Search results

Focuses on the changes in performance measurement, following research conducted with executives in a number of leading European companies. Found that there is a growing trend towards managing performance improvement through focusing on the underlying drivers of performance, whether improvements in the processes or the underlying resources that give these processes capability. The past obsession with pure financial performance is decreasing and there may be a recognition that there is a trade off between hitting today’s financial results and sustaining the capabilities and competences that allow companies to compete effectively in the future.

The use of performance measurement systems and the balanced scorecard has been on the increase, and there is now a trend amongst practitioners and academics to prescribe that rewards should be linked to the measurement system. However, little research has been done in this area. This paper reports the results of a recent survey of executive reward practices in large companies based in the UK. Senior HR professionals and reward specialists were approached to provide details of performance measurement and reward practices in their own organizations, and to give their opinions on the benefits of such an approach.

Scholars in the field of performance measurement tend to use the term business performance measurement (BPM) systems without explaining exactly what they mean by it. This lack of clarity creates confusion and comparability issues, and makes it difficult for researchers to build on one an each other's work. The purpose of this paper is to identify the key characteristics of a BPM system, by reviewing the different definitions of a BPM system that exist in the literature. This work aims to open a debate on what are the necessary and sufficient conditions of a BPM system. It is also hoped that a greater level of clarity in the performance measurement research arena will be encouraged.

The performance measurement literature is reviewed using a systematic approach.

Based on this research, a set of conditions of a BPM system has been proposed from which researchers can choose those which are necessary and sufficient conditions for their studies.

The analysis in this paper provides a structure and set of characteristics that researchers could use as a reference framework to define a BPM system for their work, and as a way to define the specific focus of their investigations. More clarity and precision around the use of the BPM systems phrase will improve the generalisability and comparability of research in this area.

By reviewing the different definitions of a BPM system that exist in the literature this paper will hopefully stimulate a debate on the necessary and sufficient conditions of a BPM system and encourage a greater level of clarity in the performance measurement research arena.

This paper aims to advance the current debates on the effect of performance measurement (PM) in the operations management domain. In order to accomplish that, it investigates the contribution of business PM and human resource management (HRM) practices to business performance.

The paper is based on ten case studies conducted across both manufacturing and service organisations capturing evidence from both the human resource function and line management.

In the PM and HRM literatures, there is a debate about the contribution these practices make to the overall performance of the organisation. In particular, the results from the PM literature are inconclusive. This paper argues that performance is a result of employee engagement and that the PM system is a communication and guiding mechanism, which if implemented well and used appropriately, can channel the efforts of employees striving to perform.

This paper contradicts the performance drivers approach to PM by providing new insights into the roles PM and HRM practices play in delivering business performance. Additionally, the paper develops a set of propositions as a means of clearly stating the findings and for encouraging future research in this area.

This study investigates the use of performance measures and how performance measurement impacts performance.

This study was conducted through multiple case studies in a single organisation. Comparisons are made between performance measurement practices in comparable high and average‐performing business units.

The findings suggest that current research into the impact of performance measurement on performance may be too simplistic in its approach as much of the research relies on studying the physical and formal systems used, ignoring the types of factors found to be important in this study.

Being based on a single organisation, the wider applicability of the specific findings from this study should be questioned. However, if, as we suggest, the interactive nature of the use of the measurement system is important, future research will need to find ways of observing, measuring and quantifying this interactivity to allow a richer picture of the impact of performance measurement on performance to be developed.

The differences observed between the high and average‐performing cases was in the way they managed with the measures. Average‐performing business units used the performance measurement system as a simple control system, whereas, high performing business units were using the measurement system much more interactively.

This paper highlights the importance of using performance measures interactively and suggests further research into Simons' concept of “interactive control”.

Organisations devote time and effort to the development of strategic performance measurement (SPM) systems. Many articles have been written on how to design and implement this type of system. However, few studies have addressed the issue of why some organisations are better able to “manage through measures” than others. Why do some organisations struggle to ensure that action follows measurement, whilst others systematically use their metrics to inform their decision‐making processes, and their subsequently actions? Specifically, it is unclear what critical factors play a role in enabling organisations to effectively use their SPM system. To gain an understanding of these factors, 24 practitioners were interviewed. This paper presents the analysed evidence from those interviews and its implications for practice.

The purpose of this article is to analyze and compare between the frameworks of performance measurement in primary health care in the world. The subject of search is to compare if the frameworks of performance measurement in primary health care have an influence on performances of health centers.

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to (1) identify the conceptual framework for measuring quality management systems, (2) assess the effects of conceptual framework on quality improvement and quality of care outcomes. We opted for the frameworks that are more cited in the literature and we analyzed and compared between these frameworks.

Eight dimensions were identified for assessing performance in Primary Health Care Facilities “PHCF” in more than 50% frameworks: Effectiveness, Safety, Accessibility, Equity, Efficiency, Acceptability, Patient Centeredness and Timeliness.

The limits of this study can be represented by the following elements: (1) lack of exhaustiveness with regard to the current Frameworks. (2) The evaluation of reliability and validity of the qualitative studies remains difficult to appreciate. (3) Most of the evaluation tools of the primary health care are not validated yet. (4) The difference in performance levels between countries, especially for the developed countries and the multitude of the frames of measure of performance, limits the comparability of the results.

This study provides a conceptual and descriptive literature on the different conceptual frameworks for performance measurement in primary health care, and a practical and useful tool for comparison between the different conceptual frameworks. Several organisations of accreditation or certification introduced, developed, incorporated and checked the indicators of clinical quality in the organizations of health care. Some studies revealed links with the governance, the access, the continuity, the coordination, the efficiency and the strength primary care (Dionne Kringos, 2018). Improvements in the quality of care have been observed in the results of accreditation and certification bodies regarding hospital infection control infrastructure, organization and performance.

Even if the links are not established within the framework of a scientific research, quality approaches are generally recognized as an essential tool to help establishments to improve the quality and the safety of the patients. Until now, it is not still common to make evaluation of the quality of care in the “PHCF” to obtain the relevant information. The necessity of having performance measurement tools, which puts in coherence the piloting of the operational level with the strategy, to integrate the organizational objectives into the measures of operational performances and make estimate its structures towards a real management by the quality.