Search results

The importance of benchmarking in the achievement of better results in the purchasing function and in overall business performance has been widely asserted in literature. However, few studies have addressed the implementation of benchmarking in the supply function and its impact on purchasing and business performance. Data was collected from 306 companies and structural equations modeling was used to develop valid and reliable instruments for benchmarking, purchasing performance and business performance. The results showed a significant positive impact of benchmarking on purchasing performance and an indirect positive effect on business performance. Implications of the findings for purchasing managers are also discussed.

Intense competition forces companies to become involved in supply chain collaboration with their upstream and downstream partners. The key to ensuring that the participating members are progressing on the right track of creating the best‐in‐class practice is to conduct benchmarking. Benchmarking stimulates collective learning for performance improvement that brings benefits to all participating members. However, previous research has focused mainly on supply chain benchmarking at the intra‐company ‐‐ rather than the inter‐company ‐‐ level. Inter‐company benchmarking requires a new perspective for understanding collaborative learning amongst the participating members that encourages them to improve supply chain performance as a whole. This research aims to develop a benchmarking scheme for supply chain collaboration that links collaborative performance metrics and collaborative enablers. The proposed benchmarking scheme can be used to examine the current status of supply chain collaboration among the participating members, identify performance gaps and systematize improvement initiatives.

The purpose of this paper is to better understand benefits and problems with different approaches to benchmarking environmental performance in manufacturing.

This paper shares the experience of a research program developing environmental benchmarking measures for the automobile industry.

In this paper, we categorize these options into four general categories: regulatory, gross emissions, efficiency, and life cycle. We found that firms emphasized different approaches to benchmarking depending upon regulatory context and company strategy. Product type, corporate and national culture, resource costs, stakeholder demands also all played a role in influencing their preferred benchmarking approach. Overall, the most robust environmental programs will incorporate elements of all four approaches.

The primary limitation of this study is that it draws its data from only one industry. Another limitation of this paper is that it is focused primarily on performance benchmarking. Additional research needs to be done to understand the factors that influence a firm's choice of benchmarking metrics, the relationship between the different aspects of environmental performance benchmarking, and the relationship between performance and managerial benchmarking.

Firms must supplement strong environmental management systems with their benchmarking strategy. Using all four provides a more balanced benchmarking effort, and minimizes limitation that single measure of environmental performance present.

For manufacturing firms, this paper offers a framework to think about the costs and benefits of a range of environmental benchmarking strategies. For researchers, it outlines a number of areas for future research.

Benchmarking is increasingly considered a useful management instrument to improve performance in healthcare. The purpose of this paper is to assess if a nationwide long-term benchmarking collaborative between operating room (OR) departments of university medical centres in the Netherlands leads to benefits in OR management and to evaluate if the initiative meets the requirements of the 4P-model.

The evaluation was based on the 4P-model (purposes, performance indicators, participating organisations, performance management system), developed in former studies. A mixed-methods design was applied, consisting of document study, observations, interviews as well as analysing OR performance data using SPSS statistics.

Collaborative benchmarking has benefits different from mainly performance improvement and identification of performance gaps. It is interesting that, since 2004, the OR benchmarking initiative still endures after already existing for ten years. A key benefit was pointed out by all respondents as “the purpose of networking”, on top of the purposes recognised in the 4P-model. The networking events were found to make it easier for participants to contact and also visit one another. Apparently, such informal contacts were helpful in spreading knowledge, sharing policy documents and initiating improvement. This benchmark largely met all key conditions of the 4P-model.

The current study has the limitations accompanied with any qualitative research and particularly related to interviewing. Qualitative research findings must be viewed within the context of the conducted case study. The experiences in this university hospital context in the Netherlands might not be transferable to other (general) hospital settings or other countries. The number of conducted interviews is restricted; nevertheless, all other data sources are extensive.

A collaborative approach in benchmarking can be effective because participants use its knowledge-sharing infrastructure which enables operational, tactical and strategic learning. Organisational learning is to the advantage of overall OR management. Benchmarking seems a useful instrument in enabling hospitals to learn from each other, to initiate performance improvements and catalyse knowledge-sharing.

Examines the practical experience of benchmarking in the UK local government sector during the period leading to the introduction of an important policy initiative for local government under “New Labour”. Argues that, under conditions of fiscal control, benchmarking has been subsumed under the wider practice of performance measurement in the sector. A critical factor is the primacy of the role of performance monitoring in local government, which in turn results from the controlling nature (in fiscal and political terms) of UK central government. The corollary is a conflation of two distinct views of benchmarking: benchmarking as a rigorous and challenging scrutiny of local government processes; and benchmarking as an instrument of central government control. Such a state of affairs would appear to offer a number of advantages to those policy makers whose blueprint for the reform of local government encourages the use of benchmarking across the sector.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the applicability of current benchmarking proposals for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to suggest a condensed process for logistics benchmarking in SMEs.

The paper starts by outlining why the logistics function is of increasing importance for SMEs. It discusses the benefit of logistics benchmarking and typical SME restrictions in benchmarking. Available approaches to benchmarking are discussed and their weaknesses when applied to SME logistics benchmarking are analyzed. The paper develops a new benchmarking process framework for SME logistics benchmarking and reports findings of a case application in three German SMEs.

The paper suggests a conceptual framework for logistics benchmarking in SMEs. The framework was tested in three German case companies. Results suggest that the suggested process together with the employed benchmarking tools and templates provide valuable support for SMEs in a logistics benchmarking project.

The conceptual framework developed has been tested in selected case companies only. Possible adaptations to specific industry needs or cultural differences need to be integrated.

The process framework developed provides practical guidance for SMEs that want to embark on a logistics benchmarking exercise.

The paper outlines weaknesses of current SME benchmarking approaches and provides practical support by outlining an adapted process together with specific implementation tools.

This paper succinctly critiques the benchmarking literature and the performance measurement literature in regards to the novel concept of lead benchmarking as a possible means of achieving increased radical and innovative transformation in organizations. For the purposes of the paper, a working definition of lead benchmarking and performance measurement is: benchmarking and performance measurement, which focuses on analysing forward looking, predictive and future performance comparisons. This critique distinctly highlights that the currency of benchmarking and performance measurement needs a radical and indeed innovative transformation to adhere to the dynamics of the business environment. This critique raises various questions of interest. These issues will be investigated later through further research by conducting rich empirical research, whereby descriptions and explanations will be developed of the what, where, who, how and why of the benchmarking concept and the extent to which organizations carry out lead benchmarking

Describes the aims, reasons for development, key features, and uniqueness of an online benchmarking and performance improvement resource. The paper begins by describing the historical context within which the Web site has been developed. It describes the growth in the use of business excellence, benchmarking and performance measurement, and how these improvement approaches are related to each other. The Web site’s uniqueness stems from how information within the resource is categorised by the Malcolm Baldrige Model and the European Business Excellence Model, the collection and linking of thousands of snippets of information from case studies and articles relating to best practices and benchmarking studies, the provision of a comprehensive list of performance measures and improvement techniques, and the way that the site has been designed based on the concept of benchmarking. An explanation of how the resource might be used to support an organisation’s benchmarking process is provided. The paper concludes by presenting the positive feedback obtained from an industry review of the Web site’s key features. The Web site aims to be launched by October 2001.

This aim of this paper is to explore the understanding and use of lead benchmarking and performance measurement as a possible means of achieving increased organisational change.

An empirical research methodology is used to survey 800 UK organisations, with 157 responses, in relation to their approach to lead benchmarking and performance measurement. A working definition of lead benchmarking and performance measurement is developed within the paper.

The findings indicate that new lead, forward looking, predictive benchmarks will need to be developed to support lead benchmarking and performance measurement activities. Furthermore, it was found that currently larger organisations are more likely to adopt these practices, with considerable variation across organisational sectors.

Focuses on ensuring that benchmarking and performance measurement remain at the leading edge of organisational change rather than becoming adhoc business improvement initiatives.

In this article it is contended that methodological issues implicit in benchmarking studies have to be clearly appreciated by management in assessing the reliability of performance gaps and the identification of sound practices that can be successfully adopted by other firms. There is no doubt that organisational design aspects of the benchmarking process are crucial to the success of the project. However, there are at least four methodological issues, extremely critical to the success of benchmarking projects, that have not yet been adequately analysed. These four methodological issues are: how to define the performance measures; how to achieve comparability of performances; how to identify best practices; how to evaluate the transferability of best practices. Strategies are developed to address these benchmarking issues. Then, these strategies are summarised in the components of a benchmarking model linking performances and best practices.