Beyond words: Testing alignment among inter-organizational performance measures

Purpose: This paper seeks to measure in a quantitative way the degree of alignment among a set of performance measures between two organizations. Design/methodology/approach: This paper extends Venkatraman's test of coalignment to assess the alignment of a set of performance measures governing a contractual inter-organizational relationship. The authors applied the test and present coefficients of misalignment across three sets of measures: those used by a service provider involved in the research, those used by customers contracting the services, and those documented in 11 contracts studied. Findings: Results confirmed a high degree of alignment between target and actual operational performance in the contracts. The alignment of customers' financial objectives and contracts' operational metrics was low. Calculations show poor alignment between the objectives of the provider and the contribution received from the contracts. Research limitations/implications: Some limitations of the conclusions include the small sample of contracts used in the calculations. Further research should include not only actual contracts, but also failed ones. Practical implications: It is possible that misaligned goals, represented in misaligned performance measures, lead to tensions in intra-firm relationships. If these tensions are not addressed properly the relationship could be unstable or terminated prematurely. This method of measuring alignment could detect early potential dangers in intra-firm relationships. Originality/value: This paper extends Venkatraman's test of coalignment to assess the alignment of a set of performance measures governing a contractual inter-organizational relationship. Management researchers and business professionals may use this methodology when exploring degrees of alignment of performance measures in intra-functional and inter-firm relationships. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Evaluation of Setup Procedures on Mobile Devices Based on Users’ Initial Experience

Users’ initial perceptions of their competence are key motivational factors for further use. However, initial tasks on a mobile operating system (OS) require setup procedures, which are currently largely inconsistent, do not provide users with clear, visible and immediate feedback on their actions, and require significant adjustment time for first-time users. This paper reports on a study with ten users, carried out to better understand how both prior experience and initial interaction with two touchscreen mobile interfaces (Apple iOS and Google Android) affected setup task performance and motivation. The results show that the reactions to setup on mobile interfaces appear to be partially dependent on which device was experienced first. Initial experience with lower-complexity devices improves performance on higher-complexity devices, but not vice versa. Based on these results, the paper proposes six guidelines for designers to design more intuitive and motivating user interfaces (UI) for setup procedures. The preliminary results indicate that these guidelines can contribute to the design of more inclusive mobile platforms and further work to validate these findings is proposed.

Trust-Level Risk Evaluation and Risk Control Guidance in the NHS East of England

In recent years, the healthcare sector has adopted the use of operational risk assessment tools to help understand the systems issues that lead to patient safety incidents. But although these problem-focused tools have improved the ability of healthcare organizations to identify hazards, they have not translated into measurable improvements in patient safety. One possible reason for this is a lack of support for the solution-focused process of risk control. This article describes a content analysis of the risk management strategies, policies, and procedures at all acute (i.e., hospital), mental health, and ambulance trusts (health service organizations) in the East of England area of the British National Health Service. The primary goal was to determine what organizational-level guidance exists to support risk control practice. A secondary goal was to examine the risk evaluation guidance provided by these trusts. With regard to risk control, we found an almost complete lack of useful guidance to promote good practice. With regard to risk evaluation, the trusts relied exclusively on risk matrices. A number of weaknesses were found in the use of this tool, especially related to the guidance for scoring an event's likelihood. We make a number of recommendations to address these concerns. The guidance assessed provides insufficient support for risk control and risk evaluation. This may present a significant barrier to the success of risk management approaches in improving patient safety. © 2013 Society for Risk Analysis.