The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.

htm

BIJ 17,2

Performance management in service operational settings: a selective literature examination

214

Carlos F. Gomes
School of Economics, University of Coimbra, ISR-Institute of Systems and Robotics, Coimbra, Portugal
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to examine, the specic literature related to performance measurement in the service sector. In the process, it also aims to classify and examine innovative approaches and models utilized to measure performance in service operational settings. Based on this investigation, the paper seeks to identify relevant benchmarking implications. Design/methodology/approach A database of 141 peer-reviewed publications, published between 1981 and early 2008, was utilized for the purpose of this paper. The published works included contributions from both practioners and scholars. Findings The International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management is found to be the leading journal in terms of contributions to performance measurement in service operational settings. It contributed 25 articles. The bulk of published work appeared in international journals. These contributions were mixed in nature. They included empirical, conceptual, case studies, literatures reviews and interviews. The focus of the articles examined was also mixed. These articles tended to emphasis operational, customer, strategic, supplier, and environmental aspects of service. Research limitations/implications Based on the ndings of this paper, it is concluded that this area of research is in need of more future efforts aimed at solidifying theoretical constructs and practical applications. Practical implications Findings derived from this investigation have relevant benchmarking implications. In this context, understanding the different approaches to performance measurement as utilized in service organizations is critical to the efforts of these organizations performance improvement efforts. Originality/value Understanding the types and scopes of the different approaches and models utilized to measure performance in service operational settings is important in light of the growing signicance of the service sector. Keywords Performance measures, Service industries, Performance management, Literature Paper type Research paper

Benchmarking: An International Journal Vol. 17 No. 2, 2010 pp. 214-231 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1463-5771 DOI 10.1108/14635771011036311

Introduction Performance measurement is considered an important aspect of management (Pongatichat and Johnston, 2008). This critical organizational process provides the basis for an organization to assess how well it is progressing toward its planned and targeted objectives, helps to identify areas of strengths and weaknesses, and facilitate future initiatives aimed at improving organizational performance (Purbey et al., 2007). In this context, benchmarking is instrumental to the process of organizational

performance improvement (Dawkins et al., 2007; Debnath and Shankar, 2008; Kwon et al., 2008; Goncharuk, 2008). Organizations which fail to make benchmarking as an integral part of their performance management efforts and practices tend to experience lower than expected performance improvements, and higher dissatisfaction and turnover of employees (Longenecker and Fink, 2001). However, the absence of a balanced set of performance measures, which take into account the multi-faceted nature of organizational performance, make it rather difcult for organizations to take the full advantage of systematic benchmarking efforts aimed at improving the different facets of organizational performance. Several authors have explored the nature and design of performance measurement systems (PMSs) in manufacturing operational settings (Cross and Lynch, 1988-1989; Kaplan and Norton, 1992; Neely et al., 1996; Neely et al., 2001; Pun and White, 2005; Shepherd and Gunter, 2006). However, less emphasis has been placed on performance measures and measurement in service operational settings. This is attributed to the difculties associated with the intangibles aspects of different services (Brignall et al., 1991; Doney et al., 2007). Owing to these difculties, service organizations, in the past, tended to resort to performance measures which emphasized the nancial aspects of performance. More recently, however, these organizations began to realize the importance of non-nancial measures, such as measures focusing on service quality (Duggirala et al., 2008; Chau, 2009). In this paper, the literature related to performance measures and measurement in service operational settings is overviewed. For this purpose, key journals are surveyed for articles dealing with innovative performance measurement approaches and models in key service sectors. Specically, articles published between 1981 and early 2008 are analyzed to determine the scope and nature of the performance measurement models and approaches proposed, and/or applied in service operational settings. The research methodology utilized is consistent with the literature (Gomes et al., 2004; Yasin et al., 2006). The next section provides a brief background relevant to the issues under investigation. In method section presents the methodology utilized in this research. The results section presents an overview of the evolution of issues and concerns related to performance measurement. The results section also presents specic results related to key themes, journals, countries, articles, and nally nature of the studies examined. The nal section offers a summary of the ndings and suggestions for performance measurement research in the growing service sector. Background A PMS can be dened as the set of metrics used to quantify both the efciency and effectiveness of actions (Neely et al., 2005). It also can be viewed as a balanced, dynamic system which supports the decision-making process by monitoring, gathering, and analyzing performance-related information (Garengo and Bititci, 2007; Bititci et al., 2000). As such, this system includes a set of performance measures that provides an organization with useful information that helps to plan, manage, control, and effectively perform the activities relevant to the different processes of an organization. Some authors tend to emphasize the managerial and management aspects of performance measurement. In this context, they tend to advocate a performance management, rather than a performance measurement perspective (Greiling, 2006; Dey et al., 2008).

Performance management

215

BIJ 17,2

216

The information managed by the PMS must be accurate, relevant, timely, and accessible. Such informational capabilities and characteristics must be incorporated into the design of the PMS. Furthermore, performance measures must also be carefully designed in order to reect the most important factors inuencing the productivity of the different processes found in the organization (Tangen, 2005). A well-designed PMS is vital for ensuring that an organization delivers cost-effective, high-quality services, which meet and exceed the needs of customers (Moullin, 2004). In this context, performance measures and measurement are viewed as important drivers of increased efciency and improved service delivery quality (Greiling, 2006). Therefore, the PMS and related processes and activities should be an important part of any service organization (Bruijn, 2002). In general, there are several difculties associated with performance measurement efforts. These difculties are more vivid in service operational environments. Healthcare and public services are cases in point (Gomes et al., 2008, 2010). These difculties are attributed, in part, to the diverse interests of the stakeholders involved (Bruijn, 2002; Moullin, 2007). For example, in public sector services, there are many stakeholders. These stockholders have different and, sometimes, conicting agendas and performance expectations (Wisniewski and Olafsson, 2004). These stakeholders tend to have different perspectives on organizational performance. In such operational environments, it is difcult to set targets, and/or to make decisions solely based on measured results, due to the conicting objectives and interests of the stakeholders. Therefore, when implementing a PMS, the conicting views and needs of different nen, 2005; Lawton et al., 2000). stakeholders must, somehow, be reconciled (Metta Therefore, PMSs and related processes must be designed carefully to incorporate the different perspectives on performance. This is critical to the success of the performance management efforts in manufacturing environments (Neely et al., 2001), and service environments as well (Dey et al., 2008). The literature on benchmarking as it relates to performance measurement in service organizations tends to point to common difculties (Vagnoni and Maran, 2008) These difculties appear to be shared by service organizations, regardless of the nature of their services (Narayan et al., 2008). Despite the inherent difculties associated with measuring and benchmarking certain aspects of service performance, service organizations are facing increasing pressure to improve the different aspects of their performance. In the process, these organizations are looking for innovative and systematic approaches and models to enhance their performance improvement efforts. The study at hand surveys the relevant literature in order to shed some light on performance measurement approaches and practices of service organizations. These approaches and practices have practical benchmarking implications to service organizations, as they struggle with performance measurement and management practical concerns. Method For the purpose of this study, several databases and search engines, such as Agricola, Ask web, Emerald, Eric, Google Scholar, Inderscience, ProQuest, Questia, and ScienceDirect, among others, were utilized. The objective of this process was to identify articles which dealt with issues related to performance measurement in service. An emphasis was placed on articles addressing innovative practices, approaches

and models. The literature search generated the titles and abstracts of over 200 articles. In an effort to focus this literature review, the authors judged the relevance of the articles in terms of offering innovative and specic models, applications or approaches relevant to performance measurement in service. This criterion was utilized to narrow the scope of the search, thus to avoid potential duplications. As a result of this selective literature review, 141 relevant articles spanning the time from 1981 to early 2008 were identied. The 1981 start was dictated by the results of the search. The early 1980s saw the beginning of a serious interest in this type of research. The research methodology utilized is consistent with the literature (Gomes et al., 2004; Yasin et al., 2006). Results Overview Historically, PMSs were developed as a mean of monitoring and maintaining organizational control. In a larger context, such systems were utilized to ensure that an organization pursues performance-based strategies aimed at the achievement of overall goals and objectives of the organization (Purbey et al., 2007). In general, the performance measurement orientation and focus went through two stages (Ghalayini and Noble, 1996). The rst stage, extended from the 1880s to the 1980s. This stage was characterized by its cost accounting orientation, emphasis on nancial measures such as prot, returns on investment, and productivity measures. The second stage began in the 1980s. It was a result of the changes that world markets underwent, including the implementation of new manufacturing technologies, and new production management az et al., 2005). This stage was marked by placing more emphasis on philosophies (D non-nancial measures (Johnson and Kaplan, 1987; Santori and Anderson, 1987; Cross and Lynch, 1988-1989; Kaplan and Norton, 1992; Neely et al., 1995). From a managerial perspective, the rst stage was marked by a clear emphasis on organizational efciency and control. On the other hand, the second stage tended to have more emphasis on organizational effectiveness. This shift in the approach to organizational performance, from over emphasizing efciency, to a more balanced performance approach, was consistent with a broader shift from a closed system organizational orientation to a more open system organizational orientation. Under the open system organizational orientation, managers are nding it necessary to balance the multifaceted nature of organizational performance. Thus, managers are paying closer attention to the measurement and benchmarking of performance aspects related to customers, suppliers, and overall organizational effectiveness. The service performance measurement literature spans different types of service organizations. Such service organizations include health care organizations, universities, municipal governments, corporate real estate organizations, police, banks, and hotels, among others (Wilson et al., 2003; Modell, 2003; Ho and Chan, 2002; Brignall and Modell, 2000; van Peursem et al., 1995). The main task of performance measurement and related activities is to support the decision-making process through gathering and analyzing information regarding the accomplishment of performance targets. By measuring and analyzing actual performance, the success/failure to achieve desired performance can be assessed and managed (Rantanen et al., 2007). In this context, performance measurement provides the basis for an organization to assess how well it is progressing towards its predetermined objectives, helps to identify areas of strengths and weaknesses, and decides on future initiatives aimed at improving

Performance management

217

BIJ 17,2

218

organizational performance (Purbey et al., 2007). Thus, it is no surprise that organizations which do not integrate ongoing performance measurement and benchmarking into their management practices and systems tend to experience lower than expected performance improvements, and higher dissatisfaction and turnover of employees (Longenecker and Fink, 2001). In this context, managers are advised to approach performance measurement systematically, thus avoiding costly piece-meal and me-too practices, approaches, and short-term thinking. There are some positive and negative effects for performance measurement. The positive effects of performance measurement include increased transparency, incentives for output, and improved accountability. On the other hand, in some cases, the negative effects may include game playing, increased internal bureaucracy, and decreased motivation and innovativeness (De Bruijn, 2002). In this context, managers should carefully examine their organizational PMS and processes in order to eliminate any potential negative activities and behaviours. Specic results In the 1980s, performance measurement issues and concerns in service operational settings become more relevant in the literature. The result of this study shows that it was not, until 1998 that a crescent and interrupted ow of publications appeared in the examined literature (Figure 1). Therefore, the analysis in this study was focused on the period 1998-2008. Based on the results of the analysis, the International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management was responsible for at least one-third of this number of publications between 2005 and 2008. Thus, signifying a recent interest in this area of research on the part of this journal. The lack of similar interest on the part of other operations and management-related journals is noted. The lack of emphasis by such journals on issues related to innovative performance measurement practices in service operational settings may be attributed to a more emphasizing more manufacturing concerns, and the devotion to other emerging research issues. At the journal level, the International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management was found to be the biggest contributor. It contributed 25 publications.
25 20 Number of articles 15 10 5 0
19 8 19 1 8 19 2 8 19 3 8 19 4 8 19 5 8 19 6 8 19 7 8 19 8 8 19 9 9 19 0 9 19 1 9 19 2 9 19 3 9 19 4 9 19 5 9 19 6 9 19 7 9 19 8 9 20 9 0 20 0 0 20 1 0 20 2 0 20 3 0 20 4 0 20 5 0 20 6 0 20 7 08

Figure 1. Articles published in service sector by year (1981-2008)

Managing Service Quality, and International Journal of Public Sector Management held second place, with eight publications each. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management followed with seven publications. Performance Measurement and Metric, and International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance followed, with six publications each. Managerial Finance and Managerial Auditing contributed ve articles each. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, and Facilities Journal contributed four publications each. Together, these ten journals accounted for 55 percent of the articles published. Traditionally, these journals tended to cover service operations-related issues. Figure 2 shows a breakdown of performance measurement articles by rst author. Between 1998 and 2001, the USA and the UK-based authors were responsible for the biggest share of performance measurement service-related articles (60 percent). After 2001, the number of authors from other organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) member countries and non-OECD was on the increase, except for 2004. In sum, the USA and the UK-based researchers contributed the bulk of performance measurement in service research between 1998 and 2001. After 2001, researchers based on other OECD countries took the lead in this research area. Perhaps, signifying increased attention to performance in service. Figure 3 shows a breakdown of performance measurement-related publication by focus. Five different focus areas were detected. The rst focus was the operational, which included efciency, quality, exibility, and reliability. The second focus was the customer-related, which included customer satisfaction, service, and responsiveness. The third focus was the strategic, which included market share, competitive position, and organizational effectiveness. The fourth focus was the supplier-related, which included supplier relationships, material availability, material quality, and certication. The fth focus was the environmental-related, which included standards, governmental regulations, and safety standards. This area has strong managerial implications, as todays managers are struggling to ensure that their practices meet and exceed governmental regulations and standards requirements. Based on Figure 3, the operational focus received thirty percent of the contributions between 1998 and 2008.

Performance management

219

USA 100 90 80 70 Percentage 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998 1999 2000 2001

UK

Other-OECD

Non-OECD

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Figure 2. Articles published in service sector by rst author country (1998-2008)

BIJ 17,2

Operational 100 90 80 70 Percentage

Customer

Strategic

Supplier

Environmental

220

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 3. Articles published in service sector by focus of the article (1998-2008)

This is despite no receiving contributions in the year 2000 and 2008. In the same time period, there were also 27 percent of the contributions to the customer focus, with the exception of 2007 and 2008. In addition, the strategic focus received 36 percent of the contributions in all the years between 1998 and 2008, with the exception of 1998. Overall, the environmental, and supplier focus areas received the least attention. Therefore, environmental and supplier-related performance aspects represent opportunities for research as they are important, however they did not received considerable research. Despite their growing importance, these two areas appear to be under researched. More applied research in these two areas may prove to be helpful to practicing managers, as they attempt to understand the dynamic and complex relationships between their organizations and the different components of the operational environment. Figure 4 shows a breakdown of performance measurement publications by nature of the study. Five different categories were identied. They included empirical,

Empirical 100 90 80 70 Percentage 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998 1999

Conceptual

Case study

Literature reviews

Other/interviews

Figure 4. Articles published in service sector by nature of the study (1998-2008)

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

conceptual, case study or eld study, literature review, and interview-based studies. The case study methodology took the lead with 31 percent of the contributions, followed by conceptual papers with 28 percent, and empirical studies with 22 percent. Therefore, both conceptual and empirical efforts are needed to advance the science and practice of performance measurement in service operational settings. Concluding remarks This study examined a selective performance measurement literature in service operational settings. An emphasis was placed on articles which dealt with innovative and systematic performance measurement practices, approaches, or models. A total of 141 articles were examined and analyzed for the purpose of this study. Based on this literature review the following conclusions and implications are offered. First, a signicant portion of articles dealing with performance measurement in service appeared in few journals. Perhaps, this signies the limited coverage of this important research area in favor of manufacturing studies. The recent growth in the service sector justies more research in this area in order to offer service organizations better approaches to the management of their performance. Research capitalizing on the benchmarking implications and lessons learned based on the manufacturing experience may prove to be helpful to service organizations as they struggle with service performance challenge and concerns. Second, the published works appear to emphasis mainly operational and, to some extent, some strategic performance concerns. Environmental-related and supplier-related performance issues appear to be under researched. As customers of most service organizations are becoming more sophisticated, service organizations are nding it necessary to broaden their criteria regarding effective organizational performance. Thus, external aspects such as the environmental and suppliers-related should be incorporated in this broader perspective. This represents an opportunity for future research. Third, empirical studies dealing with performance issues in service appear to be lagging behind, as most of the studies examined were not empirical in nature. More conceptual and empirical research is needed in order to clarify and validate relationships among theoretical constructs, which can be integrated into practical managerial frameworks. Finally, future research is called for to help service managers improve the different aspects of organizational performance through benchmarking best practices in manufacturing as well as other service organizations. At the conclusion of this research, the authors would like to express their appreciation to the capable reviewers of this journal for their valuable input. At the conclusion of this research, the authors would like to express their appreciation to the capable reviewers of this journal for their valuable input.
References Bititci, U., Turner, U. and Begemann, C. (2000), Dynamics of performance measurement systems, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 692-704. Brignall, S. and Modell, S. (2000), An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the new public sector, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11, pp. 281-306.

Performance management

221

BIJ 17,2

Brignall, T.J., Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R. and Silvestro, R. (1991), Performance measurement in service businesses, Management Accounting-London, Vol. 69 No. 10, pp. 34-6. Bruijn, H. (2002), Performance measurement in the public sector: strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 578-94. Chau, V.S. (2009), Benchmarking service quality in UK electricity distribution networks, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 47-69. Cross, K.F. and Lynch, R.L. (1988-1989), The SMART way to dene and sustain success, National Productivity Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 23-33. Dawkins, P., Feeny, S. and Harris, M.N. (2007), Benchmarking rm performance, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 693-710. Debnath, R.M. and Shankar, R. (2008), Benchmarking telecommunication service in India: an application of data envelopment analysis, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 584-98. De Bruijn, H. (2002), Performance measurement in the public sector: strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 578-672. Dey, P.K., Hariharan, S. and Despic, O. (2008), Managing healthcare performance in analytical framework, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 444-68. . and Machuca, J.A.D. (2005), Performance measurement systems, az, M.S., Gil, M.J.A D competitive priorities, and advanced manufacturing technology: some evidence from the aeronautical sector, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 781-99. Doney, P.M., Barry, J.M. and Abratt, R. (2007), Trust determinants and outcomes in global B2B services, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 9/10, pp. 1096-116. Duggirala, M., Rajendran, C. and Anantharaman, R.N. (2008), Provider-perceived dimensions of total quality management in healthcare, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 693-722. Garengo, P. and Bititci, U. (2007), Towards a contingency approach to performance measurement: an empirical study in Scottish SMEs, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 802-25. Ghalayini, A.M. and Noble, J.S. (1996), The changing basis of performance measurement, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 63-80. Gomes, C.F., Yasin, M.M. and Lisboa, J.V. (2004), A literature review of manufacturing performance measures and measurement in an organizational context: a framework and direction for future research, The International Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 511-30. Gomes, C.F., Yasin, M.M. and Lisboa, J.V. (2008), Project management in the context of organizational change: the case of the portuguese public sector, The International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 573-85. Gomes, C.F., Yasin, M.M. and Youssef, Y. (2010), Assessing operational effectiveness in healthcare organizations: a systematic approach, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 23 No. 2. Goncharuk, A. (2008), Performance benchmarking in gas distribution industry, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 548-59.

222

Greiling, D. (2006), Performance measurement: a remedy for increasing the efciency of public services?, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 448-65. Ho, S. and Chan, Y. (2002), Performance measurement and the implementation of balanced scorecards in municipal governments, Journal of Government Financial Management, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 8-19. Johnson, H.T. and Kaplan, R.S. (1987), Relevance Lost The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992), The balanced scorecard measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 71-9. Kwon, H.-B., Stoeberl, P.A. and Joo, S.-J. (2008), Measuring comparative efciencies and merger impacts of wireless communication companies, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 212-24. Lawton, A., McKevitt, D. and Millar, M. (2000), Coping with ambiguity: reconciling external legitimacy and organizational implementation in performance measurement, Public Money & Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 13-19. Longenecker, O. and Fink, S. (2001), Improving management performance in rapidly changing organizations, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 7-18. nen, P. (2005), Design and implementation of a performance measurement system for a Metta research organization, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 178-88. Modell, S. (2003), Goals versus Institutions: the development of performance measurement in the Swedish university sector, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 14, pp. 333-92. Moullin, M. (2004), Eight essentials of performance measurement, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 110-12. Moullin, M. (2007), Performance measurement denitions: Linking performance measurement and organisational excellence, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 181-3. Narayan, B., Rajendran, C. and Prakash Sai, L. (2008), Scales to measure and benchmark service quality in tourism industry: a second-order factor approach, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 469-93. Neely, A., Adams, C. and Crowe, P. (2001), The performance prism in practice, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 6-11. Neely, A., Gregory, M. and Platts, K. (1995), Performance measurement system design: a literature review and research agenda, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 80-116. Neely, A., Gregory, M. and Platts, K. (2005), Performance measurement system design: a literature review and research agenda, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1228-63. Neely, A., Mills, J., Platts, K., Gregory, M. and Richards, H. (1996), Performance measuring system design: should process based approaches be adopted?, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 46-47 December, pp. 423-31. Pongatichat, P. and Johnston, R. (2008), Exploring strategy-misaligned performance measurement, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 207-22. Pun, K.F. and White, A.S. (2005), A performance measurement paradigm for integrating strategy formulation: a review of systems and frameworks, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 49-71.

Performance management

223

BIJ 17,2

224

Purbey, Sh., Mukherjee, K. and Bhar, Ch. (2007), Performance measurement system for healthcare processes, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 241-51. nnqvist, A. and Kujansivu, P. (2007), Performance measurement Rantanen, H., Kulmala, H., Lo systems in the Finnish public sector, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 415-33. Santori, P.R. and Anderson, A. (1987), Manufacturing performance in the 1990s: measuring for excellence, Journal of Accountancy, Vol. 164 No. 5, pp. 141-7. Shepherd, C. and Gunter, H. (2006), Measuring supply chain performance: current research and future directions, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 242-58. Tangen, S. (2005), Analysing the requirements of performance measurement systems, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 46-54. Vagnoni, E. and Maran, L. (2008), Public sector benchmarking: an application to Italian health district activity plans, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 193-211. van Peursem, K., Pratt, M. and Lawrence, S. (1995), Health management performance: a review of measures and indicators, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 34-70. Wilson, C., Hagarty, D. and Gauthier, J. (2003), Results using the balanced scorecards in the public sector, Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 53-63. Wisniewski, M. and Olafsson, S. (2004), Developing balanced scorecards in local authorities: a comparison of experience, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 7, pp. 602-12. Yasin, M., Romanova, N. and Miller, P. (2006), The extent and nature of models utilization in service operational setting, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Business Administration Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 1-26. Further reading Adcroft, A. and Willis, R. (2005), The (un)intended outcome of public sector performance measurement, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 386-400. Al-Turki, U. and Duffuaa, S. (2003), Performance measures for academic departments, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 330-8. Appel-Meulenbroek, R. and Feijts, B. (2007), CRE effects on organizational performance: measurement tools for management, Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 218-38. Atkinson, H. and Brown, J. (2001), Rethinking performance measures: assessing progress in UK hotels, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 128-36. Ayadi, O., Adebayo, A. and Omolehinwa, E. (1998), Bank performance measurement in a developing economy: an application of data envelopment analysis, Managerial Finance, Vol. 24 No. 7, pp. 5-16. Barros, C. (2005), Performance measurement in tax ofces with a stochastic frontier model, Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 497-510. Bertot, J., McClure, Ch. and Ryan, J. (2000), Developing national network statistics and performance measures for US public libraries: issues, ndings and recommendations, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 15-42.

Black, S., Briggs, S. and Keogh, W. (2001), Service quality performance measurement in public/private sectors, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 400-5. Bolton, M. (2003), Public sector performance measurement: delivering greater accountability, Work Study, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 20-4. Booth, A. (2006), Counting what counts: performance measurement and evidence-based practice, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 63-74. Boussabaine, H. and Kirkham, R. (2006), Whole life cycle performance measurement re-engineering for the UK National Health Service estate, Facilities, Vol. 24 Nos 9/10, pp. 324-42. Brackertz, N. and Kenley, R. (2002), A service delivery approach to measuring facility performance in local government, Facilities, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 127-35. Brignall, S. and Ballantine, J. (1996), Performance measurement in service businesses revisited, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 6-31. Brun, M. and Siegel, J. (2006), What does appropriate performance reporting for political decision makers require? Empirical evidence from Switzerland, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 480-97. Carvalho, J., Fernandes, M., Lambert, V. and Lapsley, I. (2006), Measuring re service performance: a comparative study, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 165-79. Cassab, H. and MacLachlan, D. (2006), Interaction uency: a customer performance measure of multichannel service, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 7, pp. 555-68. Cavalieri, S., Gaiardelli, P. and Ierace, S. (2007), Strategic proles with operational metrics in after-sales service, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 Nos 5/6, pp. 436-55. Cheung, C. and Law, R. (1998), Hospitality service quality and the role of performance appraisal, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 402-6. Chi Cui, Ch., Lewis, B. and Park, W. (2003), Service quality measurement in the banking sector in South Korea, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 191-201. Chien-Ta, H. and Dauw-Song, Z. (2004), Performance measurement of Taiwans commercial banks, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 425-34. Corner, D. and Matatko, J. (1981), The uses and role of an independent unit trust risk and performance measurement service, Managerial Finance, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 5-11. Cruz, I. (2007), How might hospitality organizations optimize their performance measurement systems?, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 574-88. Currie, W. (1995), The IT strategy audit: formulation and performance measurement at a UK bank, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 7-16. Curtis, D. and Dean, H. (2004), Impact and performance measurement in library services, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 90-5. Deakins, E. and Dillon, S. (2005), Local government consultant performance measures: an empirical study, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 546-62. De Toni, A., Fornasier, A., Montagner, M. and Nonino, F. (2007), A performance measurement system for facility management: the case study of a medical service authority,

Performance management

225

BIJ 17,2

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 Nos 5/6, pp. 417-35. Dole, W., Liebst, A. and Hurych, J. (2006), Using performance measurement for decision making in mid-sized academic libraries, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 173-84. Donselaar, K., Kokke, K. and Allessie, M. (1998), Performance measurement in the transportation and distribution sector, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 434-50. Dooren, W. and Sterck, M. (2006), Financial management reforms after a political shift: a transformative perspective, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 498-514. Dubelaar, C., Tsarenko, Y. and Gabbott, M. (2003), Performance measurement in the Australian on-line securities marketplace, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 21 Nos 6/7, pp. 335-46. Evans, J. (2004), An exploratory study of performance measurement systems and relationships with performance results, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 219-32. Fitzgerald, L. (1988), Management performance measurement in service industries, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 109-16. Fritzen, S. (2007), Crafting performance measurement systems to reduce corruption risks in complex organizations: the case of the world bank, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 23-32. Fung, R., Pereira, A. and Yeung, W. (2000), Performance evaluation of a web-based information system for laboratories and service centres, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 218-27. Game, Ch. (2006), Comprehensive performance assessment in English local government, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 466-79. Ghobadian, A. and Ashworth, J. (1994), Performance measurement in local government concept and practice, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 35-51. Glunk, U. (1998), Predictors of organisational performance in small and medium-sized professional service rms, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 16 Nos 1/2/3, pp. 23-36. Gomes, C., Yasin, M. and Lisboa, J. (2007), The effectiveness of hospitality service operations: measurement and implementation concerns, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 560-73. Greatbanks, R. and Tapp, D. (2007), The impact of balanced scorecards in a public sector environment: empirical evidence from Dunedin City Council, New Zealand, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 846-73. Greiling, D. (2005), Performance measurement in the public sector: the German experience, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 551-67. Gross, P., Braun, B., Kritchevsky, S. and Simmons, B. (2000), Comparison of clinical indicators for performance measurement of health care quality: a cautionary note, Clinical Performance and Quality Healthcare, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 202-11.

226

Grygoryev, K. and Karapetrovic, S. (2005), An integrated system for educational performance measurement, modeling and management at the classroom level, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 121-36. Haktanir, M. and Harris, P. (2005), Performance measurement practice in an independent hotel context: a case study approach, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Halachmi, A. (2002), Performance measurement and government productivity, Work Study, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 63-73. Hannabus, S. (1987a), Personal performance measures, New Library World, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 86-7. Hannabus, S. (1987b), The importance of performance measures, Library Review, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 248-53. Hariharan, S., Dey, P., Moseley, H., Kumar, A. and Gora, J. (2004), A new tool for measurement of process-based performance of multispecialty tertiary care hospitals, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 302-12. Hastings, C. (2004), Discussion of performance measures in public service broadcasting, Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 56 No. 5, pp. 301-7. Holzer, M. and Kloby, K. (2005), Public performance measurement: an assessment of the state-of-the-art and models for citizen participation, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 517-32. Hoogenboezem, J. and Hoogenboezem, D. (2005), Coping with targets: performance measurement in The Netherlands police, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 568-78. Hussain, M. (2003), The impact of economic condition on management accounting performance measures: experience with banks, Managerial Finance, Vol. 29 No. 7, pp. 43-61. Hussain, M. (2004), Organisational strategic orientation and its impact on non-nancial performance measurement in the nancial services industry, Management Research News, Vol. 27 Nos 11/12, pp. 115-33. Hussain, M. and Gunasekaran, A. (2002), Management accounting and performance measures in Japanese banks, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 232-45. Hussain, M. and Hoque, Z. (2002), Understanding non-nancial performance measurement practices in Japanese banks: a new institutional sociology perspective, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 162-83. Hussain, M., Gunasekaran, A. and Islam, M. (2002), Implications of non-nancial performance measures in Finnish banks, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 452-63. Jansen, E. (2004), Performance measurement in governmental organizations: a contingent approach to measurement and management control, Managerial Finance, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 54-68. Johnston, J. (2005), Performance measurement uncertainty on the Grand Canal: ethical and productivity conicts between social and economic agency?, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 595-612. Karkatsoulis, P., Michalopoulos, N. and Moustakatou, V. (2005), The national identity as a motivational factor for better performance in the public sector: the case of the volunteers of the Athens 2004 Olympic Games, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 579-94.

Performance management

227

BIJ 17,2

228

Keith, H., Ka, L. and Chung, W. (2007), A case study on measuring the performance of a network of service providers for an international airline, International Journal of Value Chain Management, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 344-61. Kippenberger, T. (1996), Performance measurement at English nature, The Antidote, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 16-18. Kloot, L. (1999), Performance measurement and accountability in Victorian local government, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 565-84. fer, E., Klages, H. and Korac-Kakabadse, N. (1999), Benchmarking and Kouzmin, A., Lo performance measurement in public sectors: towards learning for agency effectiveness, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 121-44. Kueng, P. (2002), Performance measurement systems in the service sector: the potential of IT is not yet utilized, International Journal of Business Performance Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 95-114. Kulatunga, U., Amaratunga, D. and Haigh, R. (2007), Performance measurement in the construction research and development, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 No. 8, pp. 673-88. Kumar, A., Ozdamar, L. and Peng Ng, Ch. (2005), Procurement performance measurement system in the health care industry, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 152-66. Lied, T. (2001), Small hospitals and performance measurement: implications and strategies, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 168-73. Lim, P., Tang, N. and Jackson, P. (1999), An innovative framework for health care performance measurement, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 423-33. Lytle, R. and Timmerman, J. (2006), Service orientation and performance: an organizational perspective, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 136-47. Macaulay, S. and Cook, S. (1994), Performance management as the key to customer service, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 26 No. 11, pp. 3-8. Macnaught, B. (2004), Impact and performance measurement in public library services in the UK, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 96-100. Macpherson, M. (2001), Performance measurement in not-for-prot and public-sector organizations, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 13-17. Marr, N. (1991), Management Sophistication and Service Performance, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 32-41. Medina-Borja, A. and Triantis, K. (2007), A conceptual framework to evaluate performance of non-prot social service organizations, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 37 Nos 1/2, pp. 147-61. Mimba, N., Helden, G. and Tillema, S. (2007), Public sector performance measurement in developing countries: a literature review and research agenda, Journal of Accounting & Organizational, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 192-208. Modell, S. (2001), Performance measurement and institutional processes: a study of managerial responses to public sector reform, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 12, pp. 437-501. Modell, S. (2005), Students as consumers? An institutional eld-level analysis of the construction of performance measurement practices, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 537-63. Mohamed, E. (2005), Management accounting and performance measurement practices in service sector in Oman, International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 101-11.

Morrow, J. (1996), The development of Technical Services performance measures in Newcastle University Library, Library Review, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 15-19. Moxham, C. and Boaden, R. (2007), The impact of performance measurement in the voluntary sector: Identication of contextual and processual factors, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 826-45. Murphy, P. (1999), Service performance measurement using simple techniques actually works, Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 56-73. Page, E. III and Valenziano, S. (2001), The evolution of corporate real estate: Trends in organisation and performance measurement, Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 363-9. Parameshwaran, R. and Srinivasan, P. (2008), An integrated closed-loop model for service performance management, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 34-55. Parkan, C. (1999), Performance measurement in government services, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 121-35. Parker, S. (2006), The performance measurement of public libraries in Japan and the UK, Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 29-36. Phusavat, K. and Photaranon, W. (2006), Productivity/performance measurement: case application at the government pharmaceutical organization, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 9, pp. 1272-87. Pidd, M. (2005), Perversity in public service performance measurement, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 Nos 5/6, pp. 482-93. Ploegmakers, H., Schweitzer, M. and Rad, A. (2000), Risk adjusted performance measurement and capital allocation for trading desks within banks, Managerial Finance, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 39-50. Poll, R. (2001), Performance measures for library networked services and resources, The Electronic Library, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 307-15. Pollanen, R. (2005), Performance measurement in municipalities: empirical evidence in Canadian context, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 4-24. Prajogo, D. and Goh, M. (2007), Operations Management activities and operational performance in service rms, International Journal of Services Technology and Management, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 478-90. Rao, M. (2006), A performance measurement system using a prot-linked multi-factor measurement model, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 3, pp. 362-79. Rea, C. and Rea, D. (2002), Managing performance and performance management: information strategy and service user involvement, Journal of Management in Medicine, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 78-93. Schlesinger, L. (2003), Hardwiring an organizations service performance, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 6-9. Searcy, C., Karapetrovic, S. and McCartney, D. (2008), Application of a systems approach to sustainable development performance measurement, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 182-97. Seng, J. (2007), An IT capital performance indicator study: evidence from a Taiwan nancial service industry case study, International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Vol. 4 Nos 4/5, pp. 501-28.

Performance management

229

BIJ 17,2

230

Sigala, M. and Chalkiti, K. (2007), Improving performance through tacit knowledge externalisation and utilisation: preliminary ndings from Greek hotels, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 Nos 5/6, pp. 456-83. Smith, A. and Swinehart, K. (2001), Integrated systems design for customer focused health care performance measurement: a strategic service unit approach, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 21-9. Sotirakou, T. and Zeppou, M. (2006), Utilizing performance measurement to modernize the Greek public sector, Management Decision, Vol. 44 No. 9, pp. 1277-304. Southern, G. (1999), A systems approach to performance measurement in hospitality, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11 No. 7, pp. 366-76. Stevanovic, V., Feek, C. and Kay, R. (2005), Using routine data for benchmarking and performance measurement of public hospitals in New Zealand, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 498-507. Sureshchandar, G. and Leisten, R. (2005), Holistic scorecard: strategic performance measurement and management in the software industry, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 12-29. Swinehart, K. and Smith, A. (2004), Customer focused health-care performance instruments: making a case for local measures, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 9-16. Swinehart, K. and Smith, A. (2005), Internal supply chain performance measurement: a health care continuous improvement implementation, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 533-42. Thompson, T. and Wong, P. (1999), Metrics for assessing information technology performance in the service sector, International Journal of Business Performance Management, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 327-37. Train, B. and Elkin, J. (2001), Measuring the unmeasurable: reader development and its impact on performance measurement in the public library sector, Library Review, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 295-304. Vakkuri, J. and Meklin, P. (2003), The impact of culture on the use of performance measurement information in the university setting, Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 8, pp. 751-9. Varcoe, B. (2002), The performance measurement of corporate real estate portfolio management, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 117-30. Waal, A. and Coevert, V. (2007), The effect of performance management on the organizational results of a bank, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 Nos 5/6, pp. 397-416. Watkins, C. (2007), A spatial consideration of organisational performance: an excess of representation?, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 76-89. Wei, K. and Nair, M. (2006), The effects of customer service management on business performance in Malaysian banking industry: an empirical analysis, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 111-28. Wei-Shong, L. and Kuo-Chung, M. (2006), The internal performance measures of bank lending: a value-added approach, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 272-89. Welling, R. and White, L. (2006), Web site performance measurement: promise and reality, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 654-70.

Williams, P. (2005), Aviation benchmarking: issues and industry insights from benchmarking results, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 112-24. Wilson, A. (1998), The role of mystery shopping in the measurement of service performance, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 414-20. Wilson, A. (2000), The use of performance information in the management of service delivery, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 127-34. Wisniewski, M. and Stewart, D. (2004), Performance measurement for stakeholders: the case of Scottish local authorities, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 222-33. Yang, H. and Chen, K. (2000), A performance index approach to managing service quality, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 273-8. Yavas, U. and Romanova, N. (2005), Assessing performance of multi-hospital organizations: a measurement approach, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 193-203. Yee-Ching Lilian, C. (2004), Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecards: a survey of municipal governments in the USA and Canada, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 204-21. Yilmaz, Y. and Bititci, U. (2006a), Performance measurement in the value chain: manufacturing v. tourism, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 5, pp. 371-89. Yilmaz, Y. and Bititci, U. (2006b), Performance measurement in tourism: a value chain model, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 341-9. w, T. (2001), Performance measurement and management control Zineldin, M. and Bredenlo positioning strategies, quality and productivity: a case study of a Swedish bank, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 16 No. 9, pp. 484-99. About the authors Mahmoud M. Yasin, PhD, in Industrial Management from the Clemson University, and he is a Professor of Management at East Tennessee State University. His research has appeared in journals, such as Journal of Operations Management, OMEGA, International Journal of Production and Operations Management and Business Research. He currently serves on several editorial boards. He is the recipient of several teaching and research awards and recognitions. Mahmoud M. Yasin is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Carlos F. Gomes is an Assistant Professor in the School of Economics at the University of Coimbra and a Research member at the Institute of Systems and Robotics, Portugal. He received a PhD in Industrial Management, an MS in Industrial Management, a postgraduate certicate of Advanced Studies in Industrial Quality and International Business, and a BS in Electrical Engineering, all from the University of Coimbra. His main research interests are performance measurement, operations strategy and optimization of production systems. He has published in many refereed journals and proceedings of professional meetings.

Performance management

231

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints