Danijela Miloshoska – University St Kliment Ohridski Bitola, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality-Ohrid, Kej Makedonija, 95, 6000 Ohrid, Republic of North Macedonia

Keywords:                    Customs administration;
Performance measurement;
Key performance indicators;
Macedonian customs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/ERAZ.2023.163

Abstract: Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of each customs admin­istration largely depends on understanding the complexity of customs perfor­mance measurement. There are two basic reasons. Firstly, different customs ad­ministrations have different priorities: some are focused on law enforcement and the protection of society, others are focused on fair and effective revenue collection, and others are focused on trade facilitation and security. Secondly, it is recognized that developing key performance indicators (KPIs), or metrics, is very challenging and there is no “one- solution- fits- all” for the KPIs. This study attempts to offer an analysis of performance measurement in customs and to present a list of essential KPIs for Macedonian customs. The study revealed a se­ries of difficulties with calculating the indicators as a result of the absence of suf­ficient data. The study provides general recommendations that should serve as a basis for the development of a more practical model for measuring the perfor­mance of Macedonian customs.

9th International Scientific ERAZ Conference – ERAZ 2023 – Conference Proceedings: KNOWLEDGE BASED SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, hybrid – online, virtually and in person, Prague, Czech Republic, June 1, 2023

ERAZ Conference Proceedings published by: Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans – Belgrade, Serbia

ERAZ conference partners: Faculty of Logistics, University of Maribor, Maribor (Slovenia); University of National and World Economy – UNWE, Sofia (Bulgaria); Center for Political Research and Documentation (KEPET), Research Laboratory of the Department of Political Science of University of Crete (Greece); Institute of Public Finance – Zagreb (Croatia); Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Ohrid, University of St. Kliment Ohridski from Bitola (North Macedonia)

ERAZ Conference 2023 Conference Proceedings: ISBN 978-86-80194-72-1, ISSN 2683-5568, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/ERAZ.2023

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission. 

Suggested citation

Miloshoska, D. (2023). Customs Performance Measurement – the Evidence from North Macedonia. In V. Bevanda (Ed.), ERAZ Conference – Knowlegde Based Sustainable Development: Vol 9. Conference Proceedings (pp. 163-169). Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans. https://doi.org/10.31410/ERAZ.2023.163


Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2007). Managing performance: International comparisons. Lon­don: Routledge.

Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cantens, T., Ireland, R., & Raballand, G. (2013). Reform by Numbers Measurement Applied to Customs and Tax Administrations in Developing Countries. International Bank for Recon­struction and Development / The World Bank, DOI: 10.1596/978-0- 8213-9713-8

Dixon, J. R., & Nanni, A. J., & Vollmann, T. E. (1990). The new performance challenge: Meas­uring operations for world-class competition. Dow Jones–Irwin Homewood Il.

Forza, C., & Salvador, F. (2000). Assessing Some Distinctive Dimensions of Performance Feed­back Information in High Performing Plants. International Journal of Operations & Pro­duction Management, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 359-385

Goldratt, E. M., & Cox, J. (1986). The goal: A process of ongoing improvement. NY: North Riv­er Press.

Hayes, R. H., & Abernathy, W. J. (1980). Managing our way to economic decline. Harvard Busi­ness Review, 67–77.

Hoque, Z. (2014). 20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research. Br. Account. Rev. 46, 33–59. doi: 10.1016/j. bar.2013.10.003

Hvidman, U., & Andersen, S. C. (2014). Impact of performance management in public and pri­vate organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24, 1, 35-58.

Ireland, R., Cantens, T., & Yasui, T. (2011). An Overview of Performance Measurement in Cus­toms Administrations. Brussels: WCO Research Paper No. 13.

Johnson, H. T., & Kaplan, R. S. (1987). Relevance lost – The rise and fall of management ac­counting. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard–measures that drive perfor­mance. Harvard Business Review.

Lee, J. W., Rainey, H. G., & Chun, Y. H. (2009). Of politics and purpose: political salience and goal ambiguity of US federal agencies. Public Administration, 87, 3.

Miloshoska, D. (2016). Security Roll of the Macedonian Customs. European Journal of Law and Political Sciences, 16-20.

Miloshoska, D. (2018). Customs and Corruption: the case of the Republic of Macedonia. Con­ference proceedings of the international scientific conference “Towards a Better Future: The Rule of Law, Democracy and Polycentric Development” Volume 2.

Miloshoska, D. (2022). RISK MANAGEMENT APPROACH IN MACEDONIAN CUSTOMS. 6th FEB International Scientific Conference Challenges in Economics and Business in the Post-COVID Times.

Neely, A. (1999). The performance measurement revolution: Why now and what next? Interna­tional Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(2), 205–228.

Neely, A., Mills, J., Gregory, M., & Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design – A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations and Pro­duction Management, 15(4), 80–116.

Niven, P. R. (2003). Balanced scorecard step-by-step for government and nonprofit agencies. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinction in organization theory: A cri­tique and research strategy. Academy of Management Review 13.2, 182-201.

Tosevska-Trpcevska, K. (2014). Effects of the implementation of single window and simplified customs procedures in the Republic of Macedonia. World Customs Journal.

Waggoner, D., Neely, A., & Kennerley, M. (1999). The forces that shape organizational perfor­mance measurement systems: An interdisciplinary review. International Journal of Pro­duction Economics, 60–61, 53–60.

World Bank (WB). (2008). Public Sector Reform: What Works and Why? An IEG Evaluation of World Bank Support.

World Customs Organization (WCO). (2012). Organizational Performance Measurement, The Development Compendium