To read this content please select one of the options below:

WHY MEASUREMENT INITIATIVES FAIL

Andy Neely (Andy Neely is Director of the Centre for Business Performance and Professor of Operations Strategy and Performance at Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield, UK. He chaired the first and second international academic conferences on performance measurement, in July 1998 and July 2000 respectively and has authored over 100 books and articles on the subject, including Measuring Business Performance, which was published by The Economist.)
Mike Bourne (Mike Bourne is a Lecturer within the Centre for Business Performance, Cranfield School of Management. He is co‐author of the book Understanding the Balanced Scorecard in a Week and editor of the forthcoming Handbook of Performance Measurement being published by Gee.)

Measuring Business Excellence

ISSN: 1368-3047

Article publication date: 1 December 2000

7209

Abstract

Noting the claim that 70 per cent of balanced scorecard implementations fail, sets out to explore the two main reasons for the failure of measurement systems – namely poor design and difficulty of implementation. Considers the measurement revolution over the past 20 years noting developments such as the early budgetary control measures in DuPont and General Motors during the early 1990s. Looks at the appropriate design of measurement systems and suggests that companies should start with a “success map” – a cause and affect diagram which shows how the company operates. Points to three causes of implementation failure – political, infrastructural and focus and details of each of these. Suggests that the challenge for the twenty‐first century is how to extract maximum value from our performance measurement data.

Keywords

Citation

Neely, A. and Bourne, M. (2000), "WHY MEASUREMENT INITIATIVES FAIL", Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040010362283

Publisher

:

MCB UP Ltd

Copyright © 2000, MCB UP Limited

Related articles