Search results

This paper demonstrates a multi-criteria analytic hierarchy process (AHP) framework for evaluating and benchmarking maintenance performance in the select agro-based industry.

Initially, 20 maintenance practices (criteria) have been identified after a detailed literature review and discussion with the agro-based industry (sugar, textile and dairy industry) executives. These are then grouped into six maintenance management areas referred to as group criteria. The multi-criteria methodology consists of three steps: criteria identification, hierarchical modeling and data collection and maintenance performance evaluation, and benchmarking. The multi-criteria methodology proposed in this work facilitates two ways of carrying out benchmarking: (1) within the agro-based industry and (2) between the agro-based industry. The methodology has been explained by taking a case example of 45 agro-based industries (18 dairy, 13 sugar and 14 textile) from the western region of India. The sensitivity analysis of the model has been performed to ascertain the robustness of the results.

There is a difference in the maintenance performance across the agro-based industries due to different maintenance practices perceived differently.

The outcome of the model is mainly given by the judgments of the agro-based industry executives. It is also sensitive to any change in the relative importance to the evaluation criteria or the perception about the maintenance performance.

The study contributes in identifying the weakness, if any, by comparing the agro-based industry under investigation with the benchmark factory at three levels, namely, overall performance (factory level), group criteria (maintenance management area level) and criteria (maintenance practice level) allowing further improvement.

The methodology assists in better decision-making and in improving maintenance performance.

The purpose of this paper is to generate awareness of contributions made by benchmarking toward building performance of Indian service industries in globally market. Ranking of Benchmarking is done on the basis of their application which give confidence for the managers to adopt in their Industries so that they may become best in their field.

Methodology consists of three phase: define, phase include definitions, factors of benchmarking as literature outcomes, questionnaire survey and outcome of survey. In the second phase, analysis of collected data and applications of multi-criteria decision-making approaches [technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) and analytical network process (ANP)] are used. The last phase includes comparison of results which gives validation in similarities of ranking obtained.

The study identifies seven different benchmarking techniques used for service industries. Using TOPSIS and ANP approaches shows similarity that external benchmarking, performance benchmarking and internal benchmarking are the first three ranks that give basis for several critical success factors s, namely, planning, reliability, standardization, time behavior, usability, etc., as part of benchmarking using in service industries.

The limitation is the assumptions made by multi-criteria decision-making approaches which may effect the analysis of the study as these are taken theoretically.

This study is a first attempt to find similarities in both techniques while comparing benchmarking in Indian service industries.

This paper aims to present existence comprehensive analysis of state of implementation of benchmarking concepts in Indian automotive companies.

The research is carried out through a mixed method of research approach comprising of a survey of 300 auto companies in India. Out of 300, 48 valid responses together with three additional case studies were used in the data analysis. Inclusion of case studies was aspired to get deeper insight into the issues pertaining to adoption of best practices, and subsequently the implementation of benchmarking activities.

Benchmarking has been unanimously accepted as an effective performance and productivity improvement tool by Indian auto companies. However, Indian automobile manufacturers still see benchmarking as a tool to compare product attributes, quality attributes, operations, and processes. Moreover, it has been perceived as being less applicable at strategic level. Results also show that benchmarking is in its primary stage in the Indian automotive industry, and it still needs much more commitment from top management for its proliferation. Lesser significance is given to competitor benchmarking due to the fear of losing competitive advantage, and the problem of confidentiality. Reasons identified in this study for not using benchmarking include “lack of human resources” as most important, followed by “financial constraints”, and “lack of internal expertise”.

Research results should be generalized and reproduced with a larger sample size. Owing to the scarce application of benchmarking in small and medium enterprises (SMEs), separate study should be carried out to find ways to encourage benchmarking implementation in Indian auto component manufacturing SMEs.

The paper provides insight into the extent of implementation of benchmarking concepts in Indian automobile industry. This study is the first attempt to understand propagation of benchmarking concepts, exclusively among Indian auto companies.

The paper aims to develop a benchmarking framework to address issues such as supply chain complexity and visibility, geographical differences and non-standardized data, ensuring that the entire supply chain environmental impact (in terms of carbon) and resource use for all tiers, including domestic and import flows, are evaluated. Benchmarking has become an important issue in supply chain management practice. However, challenges such as supply chain complexity and visibility, geographical differences and non-standardized data have limited the development of approaches for evaluating performances of product supply chains. This industry-level benchmarking approach ensures that individual firms can compare their carbon emissions against other similarly structured firms.

Benchmarking has become an important issue in supply chain management practice. However, challenges such as supply chain complexity and visibility, geographical differences and non-standardized data have limited the development of approaches for evaluating performances of product supply chains. The paper aims to develop a benchmarking framework to address these issues, ensuring that the entire supply chain environmental impact (in terms of carbon) and resource use for all tiers, including domestic and import flows, are evaluated. This industry-level benchmarking approach ensures that individual firms can compare their carbon emissions against other similarly structured firms.

Supply chain carbon maps are developed as a means of producing industry-level benchmarks to set a measure for the environmental sustainability of product supply chains. The industry-level benchmark provides the first step for firms to manage the environmental performance, identify and target high carbon emission hot-spots and for cross-sectorial benchmarking.

The paper links the theoretical development of supply chain environmental system based on the Multi-Regional Input–Output model to the innovative development of supply chain carbon maps, such that an industry-level benchmarking framework is produced as a means of setting product supply chain carbon emissions benchmarks.

This paper aims to provide a framework for benchmarking the eTourism capability of a destination’s tourism industry, understanding the eTourism capability of a destination’s industry as the contribution that the information and communication technologies (ICT) uptake of that industry makes to its own performance. The impact of ICT in tourism has been suggested through extensive research. Previous work has urged the development of wide-angle studies to enable benchmarking of destinations and their industries. However, relevant research is limited. Macro-level studies in the area tend to focus on a single aspect of technology to evaluate adoption, are not sector-specific nor take into consideration the different levels of contribution that systems may bring to performance.

A review of the literature on tourism, eTourism, benchmarking and technology adoption provided the baseline for developing this benchmarking tool.

The literature supported the selection of key tourism industry sectors, i.e. accommodation establishments, visitor attractions and food and beverage; the most suitable methodology, i.e. intermediary performance measures; and the business characteristics that need being taken into consideration when assessing ICT adoption by tourism businesses, e.g. size, type of establishment and area of location.

The framework has not been tested yet. It is based on a review of the literature and needs to be validated through primary research. The framework was developed based on the context of Scotland. Further work should be done to adjust the framework to other destinations worldwide.

The framework enables destinations to benchmark the eTourism capability of their industries.

It provides a comprehensive framework for benchmarking tourism destinations’ industries, which takes into consideration elements of technology adoption, the characteristics of the tourism industry and the particularities of the different ICT elements.

Benchmarking is more than giving marks. It is a way of measuring a firm’s strategies and performance against "best‐in‐class” firms, both inside and outside the industry. The aim is to identify best practices that can be adopted and implemented by the organization with the purpose of improving a company’s performance. The process of benchmarking is divided into seven phases: which functions to benchmark; importance of each subject area; whom to benchmark against; gather the benchmarking information; identify performance gaps; how to learn from the “best‐in‐class” (benchlearning); and implementation of the changes (benchaction). Benchmarking, benchlearning and benchaction is not a one‐time project. It is a continuous improvement strategy and a change management process. Thus benchmarking is a part of the total quality management (TQM) system, and it relates well to other TQM initiatives.

To examine how the construction of benchmarks influences the discourse of national productivity, and hence shed light on the competitive‐interdependent relationship between global capital and domestic labour.

A study of a government inquiry into the Australian automotive industry (in 1996) is used to argue that the formulation of socially conscionable public policy is made more difficult by the international legitimisation of benchmarks.

The inclusion of structural factors will mitigate the power of accounting discourse to normalise behaviour because it gives rise to glaring discrepancies between shared experiences and accounting's inscribed reality. The inscribed reality is distorted by the decontextualised nature of benchmarks. Further, the global legitimisation of benchmarks makes it more difficult for the state to disregard their influence.

Combines, compares and re‐evaluates earlier literature and studies. Leaves the door open for the practice of benchmarking to emphasise a process of establishing sustainable local goals, rather than a means of institutionalising a dominant mode of production across the globe.

States that the benefits of benchmarking are still largely unrecognized in the construction industry, despite the fact that the best practice concept has been indirectly investigated by both practitioners and researchers. Notes that some confusion seems to exist in construction circles as to what exactly benchmarking is and what it can achieve to improve productivity. Addresses the benchmarking concept and its application to construction and presents a three‐level internal, project and external framework for benchmarking current practice. The three levels are examined in detail, with an illustration of the need to adapt to improve construction productivity. Uses a generic definition of benchmarking throughout to ensure applicability to the different and many aspects of the construction process.

The purpose of this paper is to review general applications of the ISO14001 certification process and show how limitations such as ensuring minimum environmental performance standard, public access to performance information, and peer benchmarking may be overcome by voluntary commitment to attainable standards by association of specific industries.

A replicable environmental performance (weighted) index was developed by the authors. Secondary data obtained from five (public and private) steel mills provided technical data under voluntary compliance standards. Primary data on non‐technical items of performance index were collected. The index was tested to demonstrate peer benchmarking process.

ISO 14001 certification cannot serve as an end in itself for industries as peer companies under voluntary compliance may exceed environmental performance. Minimum acceptable environmental standards could be enforced through industry‐wide consensus. Public access to performance indicators can be ensured under a voluntary mandate; peer benchmarking may allow for competitive goal setting. The model proposed could be gainfully replicated particularly in developing countries.

The weighted index used in the paper could be further expanded to include additional non‐technical items such as occupational employee health and R&D expenditure of plants on environmental management system.

Peer benchmarking should allow for competitive goal setting for continuous improvement. The weighted index could be replicated for other industries in India. This index with minor adjustment, if needed, could be used in other countries and by industries already certified by ISO 14001 standards for peer benchmarking toward continuous improvement.

The weighted index is the original contribution. It is likely to make definitive contribution to the literature of environmental performance measurement. It also makes a contribution to the benchmarking literature in general and to peer benchmarking in particular. The paper not only shows the limitation of ISO 14001 standards but demonstrates how to overcome the limitations toward the competitive goal setting and continuous improvement of performance by the benchmarked industries.

Benchmarking against industry averages or high performance organizations can be useful for most companies to improve products and processes, including strategic planning, forecasting marketing trends, and internal operation. Company innovation is also widely recognized as a critical process for company survival and growth. As business globalization and competition increase, company innovativeness has become essential for success. Analyses company innovativeness from a practical perspective, in terms of the activities and mechanisms necessary for companies to seek, evaluate, implement and foster the development of new ideas. The results provide strong empirical evidence that company innovation is a major determinant of company business performance. Because most benchmarking schemes are industry‐specific, focuses on the manufacturing industry. Provides a first attempt at developing an industry‐wide average for company innovativeness which business managers can use to gauge their company’s performance along the various activities required to innovate. Managers can then focus their attention on why their respective organizations vary from the industry averages regarding specific items.