Search results

A measuring system for automatic process parameter acquisition in garment sewing operations has been presented. The measuring equipment is based upon the usage of a very powerful portable notebook IBM compatible personal computer, equipped with an AD converter, measuring instruments and adequate software packages for data storing and analysis. Characteristics of measuring instruments and sensors have also been given, together with measuring process description, all connected with two independent video‐camera systems, working in two planes, used for working operation analysis at workplaces in garment sewing operations.

The thesis of this book is that library measurement needs to move on and away from the idea that it is a process of counting and comparing the resources deployed by our libraries. The current emphasis on output measurement is an improvement but not the answer, refreshing as it is to judge a library by the quantity of what comes out instead of by the quantity of what is put in. The author believes that the nature of the library service is that of a “broad aim” social programme, best judged (evaluated) by gathering “politically significant information on the consequences of political acts”. “Political” here implies that the aims and intentions of those funding, organising and using libraries arise from more than one set of social values and from more than one definition of what the library is, and that they differ in priorities even when they do not directly conflict. Information about the library service will be in the form of a spectrum of measures reflecting the inputs, the processes, the outputs and the impact of the library, relating the various values in various ways. The difficulty in measuring library services, it is argued here, arises from the conflicts and lack of clarity about the aims of the service, and from uncertainty about how the process affects the outcomes. The technical problems of measurement are secondary. Chapter One aims to survey the range of measures available, whilst the rest of the book discusses how they might be used.

The purpose of this paper is to seek effective measurement methods that reflect the real value of process capital.

From a system model perspective, the authors refined the existing knowledge of process measurement by distinguishing three kinds of indicator for the value of process capital: input, output, and the capability to manage process capital. The design of this study, therefore, incorporates a longitudinal analysis of the content of process capital and traces its evolution by attaching a monetary value to activities and assets.

The tested results reveal that the input measure is a less effective measure for process capital, while the output measure is a valid one for measuring operational and managerial performance of process capital. The capability to manage process capital can predict all dimensions of process capital in both the short‐ and long‐term periods.

A practical view of process capital enhances the current understanding of process capital by highlighting the sustainability of process value and the validity of measuring output and management capability of the process capital. Second, the study results also explain the productivity paradox because of the complexity of the hidden cost of process input and the distinctive capability of organizations in managing technology and complementary resources. Finally, the system view of process capital, from input through process to output of the process capital, with operationalized measures, provides a useful reference for examining intellectual capital.

The findings offer a more robust definition of process capital as a firm's established capability to exploit the knowledge of business processes and organize resources in designing and managing business activities for sustained value.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework for measuring the S&OP process performance.

The method used is a multiple case study of five companies from different industries based on data from 12 structured interviews.

The main result is a framework to measure the S&OP process. It includes concrete suggestions for organizations when developing measures to increase effectiveness and efficiency of the process. It will also help organizations to standardize measures and to enhance organizational transparency. Our results include measures for every step of the process as well as for the outcome of the process. The authors highlight the importance of cross-functional measures along with measures that focus on how to conduct the process. The framework is founded on a set of criteria on appropriate measures such as comprehensiveness, internal process efficiency, horizontal and vertical integration, internal comparability, and usefulness. The study contributes to performance measurement literature and the S&OP literature.

Validation of the framework is desirable in similar as well as other contexts. Implementation challenges should also be investigated.

The framework provides guidelines in order to measure, analyze and improve the effectiveness and the efficiency of the process.

This is the first framework for measuring the S&OP process that includes detailed measures for each step of the process, for the outcome of the process as well as how to conduct the process itself.

In this paper, a two‐section method for measuring is introduced and the variation soruces of measurement process are analysed. Measuring is a special process. Various variation source must be firstly decomposed so that the statistical distribution law of measuring process can be established, and then implement monitoring control of the measuring process. A special method to obtain the m easuring variation is discussed, and a monitoring control technique for measuring process is studied based statistical distribution. Towards the end, we briefly introduce software design for the analysis and control of a measurement process.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the fundamentals of a performance measurement system (PMS), in order to ascertain if they satisfy the measurement requirements of business process management (BPM) by means of a systematic review of the literature.

The paper uses meta‐analysis to systematically review and examine existing BPM and PMS from the business, non‐business and public sectors. A specific methodology using categorization concept was used to select the appropriate articles. In total, 42 relevant articles are selected and later analyzed. A subsequent content analysis of the information obtained is applied to identify the gaps in the current literature.

The growing interest in PMS has produced an extraordinarily large numbers of papers on the topic. This paper found that, by and large, the PMS as advocated by various authors for over 20 years (since 1990) failed to fulfill the measurement requirements of BPM. This is alarming, considering that past critics of PMS have indicated that the weaknesses of PMS in relation to BPM applied only in isolated or specific situations such as information technology (IT). These findings dispel the notion that a PMS is a prerequisite to the introduction of an effective BP in organizations.

This paper has identified the gaps (weaknesses) of current PMS in meeting the measurement requirements of BPM. This paper proposes a theoretical integrated framework which encompasses a management system, that combines with a measurement system and business processes, and which can be implemented using the popular value‐chain methodology to measure and compare performance within BP organizations.

The results presented contribute towards providing an updated overview of the current state of research into PMS and its relevance to BPM, in order to identify existing research gaps, issues and concerns upon which ongoing and future research efforts on this topic can be built.

The purpose of this paper is to present a business process measurement framework for the evaluation of a corpus of business processes modelled in different business process modelling approaches. The results of the application of the proposed measurement framework will serve as a basis for choosing business process modelling approaches.

The approach uses ideas of the goal question metric framework to define metrics for measuring a business process where the metrics answer the questions to achieve the goal. The weighted sum method (WSM) is used to aggregate the measure of attributes of a business process to derive an aggregate measure, and business process modelling approaches are compared based on the evaluation of business process models created in different business process modelling approaches using the aggregate measure.

The proposed measurement framework was applied to a corpus of business process models in different business process modelling approaches and is showed that insight is gained into the effect of business process modelling approach on the maintainability of a business process model. From the results, business process modelling approaches which imbibed the principle of separation of concerns of models, make use of reference or base model for a family of business process variants and promote the reuse of model elements performed highest when their models are evaluated with the proposed measurement framework. The results showed that the applications of the proposed framework proved to be useful for the selection of business process modelling approaches.

The novelty of this work is in the application of WSM to integrate metric of business process models and the evaluation of a corpus of business process models created in different business process modelling approaches using the aggregate measure.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of research and development in the measurement of maintenance performance. It considers the problems of various measuring parameters and comments on the lack of structure in and references for the measurement of maintenance performance. The main focus is to determine how value can be created for organizations by measuring maintenance performance, examining such maintenance strategies as condition‐based maintenance, reliability‐centred maintenance, e‐maintenance, etc. In other words, the objectives are to find frameworks or models that can be used to evaluate different maintenance strategies and determine the value of these frameworks for an organization.

A state‐of‐the‐art literature review has been carried out to answer the following two research questions. First, what approaches and techniques are used for maintenance performance measurement (MPM) and which MPM techniques are optimal for evaluating maintenance strategies? Second, in general, how can MPM create value for organizations and, more specifically, which system of measurement is best for which maintenance strategy?

The body of knowledge on maintenance performance is both quantitatively and qualitatively based. Quantitative approaches include economic and technical ratios, value‐based and balanced scorecards, system audits, composite formulations, and statistical and partial maintenance productivity indices. Qualitative approaches include human factors, amongst other aspects. Qualitatively based approaches are adopted because of the inherent limitations of effectively measuring a complex function such as maintenance through quantitative models. Maintenance decision makers often come to the best conclusion using heuristics, backed up by qualitative assessment, supported by quantitative measures. Both maintenance performance perspectives are included in this overview.

A comprehensive review of maintenance performance metrics is offered, aiming to give, in a condensed form, an extensive introduction to MPM and a presentation of the state of the art in this field.

The essential investments in new product development (NPD) made by industrial companies entail effective management of NPD activities. In this context, performance measurement is one of the means that can be employed in the pursuit of effectiveness.