Use of key performance indicators for PPP transport projects to meet stakeholders’ performance objectives

Abstract

Purpose

The need for more efficient and effective public-private partnership (PPP) projects makes performance management of increasing importance, especially with respect to stakeholder expectations. This paper seeks to examine the use of key performances indicators (KPI) based on the analysis of critical success factors (CSF) for monitoring of PPP transport projects from the perspective of different stakeholders.

Design/methodology/approach

The list of stakeholders’ performance objectives including CSF was defined using the brainstorming technique applied to group of experts in PPP transport sectors and refined through literature review. Input of the expert group was validated against a feedback from a respective survey. Three main groups of stakeholders were identified: public sector, private sector, and users. Finally, the review and comparative analysis of existing KPIs in PPP transport projects was performed based on stakeholders’ objectives and project attributes using the “frequency of mention” approach.

Findings

The paper introduced a two layers approach for the assessment of PPP projects. The first stage was based on evaluation of project ultimate objectives from the standpoint of each stakeholder, i.e. profitability for private sector, effectiveness and value for money for public sector, and level of service for users. An adjusted and weighted combination of fulfillment of the specific stakeholder objectives leads to an overall approach (second layer) of describing a PPPs success or failure.

Originality/value

The paper presents the comprehensive review of literature on transport PPP projects and evaluation of available CSFs and KPIs.

Citation

Mladenovic, G., Vajdic, N., Wündsch, B. and Temeljotov-Salaj, A. (2013), "Use of key performance indicators for PPP transport projects to meet stakeholders’ performance objectives", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 228-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-05-2012-0026