Is performance measurement and management fit for the future?

By Steven A. Melnyk, Umit Sezer Bititci, Ken W. Platts, Jutta Mathilde Tobias Mortlock, B. Andersen. 2014

433 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Performance measurement and management (PMM) is a management and research paradox. On one hand, it provides management with many critical, useful, and needed functions. Yet, there is evidence that it can adversely affect performance. This paper attempts to resolve this paradox by focusing on the issue of “fit”. That is, in today's dynamic and turbulent environment, changes in either the business environment or the business strategy can lead to the need for new or revised measures and metrics. Yet, if these measures and metrics are either not revised or incorrectly revised, then we can encounter situations where what the firm wants to achieve (as communicated by its strategy) and what the firm measures and rewards are not synchronised with each other (i.e., there is a lack of “fit”). This situation can adversely affect the ability of the firm to compete. The issue of fit is explored using a three phase Delphi approach. Initially intended to resolve this first paradox, the Delphi study identified another paradox – one in which the researchers found that in a dynamic environment, firms do revise their strategies, yet, often the PMM system is not changed. To resolve this second paradox, the paper proposes a new framework – one that shows that under certain conditions, the observed metrics “lag” is not only explainable but also desirable. The findings suggest a need to recast the accepted relationship between strategy and PMM system and the output included the Performance Alignment Matrix that had utility for managers.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Management Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/157af8d5d6bb8c613391b71caefe1d1ee5ab9fca

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

  1. Federico Caniato

In Management Information Systems

  1. Vieri Maestrini
  2. Federico Caniato
  3. Richard T. Vidgen
  4. Davide Luzzini
  5. Paolo Maccarrone

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. Federico Caniato
  2. Richard T. Vidgen
  3. Stuart J. Barnes

Citations in the corpus