Designing, implementing and updating performance measurement systems

By Mike Bourne, J. Mills, M. Wilcox. 2000

1,206 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/375bb76d7433f82a01dda4b8f4b621feb3b119f4

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

Performance Measurement Systems in SMEs: A Review for a Research Agenda (2005, background): “The lack of alignment between performance measurement and business strategy in traditional models has been found to be one of the main obstacles to achieving the expected results from a PMS (Atkinson and Waterhouse 1997; Bourne et al. 2000; Dixon et al. 1990; Goold 1991; Kaplan and Norton 1992, 1996”
Performance Measurement in a Supply Chain (2003, background): “It assists in directing management attention, revising company goals, and re-engineering business processes [6–8].”
Dynamics of performance measurement and organizational culture (2006, methodology): “…performance measurement mostly comprises of case studies and surveys, with very progressive and longitudinal et al, 2000, Bourne and Neely 2000 and Bourne et al 2000, Nudurupati, 2003, Kennerley and Neely, 2003) rformance Bourne (2001), using systems dynamics and action research, identified two…”
Performance measurement systems in the Finnish public sector (2007, methodology): “According to Bourne et al. (2000) and Leinonen (2001), choosing the success factors and defining the measures can be called designing the PMS, and the phase of taking the measures into use can be called implementation.”
Interplay between performance measurement and management, employee engagement and performance (2017, background): “Consequently a plethora of performance measurement frameworks emerged (Keegan et al., 1989; Kaplan and Norton, 2001; Bourne et al., 2000; Neely et al., 2002).”
A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems (2002, background): “In a case study company, Bourne et al. (2000) observed that performance measures changed over time.”
Indicators in Social Life Cycle Assessment: A Review of Frameworks, Theories, and Empirical Experience (2017, methodology): “…practice would be especially important because the evolution of performance measurement has the potential to challenge and change strategic assumptions, for example, from short-term profit thinking to long-term progress of social responsibility and sustainable development (Bourne et al. 2000).”
The evolution of performance measurement research: Developments in the last decade and a research agenda for the next (2005, background): “There followed a rich stream of work on the design and deployment of performance measurement systems, which reported on research to develop processes for designing measurement systems and barriers to their successful implementation ( Bourne et al. , 2000”
Intellectual capital, management accounting practices and corporate performance : perceptions of managers (2007, background): “These have been criticised for being backward looking, unable to measure intangible resources and not suitable for assessing performance of investments in new technologies and markets which firms require to compete successfully in global markets (Bourne et al., 2000; Amir and Lev, 1996).”
Improving control through effective performance measurement in SMEs (2001, background): “The length of time required to integrate the system into companies has been identi ed as a potential reason why the implementation rate was so low (Bourne et al. 2000).”
Supply chain performance measurement systems: A systematic review and research agenda (2017, background): “Studies on the internal PMS show how failures could occur due to poor implementation (Bourne et al., 2000, 2003), inappropriate use (Henri, 2006; Micheli and Manzoni, 2010) or a lack of review (Braz et al., 2011).”