Search Results

1 - 10 of 361 items :

  • "Performance measurement" x
Clear All

. Information Systems Management, 25(2), 113-120. Attaran, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between information technology and business process reengineering. Information & Management, 41(5), 585-596. Atkinson, A. A. (1998), Strategic Performance Measurement and Incentive Compensation, European Management Journal , Vol. 16, No. 5, Oct, pp. 552-561. Atkinson, A., Waterhouse, J., Wells, R. (1997), A stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement, Sloan Management Review, pp. 25-37 Balachandran, K. R., Shu, H. L., Suresh, R. (2007), ‘A framework for unused

L iterature Abd Elhamid, M., & Ghareeb, S. (2011). Measuring Performance in Egyptian Construction Firms Applying Quality Management Systems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Project Management , 1 (2), 18-27. Ahmad, S., Svalestuen, F., Andersen, B., & Torp, O. (2016). A Review of Performance Measurement for Successful Concurrent Construction. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , 226 , 447-454. Aho, M. (2009). A Capability Maturity Model for Corporate Performance Management. An Empirical Study in Large Finnish Manufacturing Companies

R eferences Bhimani, A. (1993). Performance Measures in UK Manufacturing Companies: The State of Play. Management Accounting, 71(11). Bititci, U.S., Neely, A., Turner, T. (2006). Integrated Performance Systems: Structure and Dynamics. In A. Neely (Ed.), Business Performance Measurement. Theory and Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bourguignion, A. Malleret, V. Norreklit, H. (2004). The American Balanced Scorecard versus the French Tableau de Bord: The Ideological Dimension. Management Accounting Research. Chiapello, E. Lebas, M. (1996). The Tableau

Enron look good”, World Economics, Vol. 13, No.1, pp. 1-18. 5. Barzelay, M. (2001). „The New Public Management, Improving Research and Policy Dialogue”, Berkeley: University of California Press 6. Bolton, M. (2003), „Public sector performance measurement: delivering greater accountability”, Work Study, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 20-24. 7. Boyne, G. (2003), „Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 367-394. 8. Broadbent, J., Laughlin, R. (2009), „Performance

, D. (2007). Management by Measurement. Designing Key Indicators and Performance Measurement Systems . Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. George, M. L. (2010). Lean Six Sigma kapesní příručka . Brno: SC&C Partner. Hronová, S., Fischer, J., Hindls, R., Sixta, J. (2009). Národní účetnict ví: nástroj popisu globální ekonomiky . Praha: C. H. Beck Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D.P (2002). Balanced Scorecard: strategický systém měření výkonnosti podniku . Praha: Management Press. Katic, D., Majstorovic, V., Colak, I. (2011). Performance Measurement Review. Annals of


It has been widely argued that an inability to account for marketing’s contribution has undermined its standing within the company. Furthermore, the effect of marketing activities on business success is underestimated. To respond to this pressure, marketers are investing in the development of performance measurement abilities. In this study of senior marketing managers in high-tech firms, the effect of the ability to measure marketing performance against business performance is examined. The authors also explore the effect of the ability to measure marketing against marketing’s status within the company. Results indicate that this ability is essential given that it has a significant impact on company performance, profitability, stock returns, and marketing’s stature within the company. Considering these effects, the closing managerial implications are highly relevant for marketing professionals


Modern business conditions have led to the development of a large number of different models for strategic performance management, which view performance measurement through the prism of financial and non-financial indicators, from multiple perspectives. Strategic performance management models should enable efficient and effective management, i.e. an adequate response to continuous changes in the business environment. Theory and practice in this area suggest the development and implementation of various integrated frameworks (models) for performance management of companies, in order to achieve business excellence. In addition to the well-known integrated models, such as the Balanced Scorecard (BSC), Performance Pyramid, SAILS model (Strategy Aligned Integrated Linked Scoring System), GRASP model (Goals-Resources-Actions-Structure-People), and others, Kanji’s Business Excellence Model (KBEM) and Kanji Business Scorecard (KBS) have been developed as well. Kanji’s model was created with the objective of eliminating the weaknesses and shortcomings of previous models, particularly the Balanced Scorecard. The application of multidimensional performance measures should increase the informational power of management in making strategic business decisions. The goal set by this paper is to consider some of the basic features of modern performance measurement and management models of companies that are represented in theory and applied in practice, and, on the basis of comparative analysis, to draw conclusions about their advantages and disadvantages.

.” Organisation Studies 27, 1037 - 1057. Chan, H. S. and J. Gao. 2009. “Putting the Cart before the Horse: Accountability or Performance.” The Australian Journal of Public Administration 68(S1), S51-S61. Chan, H. S. and J. Gao. 2008. “Performance Measurement in Chinese Local Government.” Chinese Law and Government 41(2 - 3), 4 - 9. de Bruijn, H. 2002. “Performance Measurement in the Public Sector: Strategies to Cope with the Risk of Performance Measurement.” The International Journal of Public Sector Management 15(7), 578 - 594. Dur, R. and R. Zoutenbier. 2014. “Working for a


In recent years, China’s environmental pollution is serious, manufacturing industry has become one of the main targets of government environmental regulation. This paper uses the SBM model to calculate efficiency value of 29 manufacturing industries from 2008 to 2017. The results show that the overall performance of environmental regulation in manufacturing industry is high (the average efficiency value is 0.7806), but it shows a declining trend. The efficiency of environmental regulation also varies widely. The government should consider focusing on the 11 industries with low SBM value in the next step to improve the performance of environmental regulation.

., (2000). The Balanced Scorecard Beyond Reports and Rankings. Planning for Higher Education, Winter, 37–42. Świerk, J., & Mulawa, M. (2015). The Balanced Scorecard for Higher Education-the Case of Maria Curie-Skłodowska University (online). . Tapions, E., Dyson, R. G., & Meadows, M. (2005). The impact of the performance measurement systems in setting the ’direction’ in the University of Warwick. Production Planning and Control, 16 (2), 189–198. Taylor, J., & Baines, C. (2012). Performance management in UK