scholarly journals Misfit? The Use of Metrics in Innovation

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 388
Author(s):  
Ilse Svensson de Jong
Keyword(s):  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Business Performance ◽  
Strategic Change ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Significant Degree ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
Sales Organizations ◽  
Organizational Levels

Measuring innovation is a challenging but essential task to improve business performance. To tackle this task, key performance indicators (KPIs) can be used to measure and monitor innovation. The objective of this study is to explore how KPIs, designed for measuring innovation, are used in practice. To achieve this objective, the author draws upon literature on business performance in accounting and innovation, yet moves away from the functional view. Instead, the author focuses explicitly on how organizational members, through their use of KPIs in innovation, make sense of conflicting interpretations and integrate them into their practices. A qualitative in-depth case study was conducted at the innovation department of an organization in the process industry that operates production sites and sales organizations worldwide. In total, 28 interviews and complementary observations were undertaken at several organizational levels (multi-level). The empirical evidence suggests that strategic change, attributed to commoditization, affects the predetermined KPIs in use. Notably, these KPIs in innovation are used, despite their poor fit to innovation subject to commoditization. From a relational perspective, this study indicates that in innovation, KPIs are usually complemented by or supplemented with other information, as stand-alone KPIs exhibit a significant degree of incompleteness. In contrast to conventional studies in innovation and management accounting, this study explores the use of key performance indicators (KPIs) in innovation from an interpretative perspective. This perspective advances our understanding of the actual use of KPIs and uncovers the complexity of accounting and innovation, which involve numerous angles and organizational levels. Practically, the findings of this study will inform managers in innovation about the use of KPIs in innovation and the challenges individual organizational members face when using them. In innovation, KPIs appear to be subjective and used in unintended ways. Thus, understanding how KPIs are used in innovation is a game of reading between the lines, and these KPIs can be regarded as misfits.

Strategic Planning for E-Learning in a Polytechnic

2011 ◽  
pp. 47-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Bates
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Faculty Development ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Strategic Plan ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
E Learning ◽  
And Training

This chapter is a case study of how a polytechnic developed a strategic plan for e-learning. It describes the institution’s rationale for moving more strongly into e-learning, the processes followed by the institution to develop a plan and ensure its acceptance through the institutional community, and the factors that facilitated the process. It indicates that attention to objectives, core values and principles, and faculty development and training, are critical for the successful transition from mainly face-to-face teaching to e-learning. The development of key performance indicators will allow the success of the plan to be measured in 2010.

Developing Maintenance Key Performance Indicators From Maintenance Work Order Data

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Brundage ◽  
K. C. Morris ◽  
Thurston Sexton ◽  
Sascha Moccozet ◽  
Michael Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Small And Medium Enterprises ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Maintenance Management ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Maintenance Decisions ◽  
Maintenance Technicians ◽  
Maintenance Work ◽  
Maintenance Decision ◽  
Medium Enterprises

Maintenance management for manufacturing is a crucial activity for improving productivity within a facility. Within this process, maintenance work orders (MWOs) are used when tracking and solving any maintenance–related issue. The MWOs often capture the problem, the solution, at what machine the problem occurred, who solved the problem, when the problem occurred, and other information. These MWOs are manually written by maintenance technicians, entered into a database, or recorded directly into maintenance management software. Technicians often describe or record information informally — or do not record it at all — leading to inconsistencies and/or inaccuracies in the data. This paper outlines maintenance key performance indicators (KPIs), developed using MWOs, that show why consistent and accurate data collection is important for maintenance decision making. The maintenance data, or “elements,” and their corresponding KPIs are derived from MWOs from real manufacturers (large manufacturers and small and medium enterprises). While all elements or KPIs are not recorded by every manufacturer, the guideline provided here outlines the elements necessary to calculate specific KPIs. These examples are developed to aid in common maintenance decisions.

scholarly journals Establishment of Key Performance Indicators for Green Building Operations Monitoring—An Application to China Case Study

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 976 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinqiu Li ◽  
Qingqin Wang ◽  
Hao Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Quality ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Green Building ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Energy Performance ◽  
Operational Performance ◽  
Indoor Environmental Quality ◽  
Evaluation Standards

Released green building evaluation standards for operation stage include a huge number of indicators, which are very comprehensive and systematic. However, the indicators of these standards are very complicated and a large amount of time and manpower are consumed for their evaluation. To evaluate the operational performance of green buildings more practically and efficiently, some studies collect the operational data for part of the indicators (mainly focusing on building energy performance, indoor environmental quality or occupant satisfaction), which are too rough to evaluate the performance of green building. This paper proposed a total of 27 key performance indicators (KPIs) for green building operations monitoring. The number of proposed indicators is much fewer than the evaluation standards, as well as suitable for long-term monitoring, which can dramatically reduce evaluation time and cost. On the other hand, the indicators involving Outdoor environmental quality, Indoor environmental quality, HVAC system, P&D system, Renewable energy system, Total resource consumption and User behavior, which are more comprehensive and systematic than the conventional monitoring studies for operational performance of green building. Firstly, an indicators library for operations monitoring of green building was established based on relevant standards and literature review in this field. Secondly, “SMART” principle and Delphi method were adopted to select the key performance indicators for green building operations monitoring. Different background experts regarding green building industry were chosen to screen the most relevant, accessible and measurable indicators. Subsequently, two projects in China were selected for case study of key performance indicators proposed in this paper for green building operations monitoring to validate the feasibility and advancement.

Using Key Performance Indicators and Risk Measures in Continuous Monitoring

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Nigrini ◽  
Arlo J. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Continuous Monitoring ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Multiple Cues ◽  
Perceived Importance ◽  
Small Set

ABSTRACT: The paper describes a continuous monitoring methodology in an environment with multiple cues indicative of fraud and errors. A case study describes an application by a restaurant franchisor on the monthly sales numbers reported by franchisees. The system scores each restaurant based on variables judged to be possible indicators of fraud or errors in the monthly sales reports. The variables are weighted according to their perceived importance to obtain a final risk score for each restaurant. The output is a small set of audit targets believed to have a high risk of reporting errors. The variables can be categorized as being (1) key performance indicators, (2) statistical irregularities, (3) motivation or pressure related variables, and (4) variables related to compliance with the franchising agreement.

scholarly journals Using Logic Model and Key Performance Indicators to Construct A Field Hospital for Coronavirus Pandemic Cases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alshehri Ali ◽  
Al Moteri Modi Owied ◽  
Plummer Virginia ◽  
Endacott Ruth ◽  
Al Thobaity Abdulellah
Keyword(s):  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Logic Model ◽  
Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia ◽  
Field Hospital ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Hospital Construction ◽  
Model Components

Abstract Background. Field hospitals have been established as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response in a range of countries including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Assess input, monitor activities and track output can be used to identify whether field hospitals are meeting their intended targets. Method. Based on a case study approach, the reported results include field hospital construction project performance outcomes, a description of the design process and the development and application of key performance indicators to assess field hospital efficacy.Result. Each of the logic model component (i.e. input, activities and output) has tailored indicators that address different aspects of field hospital; from the infrastructure work to the wider impacts on services.Conclusion. The logic model components and related KPIs can be extremely important in terms of providing insights into how to achieve the field hospital’s objectives.

scholarly journals Acoustical planning for workplace health and well-being: A case study in four open-plan offices

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Lee ◽  
Francesco Aletta
Keyword(s):  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
The United States ◽  
Workplace Health ◽  
Open Plan ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
Health And Well Being

Noise is the most frequent reason for complaints about environmental conditions in the workplace. It is associated with individual health and well-being and decreased productivity and performance. This study identified a set of acoustic strategies for open-plan workplaces and examined a case study applying those to four open-plan offices in the United States. The set of measures was defined based on a literature review and a focus group interview with 17 experts. A total of four topics were identified as key performance indicators of proper acoustic environments in the open-plan workplaces. A total of 19 items were then developed within these 4 topics as the protocols for planning acoustic strategies for workplace health and well-being. In the case study, the level of acoustic performance for workplace health and well-being was highest in the Dallas office (27.5 points out of a total of potential 40.0) followed by the Minneapolis office (26.0). Both offices outperformed the other offices in achieving space planning principles to control noises and occupant noise control in open spaces for acoustical privacy. A further examination on the relationships between acoustic strategies and other health and well-being key performance indicators in these offices suggests that guidance to increase occupants’ auditory comfort, well-being, and performance should be sought by designers in a holistic and integrative way.

An Integrative Framework for Strategic Intelligence

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Xu ◽  
G. Roland Kaye
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Business Intelligence ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Key Performance Indicators ◽  
Competitive Intelligence ◽  
Integrative Framework ◽  
Strategic Intelligence ◽  
Intelligence Activity ◽  
Insight Into

This paper defines strategic intelligence as a distinct organisational resource that differs from competitive intelligence (CI) and business intelligence (BI). A literature review unfolds a number of deficiencies in intelligence practice and systems. The findings, based on a case study, suggest that there is a lack of systematic scanning, analysing and support for strategic intelligence. An integrative framework is proposed to guide and improve strategic intelligence activity, which comprises of Key External Intelligence (KEI) and internal Key Performance Indicators (KPI). Implementation issues are discussed. The paper develops novel insight into strategic intelligence, and the proposed solution has implications on enhancing managers’ and an organisations’ sensibility and capability by detecting and responding to emerging strategic signals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document