BeschreibungPerformance measurement (PM) has become one of the most important management tools in the last two decades. A lot of research has been done on the initial stages of PM such as its strategic value, measurement system approaches and the design of key performance indicators (KPIs). In this paper, we take a post implementation look at PM by questioning the accuracy of PM performance data (PD) measured. The underlying motivation is that PM dataPD in PM not reflecting actual performance attainment is useless and even creates operational inefficiencies that might threaten the survival of a company. By developing an performance data audit framework (PDAF) based on standard audit principles, we create a road map for managers how to cope best with suspicious PM dataPD. The application of this framework to a case study at a paper producingmanufacturing company shows a necessity to perform such an audit on a regular basis. Furthermore, recommendations of how to mitigate PM dataPD limitation issues in general are given. Findings In our case study, PM dataPD of the company did not reflect actual performance attainment but this could be corrected by employing the PDAF approach as developed by the authors. Management should be aware with regard to suspicious PD in PM data. This will requires the development of an audit framework being able to detect inaccurately measured KPIs and allow corrective action to enhance their ability to assess real performance of company activities and in turn increase their competitiveness. The need of auditing PM data with regard to whether it is accurate or not has both practical implications for the management practice and research in the field of PM. A lot of research has been done on the initial stages of PM such as its strategic value, PM approaches and the design of key performance indicators (KPI), but not on the proper handling of suspicious PM dataPD like inaccurately measured KPIs.
|7 Juli 2013 → 10 Juli 2013
|18th International Symposium on Logistics (ISL 2013)