation toward results, a certain level of bureaucratic consensus in favor of changing the traditional culture of management, change in the traditional bureaucratic culture to favor a results-based orientation, evaluation of some strategic policies (public security and social development), processes of human resources training, and the incipient linking of RBM to development. The Mexican federal government must give greater priority to the RBM proposal and connecting RBM to public policies and structural reforms that are underway, including effective implementation and a transversal perspective. This connection is important both for the state government in Baja California and for the federal government, particularly when considering lessons from international experiences associated with improved government performance, which, in every case, have strengthened legitimacy by results. Important variables to consider include vision and cultural change (effective transparency, accountability and anti-corruption controls), a strategic agenda for development, and strengthening implementation and evaluation capacities for improved government performance.

It should be mentioned that the theoretical, methodological and empirical evidence of the RBM model involves attending to the above-mentioned goals according to the variables of analysis in this article, which together reinforce the sustainability of the model. These factors include institutional arrangements for effective implementation; strengthened institutional capacities to reduce bureaucratic inertia; defining a political agenda and inter-institutional relations among actors with different political priorities; strengthening public management, political diversity, and the interests of the various actors in defining the strategic vision and agenda; and implementing cultural change and transversal processes of evaluation that affect better government performance and thus national development.