Exploring strategy‐misaligned performance measurement

Modern business conditions have led to the development of a large number of different models for strategic performance management, which view performance measurement through the prism of financial and non-financial indicators, from multiple perspectives. Strategic performance management models should enable efficient and effective management, i.e. an adequate response to continuous changes in the business environment. Theory and practice in this area suggest the development and implementation of various integrated frameworks (models) for performance management of companies, in order to achieve business excellence. In addition to the well-known integrated models, such as the Balanced Scorecard (BSC), Performance Pyramid, SAILS model (Strategy Aligned Integrated Linked Scoring System), GRASP model (Goals-Resources-Actions-Structure-People), and others, Kanji’s Business Excellence Model (KBEM) and Kanji Business Scorecard (KBS) have been developed as well. Kanji’s model was created with the objective of eliminating the weaknesses and shortcomings of previous models, particularly the Balanced Scorecard. The application of multidimensional performance measures should increase the informational power of management in making strategic business decisions. The goal set by this paper is to consider some of the basic features of modern performance measurement and management models of companies that are represented in theory and applied in practice, and, on the basis of comparative analysis, to draw conclusions about their advantages and disadvantages.

Since the publication of the initial American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Methodology for the Selection and Creation of Performance Measures,1 there has been an explosion in the development and application of performance measures. Although initially envisioned as a means for physician-led quality-improvement efforts, performance measures have been primarily used as tools for accountability and performance-based reimbursement instead. Given the centrality of and experience with performance measures for quantifying healthcare quality, the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF)/AHA Task Force on Performance Measures sought to update its methodology so that ongoing efforts to measure performance could benefit from emerging insights. The original methodology, proposed in 2005,1 remains the foundation for developing process performance measures. The principal recommendations of the 2005 report are summarized in Table 1. The 2010 report does not address detailed issues of analysis,3 pay for performance,4 or nonfinancial rewards for better performance5 because these topics have been addressed in other statements. The focus of the 2010 report is to provide a state-of-the-art perspective on the construction, collection, and emerging directions of performance measurement as a means to improve healthcare quality. View this table: Table 1. ACCF/AHA Attributes of Performance Measures Figure 1. An overview of the steps in providing care by domain. Reprinted from Spertus et al.1 Performance measures that articulate discrete processes of care, as opposed to structural aspects of care or outcomes, are distinctly different from both clinical practice guidelines and appropriate use criteria because they represent a subset of the clinical guidelines for which the evidence is sufficiently strong: typically where the highest-quality evidence of benefit unequivocally exceeds risk (Class I recommendation, Level of Evidence: A),8 failure to provide the therapy to an eligible patient meaningfully reduces the likelihood that the patient will experience the best possible outcome. In this report, …

PurposePerformance management in public sector organizations is a growing phenomenon worldwide. Increasingly, questions are being raised as to its effectiveness in achieving the objective of improving the performance of public sector organizations. Research has shown that there seems to be questionable benefits and many barriers, challenges and problems with implementing performance management and measurement in the public sector environment. The purpose of this paper is to argue that this is due to the lack of focus on the process of managing the implementation of performance measurement. The author aims to review the relevant extant literature to support these assertions and to provide a conceptual framework that integrates these ideas.Design/methodology/approachThis paper reviews the extant literature on public sector performance management and measurement and develops a conceptual framework to explain how public sector performance measurement systems can be made more effective in light of the research evidence.FindingsThis paper suggests that three important factors need to be considered in the effective implementation of a performance measurement system in the public sector. They are managerial discretion, a learning and evaluative organizational culture and stakeholder involvement. These three factors are discussed and its impact on performance measurement is explored.Research limitations/implicationsA proposed integrative framework is presented that supports the assertion of the importance of these three factors in influencing how performance measurement can lead to improved performance in public sector organizations. Some potential environmental and institutional constraints are also discussed in implementing some of the suggestions proposed.Practical implicationsThe paper provides a model that explains three important facors that need to be considered in implementing an effective performance measurement system in public sector organizations and suggestions for how it can be implemented effectively.Originality/valueThe paper integrates and synthesizes the literature on public sector performance measurement into a comprehensive conceptual framework that explains more explicitly the factors that can influence the effectiveness of a performance measurement system in the public sector.

Purpose The literature highlights the relevance of performance measurement and management system in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to face the current competitive environment. However, a number of studies investigate how performance measurement and management system is effective for evolving and how contingency factors could influence this change. Newer experiences are sporadic and rarely investigated by researchers and practitioners. The purpose of this study is to identify the feasible evolutionary path of performance measurement and management system in leading SMEs to respond to current business challenges. Furthermore, it aims to contribute to the understanding of the role of key contingency factors influencing this evolution. Design/methodology/approach A longitudinal case study, based on retrospective and real-time investigations, is performed to investigate the primary evolutions of the performance measurement and management system and its key determinants. Findings The findings highlight two evolution paths, increasing the maturity of performance measurement. The first path highlights a strong command and control of performance management; the second path shows a democratic and participative of performance management. Moreover, management information system, organizational culture and management style are highlighted as key contingency factors in the change of performance management. Originality/value The authors contribute to knowledge in performance measurement field, showing how the efforts for developing performance measurement and management system in a leading SME could determine two different evolutionary paths. Furthermore, the paper describes the increasing role of organizational culture, management style and management information system in performance management evolution, as well as the relevance of online chats and social media in performance management activities.

A performance measurement framework forms the basis for which the organizational, departmental, team and individual performance measures are developed. It is therefore imperative that a sound performance measurement framework is developed. While there are numerous studies that have concentrated on the centrality of performance measures as a performance management tool, there is less attention on the development of a performance management framework in intergovernmental organizations, which forms the basis for the formulation of performance measures. This study, thus sought to fill the void that many scholars appear to have left. Specifically, the study worked backwards with an objective of identifying the critical non-technical factors that are antecedents of a sound performance management framework. The study was conducted in IGAD which is a project-oriented institution that employs performance measures as an important performance management tool. The study followed a non-experimental research design methodology and copies of questionnaires were distributed to 108 respondents online. A response rate of 93.5% was realized. From the study, it emerged that, leadership, facilitative culture, supportive environment, top management commitment, and staff involvement are the main factors that organizations need to put in place if they are to successfully develop a sound performance measures framework.

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to investigate the links and relationships between strategy and operations in local government improvement efforts under the umbrella of the Local Government Modernisation Agenda (LGMA) in England. More specifically, it explores the implementation of structured change methods and performance measurement and management initiatives that claim to have a linked strategic and operational focus through to stakeholder impact.Design/methodology/approachThis research adopts an interpretive multiple case approach (n=5), using in‐depth semi‐structured interviews and focus groups, as well as substantive archive information.FindingsThe structured integration of strategic level policy‐setting and its associated operational level activity in local authorities is often obscure and lacking in cohesiveness. Performance measurement and management at the strategic level is, for the most part, driven by emerging legislation and the need for compliance rather than improving service effectiveness. This has led to discontinuity, delays in implementing policy, and criticism of performance measures from service delivery staff.Practical implicationsThere is a need for improved integration across the strategic‐operational divide, which requires improved understanding and translation approaches. Methods adopted from other sectors should be assessed critically and tailored to suit this need rather than adopting an off‐the‐shelf provision.Originality/valueThere is a paucity of in‐depth studies relating to performance measurement and management across the strategic‐operational span in the public sector in general, and local government in particular. Increased understanding in this area is of critical importance in relation to implementing effectively the current and future modernisation and reform initiatives.

Purpose The widespread adoption of the Balanced Scorecard has led to a need to understand how performance measures affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Despite the growing trend in the implementation of the Balanced Scorecard, there is little research evidence available on the behavioral outcomes resulting from the use of nonfinancial performance measures. This study seeks to address this gap by examining several behavioral outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment and managerial performance, resulting from the use of financial and nonfinancial performance measures. Methodology Data were collected using a mailed questionnaire survey to manufacturing organizations in Singapore. Path analysis technique was employed in this study to investigate the relationships. Findings The results of the study show that behavioral outcomes are indifferent regardless of the nature and type of performance measures used. However, the relationships between performance measures and behavioral outcomes are indirect through procedural fairness and trust in supervisor. Research limitations Survey questionnaire method was used in this study and there are limitations associated with survey questionnaire method. As our sample was selected from large organizations, it is unclear if our results are generalizable to small organizations. Also, as our sample was selected from the manufacturing sector, generalizing our results to the nonmanufacturing sectors should be made with caution. Practical implications This study highlights the need for organizations to pay attention to issues pertaining to procedural fairness and interpersonal trust in the design and implementation of performance measurement systems.

Diabetes mellitus performance measures in individuals with limited life expectancy.

WR Grace plots exit strategy

This research explores how child protection is constructed through performance measurement, and how the selection and reporting of performance indicators influences policy and practice. Performance measurement is now a mainstay of public sector management. At one level, it has a role in addressing ever-present questions about the quality and effectiveness of child protection services. However, there are concerns about assessing performance within a management framework, rather than a professional or client-centred framework. Therefore, the thesis aims to critically engage with the problems and potential of performance measurement in child protection with a view to maximising its capacity to promote better outcomes for children and families. It focuses particularly on the role of family support, because despite its proclaimed importance in legislation and policy, in practice family support work remains marginalised, situated 'outside' core child protection work. The research approaches performance measurement from a critical policy perspective, in which indicators have both technical and policy functions. While performance measurement may be viewed rationally as a means for government to manage resources, from a broader policy perspective the way it is conceptualised and implemented has major consequences for service delivery. The policy significance of performance measurement is explored through two studies. The first study analyses developments in policy and practice in three jurisdictions: England, Victoria (Australia) and Queensland (Australia). This analysis contrasts the prominent position of family support in child protection legislation and policy, with its marginal position in both practice and performance measurement. It outlines the socio-political context for performance measurement in child protection, drawing out the values and power relations embedded in performance indicators that give them a role in communicating policy intent. The study concludes that performance measurement in all three jurisdictions is directing policy attention (and therefore resources) towards investigation and out-of-home care, largely ignoring family support. The second study moves beyond the policy critique to more concrete concerns about how to reconstruct performance measurement in child protection to encompass family support indicators. Using a survey method, it seeks to describe and analyse the practice of family support in one jurisdiction (Queensland) according to a performance measurement model of inputs, outputs, processes and outcomes. It concludes that useful performance data can be collected to aid understanding of the contribution of family support to the overall child protection system. Such data will help to move family support beyond assumptions about its value, towards empirical scrutiny of its methods and results. It suggests that family support will command greater policy attention if included in the child protection performance measurement effort. The thesis concludes that viewed from a critical policy perspective, performance measurement can be harnessed in the interests of good practice. It can assist with the repositioning of family support, moving it from the realm of unproblematic moral goodness to more critical inquiry. It argues there is nothing inherently wrong with measuring effectiveness and efficiency, but it is important to examine the manner in which performance measurement is developed and implemented, its methods and consequences. Performance indicators are not neutral or merely technical. Establishing indicators can influence how social problems such as child abuse and neglect are defined, where resources are placed, what service types are funded, and how outcomes for children and families are defined. It questions the privilege performance indicators may be given within managerial approaches to government, as if they somehow provide an objective and unbiased account of how services are performing. However, this is not to suggest that performance indicators are worthless or meaninglessmrather that their meaning should be explicit, and their underpinning value stances debated within policy processes. Such debate will enhance the congruency between child protection research and indicators, and democratise the processes by which performance measures are developed, used and reported.

The role of intangible strategic resources – or with other words: intellectual or knowledge capital – has been one of the most intensively discussed topics of organizational and management studies in the last 25 years both from theoretical and practical aspects. Various scholars with different background – from strategy management, to performance management, HR and knowledge management, until (management) accounting studies and others – have discussed the role of intangibles in value creation, strategy and corporate performance, and the significant management challenges around them. In addition, more than 40 different performance measurement and management frameworks and methods have been developed and published by organizations from various sectors: not only from the so-called knowledge industries – such as education, financial services, IT services or management consulting – but also from traditional sectors like manufacturing, construction and others. Nevertheless, the number of those companies which have been able to successfully implement and use the abovementioned performance management tools and methods is much less than it was expected originally. If applying Gartner’s lifecycle model (Gartner [2016]), the most recent period could be easily called as ‘Through disillusionment’ because of the challenges and barriers arisen. Several challenges are related to the immaterial character of intangible strategic resources, however, important organizational factors – including leadership support and commitment – are also crucial according to both strategic performance management (SPM) and intellectual capital management (ICM), and organizational behavior studies as well. The role and impact of leadership is one of the key factors is in both the SPM, ICM and OB literature. So, it is in the focal point of my thesis when analyzing human capital and its integration level into strategic performance management system in an organization where human capital plays a crucial role in both strategy and performance. Human capital is one of the key components of intangible strategic resources with crucial impact on value and performance in various organizations. This explorative case study research has been conducted for almost 10 years and applied mixed research methodologies to understand my main question in the best possible way: why, how and what kind of human capital information is integrated into the corporate strategic performance management system, and what is the role of the senior management’s leadership style and characters at a firm where human capital is critical. By this, I aim to contribute to both the scientific and practical discourse around intellectual capital management, and the related organizational challenges. During this thesis, my original SPM perspective has been consciously and functionally combined with a change management and leadership, as well as organizational behavioral aspects, as these are all relevant for the successful implementation of an SPM system, and its beneficial use for human capital management purposes in an organization. Based on the empirical results of this case study research, even senior manager’s leadership characteristics or the main function of SPM itself can at least partially influence the level of human capital’s integration into corporate SPM, the bigger impact at the organization are related to several supporting, substituting and neutralizing organizational factors. The maturity of HRM and Strategic functions, and the level of low data availability regarding human capital performance measures all have a significant influence on the way human capital’s performance is measured and managed at the firm. This might be one of the reasons why most of the abovementioned ICM methods and tools have been not implemented successfully in organizations. Of course, to derive such a generalizable result was and could not be the objective of my thesis, but to deeply understand the phenomenon in an organization where it appeared to be relevant from various aspects. Since the results of this thesis are strongly related to studies of various SPM scholars – e.g. Simons, or Anthony and Govindarajan (etc.) – the integration of SPM, ICM and organizational behavior (here: leadership) perspectives can lead closer the scientific community to understand the theoretical and practical challenges regarding measuring and managing intangibles, and help us to step forward from the current state of ‘Through disillusionment’ to ‘Slope of enlightenment’ in the near future. Besides deeply understanding the case study organization, this latter and to provide insightful inputs for various following combined research projects have been also important goals and aimed contribution of this thesis.

The prevailing literature and empirical studies on management of organizational performance stress the increasing importance of non-financial performance measures and propose companies to implement some kind of integrated performance measurement system. The purpose of our study is to investigate the characteristics of performance measurement and management in large Slovenian companies, focusing also on the progress made in the 5-year period. The analysis is based on two surveys conducted in the spring 2003 and summer of 2008. We investigate what do companies understand by “successful performance”, what are the most and the least important performance measures for companies, and what performance measurement systems do companies use. By answering these questions we discuss the impact of our results on the future development and growth of firms. The research results show that large Slovenian companies consider “successful performance” mostly in terms of implementing the strategy, followed by pursuing the goals of the owners and achieving the goals of different stakeholders. Most large Slovenian companies perceive financial performance measures as more important than non-financial, although they claim they measure both perspectives of their business. Our research results also suggest that 68% of large Slovenian companies in our sample use balance scorecard or some other integrated performance measurement system. These findings are generally in line with the existing theory and empirical evidence from other countries. Our main conclusion is that the prevailing role of financial key performance indicators in large Slovenian companies is appropriate for monitoring the effects of the current financial crisis but if companies want to succeed in the long-run they have to base their decisions also on non-financial measures that enable monitoring of many important capabilities for achieving long-term strategic goals.

PurposeThe intent of microfinance institutes (MFIs) in developing countries is to provide loans to very poor people in order to help them transform their lives. MFIs tend to receive subsidies; sustainability is being sought to free MFIs from non‐market dependencies. Sustainability is expected to be achieved with “best practices,” of which management with performance measures is a component. The purpose of this paper is to examine the use of performance measures by three Kenyan MFIs, which are classified as formal and client based, and likely to use rational and explicit performance measures. Clients in these MFIs are placed into self‐help groups with two responsibilities: to provide mutual support and advice to the borrowing client; and to provide the MFI with a guarantee that loans of group members will be repaid.Design/methodology/approachBased on a review of the economics and performance measurement systems literatures, research questions were developed along with an interview guide. Case studies were used to administer an interview guide which was distributed to the respondents prior to the face‐to‐face interviews.FindingsThe study concludes that MFIs have relatively well‐developed performance measures that support their particular businesses. There was a good balance between the use of financial and non‐financial performance measures. However, output measures were more commonly used than process measures. The nature of the MFIs suggests the importance of performance measurement. The managers of the MFIs are concerned with performance measurement, as expected within a bureaucracy, and a top‐down demand is present. In addition, group members or clients are interested in performance measurement as each member guarantees the loans of all fellow group members who have loans with the MFI. Thus, the customers exert a bottom‐up demand for performance measurement.Originality/valueThe findings support the view that performance measures are a means for managing MFIs and are a likely requirement for sustainability. Furthermore, the findings have identified performance measures (similar to those at banks) that are appropriate for the three MFIs in Kenya. The findings are important since the identified performance measures may be adopted by other evolving MFIs in this relatively new sector. In addition, the findings contribute to a better understanding of the genesis of the less popular results and determinants performance measurement framework of Fitzgerald et al.

PurposeThis study proposes a systematic and comprehensive circular economy (CE) performance measure as an instrument to operationalize and quantify circularity. It seeks to evaluate the relative contribution of blockchain technology to evaluate various measures in this study. A general research agenda for investigating blockchain capabilities to performance assessment in CE is presented.Design/methodology/approachEmpirical survey data from 32 CE and blockchain experts are collected to inform this study. Inductive reasoning, heatmaps, and a middle-range theory building approach are utilized to generalize theoretical patterns for blockchain support of CE performance assessment and measurement. A series of propositions are then developed as a middle-range theory for the true, false, perceptible, and hidden affordances of blockchain technology capabilities for CE performance measurement.FindingsOverall, sixteen performance measures and metrics are identified and examined. The authors find most of these measures and metrics – based on literature and expert opinion – can be supported using blockchain technology capabilities. Four major blockchain capabilities, transparency and traceability, reliability and security, smart contracts, and incentivization and tokenization are shown to have varying potential support for CE performance assessment. There needs to be an evaluation of true, false, perceptible, and hidden affordances of blockchain technology capabilities for CE performance measurement in future studies.Originality/valueBlockchain application for CE, and specifically performance measurements, is a new area. Research and practice evaluation on this issue is important but needs substantially additional investigation to help CE progress. This study provides a framework for evaluation and a foundation for future research at the nexus of CE, blockchain technology, and performance measurement.

PurposeThe objective of this study is to shed some light on performance measurement issues relevant to current practices.Design/methodology/approachThe performance measurement practices in terms of utilization, relevance, and availability of information are studied for a sample of 92 Portuguese manufacturing executives. Several statistical instruments were used namely multiple regression analysis, cluster analysis and gap analysis.FindingsThe results of this study underscore consistent patterns pointing to a lack of a broad perspective on manufacturing performance measurement. Conclusions and their implications to the theory and art of performance measurement are presented.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample used in this study is specific in nature (Portuguese executives). Thus, the results should be interpreted accordingly. Future research should test the applicability of the obtained results using other sample frames.Practical implicationsThis study provides practicing managers with useful information regarding performance measures and measurement practices.Originality/valueThis study represents an important step toward refining the theory and practice of performance measurement in manufacturing organizations.