Performance measurement and benchmarking of a major innovation programme

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe the problems encountered and the solutions developed when using benchmarking and key performance indicators (KPIs) to monitor a major UK social house building innovation (change) programme. The innovation programme sought improvements to both the quality of the house product and the procurement process. Design/methodology/approach: Benchmarking and KPIs were used to quantify performance and in-depth case studies to identify underlying cause and effect relationships within the innovation programme. Findings: The inherent competition between consortium members; the complexity of the relationship between the consortium and its strategic partner; the lack of an authoritative management control structure; and the rapidly changing nature of the UK social housing market all proved problematic to the development of a reliable and robust monitoring system. These problems were overcome by the development of multi-dimensional benchmarking model that balanced the needs and aspirations of the individual organisations with the broader objectives of the consortium. Research limitations/implications: Whilst the research methodology provides insight into the factors that affected the performance of a major innovation programme its findings may not be representative of all projects. Practical implications: The lessons learnt should assist those developing benchmarking models for multi-client consortia. Originality/value: The work reported in this paper describes an inclusive approach to benchmarking in which a multiple client group and their strategic partner sought to work together for shared gain. Very few papers have addressed this issue.

Developing a conceptual model of lead performance measurement and benchmarking: A multiple case analysis

Purpose: Environmental turbulence including rapid changes in technology and markets has resulted in the need for new approaches to performance measurement and benchmarking. There is a need for studies that attempt to measure and benchmark upstream, leading or developmental aspects of organizations. Therefore, the aim of this paper is twofold. The first is to conduct an in-depth case analysis of lead performance measurement and benchmarking leading to the further development of a conceptual model derived from the extant literature and initial survey data. The second is to outline future research agendas that could further develop the framework and the subject area.

Design/methodology/approach: A multiple case analysis involving repeated in-depth interviews with managers in organisational areas of upstream influence in the case organisations.

Findings: It was found that the effect of external drivers for lead performance measurement and benchmarking was mediated by organisational context factors such as level of progression in business improvement methods. Moreover, the legitimation of the business improvement methods used for this purpose, although typical, had been extended beyond their original purpose with the development of bespoke sets of lead measures.

Practical implications: Examples of methods and lead measures are given that can be used by organizations in developing a programme of lead performance measurement and benchmarking.

Originality/value: There is a paucity of in-depth studies relating to the theory and practice of lead performance measurement and benchmarking in organisations.

A point prevalence survey of antibiotic prescriptions: benchmarking and patterns of use

center dot Inappropriate antimicrobial use has been associated with increased morbidity and hospital costs.

Voltage Dip Benchmarking in Power Quality and Disturbance Monitoring

This paper examines power quality benchmarks in the electricity supply industry (ESI) and impact of standards for the reduction of voltage dip incidents. The paper considers adherence to particular standards and is supported by several case studies from incidents where voltage dips have been detected and assessed by the power systems division of Scottish Power and where improvements have been implemented to help militate against subsequent incidents.

Differences in cancer awareness and beliefs between Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership):Do they contribute to differences in cancer survival?

Background:There are wide international differences in 1-year cancer survival. The UK and Denmark perform poorly compared with other high-income countries with similar health care systems: Australia, Canada and Sweden have good cancer survival rates, Norway intermediate survival rates. The objective of this study was to examine the pattern of differences in cancer awareness and beliefs across these countries to identify where these might contribute to the pattern of survival.Methods:We carried out a population-based telephone interview survey of 19 079 men and women aged =50 years in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure.Results:Awareness that the risk of cancer increased with age was lower in the UK (14%), Canada (13%) and Australia (16%) but was higher in Denmark (25%), Norway (29%) and Sweden (38%). Symptom awareness was no lower in the UK and Denmark than other countries. Perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation were highest in the UK, in particular being worried about wasting the doctor's time (UK 34%; Canada 21%; Australia 14%; Denmark 12%; Norway 11%; Sweden 9%).Conclusion:The UK had low awareness of age-related risk and the highest perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation, but symptom awareness in the UK did not differ from other countries. Denmark had higher awareness of age-related risk and few perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation. This suggests that other factors must be involved in explaining Denmark's poor survival rates. In the UK, interventions that address barriers to prompt presentation in primary care should be developed and evaluated. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Stage at diagnosis and ovarian cancer survival:Evidence from the international cancer benchmarking partnership

Objective: We investigate what role stage at diagnosis bears in international differences in ovarian cancer survival. Methods: Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, and the UK were analysed for 20,073 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer during 2004-07. We compare the stage distribution between countries and estimate stage-specific one-year net survival and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log cumulative excess hazard scale. Results: One-year survival was 69% in the UK, 72% in Denmark and 74-75% elsewhere. In Denmark, 74% of patients were diagnosed with FIGO stages III-IV disease, compared to 60-70% elsewhere. International differences in survival were evident at each stage of disease; women in the UK had lower survival than in the other four countries for patients with FIGO stages III-IV disease (61.4% vs. 65.8-74.4%). International differences were widest for older women and for those with advanced stage or with no stage data. Conclusion: Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international variation in ovarian cancer survival, and a more adverse stage distribution contributes to comparatively low survival in Denmark. This could arise because of differences in tumour biology, staging procedures or diagnostic delay. Differences in survival also exist within each stage, as illustrated by lower survival for advanced disease in the UK, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment. Population-based data on cancer survival by stage are vital for cancer surveillance, and global consensus is needed to make stage data in cancer registries more consistent. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.