Robert Johnston and Panupak Pongatichat
The aim of this paper is to explore an important but relatively uncharted territory: the actual functioning of performance measurement systems (PMS) in their organisational…
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this paper is to explore an important but relatively uncharted territory: the actual functioning of performance measurement systems (PMS) in their organisational context. The objective of the paper is to document the ways in which managers go about aligning operational measures with their organisation's strategy in practice.
Design/methodology/approach
This research adopts an interpretive multiple‐case approach in order to gather rich data on the strategies used in managing operational PMS. Data were collected from detailed interviews with managers and supervisors in four government agencies.
Findings
The expectations were that the operations managers would adjust their performance measures to support the changes in strategy. This was not the case. All the interviewees employed one or more tactics to cope with the tensions between strategy and performance measures. The ten tactics identified are collected into three strategies; do‐nothing strategy, pseudo‐realigning strategy, and distracting strategy.
Research limitations/implications
This paper casts some doubt on the practice, rather than the principle, of strategy‐aligned performance management. More work needs to be carried out to ascertain how other, both for profit and public sector, organisations deal with these tensions in practice.
Practical implications
From a practitioner point of view it raises the question as to whether senior managers are exerting sufficient control over the alignment issue or providing suitable tools, methods or indeed incentives to bring alignment about.
Originality/value
The paper highlights a gap between theory and practice and suggests that the way to ensure implementation of “modern management methods,” might be to deal firstly with the issues of relevance, timeliness, structure, integration, and symmetry.
Details
Keywords
Panupak Pongatichat and Robert Johnston
The objective of this paper is to explore the possibility that some degree of misalignment between performance measures and strategy, far from being counterproductive, could…
Abstract
Purpose
The objective of this paper is to explore the possibility that some degree of misalignment between performance measures and strategy, far from being counterproductive, could indeed have some benefits. The research question underpinning this paper is what the benefits are of misalignment between performance measurement and strategy.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper is based on the results of a four‐year empirical study into performance management. The four research sites were central government agencies that should be adept at managing realignment of performance measures, as government strategy is often the subject of frequent change. Data were collected from 30 semi‐structured interviews and from documentation.
Findings
It could be contended that alignment deterioration, in both private and public organisations, is a natural phenomenon resulting from either continuous changes in the external environment and/or frequent, or at least occasional, changes in the internal environment. It could further be suggested that in some cases these misalignments might not be accidental but understood and created by the managers. All the senior managers interviewed understood that their measures ought to align with strategy.
Research limitations/implications
The paper has several limitations including the limited number of organisations studied and the number of interviews conducted. The paper raises several questions for further research.
Practical implications
Several questions are posed for managers as to how they might deal with opportunities from the misalignment of performance measures and strategy.
Originality/value
A substantial body of knowledge has developed over the last 20 years on performance measurement and management in both the private and public sectors, though the majority of material is concerned with private sector applications. This review of the performance management literature has identified over 400 papers and texts, just under a quarter of which (92/425) are set in a public sector context.
Details
Keywords
Abdulkader Zairbani and Senthil Kumar Jaya Prakash
The purpose of this paper is to provide an organizing lens for viewing the distinct contributions to knowledge production from those research communities addressing the impact of…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide an organizing lens for viewing the distinct contributions to knowledge production from those research communities addressing the impact of competitive strategy on company performance in general, and the influence of cost leadership and differentiation strategy on organizational performance in detail.
Design/methodology/approach
The research methodology was based on the PRISMA review, and thematic analysis based on an iterative process of open coding was analyzed and then the sample was analyzed by illustrating the research title, objectives, method, data analysis, sample size, variables and country.
Findings
The main factor that influenced the competitive strategy is strategic growth; strategic growth has a significant influence on competitive strategy. Furthermore, competitive strategy will boost firm network, performance measurement and organization behavior. In the same way, the internal goal factor will enhance organizational effectiveness. Also, a differentiation strategy will support management practice factors, strategic positions, product price, product characteristics and company performance.
Originality/value
This study contributes to the literature by identifying a framework of competitive strategy factors, company performance factors, cost leadership strategy factors, differentiation strategy factors and competitive strategy with global market factors. This study provides a complete picture and description of the resulting body knowledge in competitive strategy and organizational performance.