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.

Accountability and Value for Money in Private Finance Initiative Contracts

Within the context of New Public Management (NPM), successive UK governments have claimed that PFI projects provide more accountability, and arguably, more value for money (VFM) than conventional procurement for the public (HM Treasury 1995, 2000, 2003a and 2003b). However, recent empirical research in the UK on PFI has indicated its potential limitations for accountability and VFM (Broadbent, Gill and Laughlin, 2004; Edwards, Shaoul, Stafford and Arblaster, 2004; Shaoul, 2005; and Ismail and Pendlebury, 2006) albeit these are based on either published accounts or a limited number of key stakeholders. This paper attempts to partially redress this gap in the literature by presenting an interesting case of the impact of PFI on accountability and VFM in Northern Ireland's education sector. The findings of this research, based on forty two interviews with a wide range of key stakeholders, suggest that stakeholders have different and often conflicting expectations and the actual PFI accountability and VFM benefits are much more obfuscated than those claimed in Government publications.