Innovation assessment as a management information tool: a case study

Abstract

The assessment of managerial action can be viewed as an information tool for the improvement of management decision‐making processes. Such an assessment might serve to improve both the managerial actions directly assessed and other related organizational aspects. This research focuses on what we can call a “specific assessment”, as opposed to a more permanent assessment which is normally facilitated by traditional information systems. From a learning perspective, it is the generation of second‐order learning on management systems that is being considered here. In terms of information flows, we are talking about the creation of information in order to improve management action, and eventually contribute to the excellence of management. The accounting system has been the privileged source of information but how well does this tool address managerial action? How well does this tool address innovation and learning dimensions? A review of the literature shows that the answers to those questions can be disappointing. What is more, the advances brought about by the quality initiatives do not seem yet to greatly improve those aspects. During the last eight years we have been engaged in a broad action‐research program in a large pharmaceutical multinational company. From this rich experience we pick one of the main axes of transformation: a case of multiple process reengineering. An assessment of this organizational innovation allows us to study the questions stated above. We start with a presentation of the particular context of the company. We identify then descriptive and explicative contextual variables concerning success factors and limits of the managerial actions studied. Finally, we present expected results, and other parallel impacts not initially expected.

Citation

Bartoli, A., Hermel, P. and Ramis‐Pujol, J. (2003), "Innovation assessment as a management information tool: a case study", Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040310477959