Development of a New Model for Performance Measurement Based on the Tool for Action Plan Selection

  • Zdravko Tesic
  • Ivana Tomic
  • Sanja CvijanovicEmail author
  • Marina Zizakov
  • Tamara Bojanic
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering book series (LNMUINEN)


With the aim to present a new method for improving industrial company performances, this study will present a new model for performance measurement and management using Tool for Action Plan Selection (TAPS). As a software tool, TAPS assist managers to define goals, measure Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and create strategic decisions. The new model defines the main functional areas of an industrial company as four sectors with KPIs are measured by sector managers and are giving general management information about their influence on the defined objective. Non-parametric statistical analysis with Wilcoxon rang test showed the difference between assessment for functional areas of general managers and average scores of KPIs for functional areas of sector managers. The research is conducted within eight international industrial companies and the results give information about the most important KPIs. The results of this research are can be used as guidelines and support for the management of international industrial companies in the process of strategic decisions making.


TAPS Performance KPIs Measurement Management 



This paper was supported by the South Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme through the project: Danube Inland Harbour Development (DaHar), and project “Development of software to manage repair and installation of brake systems for rail vehicles”, Ministry of Science of Serbia, no. 035050.


  1. 1.
    Tsamenyi, M., Sahadev, S., Qiao, Z.S.: The relationship between business strategy, management control systems and performance: evidence from China. Adv. Account. 27(1), 193–203 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ukko, J., Tenhunen, J., Rantanen, H.: Performance measurement impacts on management and leadership: perspectives of management and employees. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 110(1), 39–51 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chaffey, D., Wood, S.: Business Information Management: Improving Performance Using Information Systems. Prentice Hall/Financial Times, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aguinis, H., Pierce, C.A.: Enhancing the relevance of organizational behaviour by embracing performance management research. J. Organ. Behav. 29(1), 139–145 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tan, K.H., Platts, K.: Managing manufacturing action plans. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 6(4), 369–385 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lohse, G., Biolsi, K., Walker, N., Rueter, H.: A classification of visual representations. Commun. ACM 37(12), 36–49 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCann, J.: Organizational effectiveness: changing concepts for changing environments. Hum. Resour. Plan. 27(1), 42–50 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Selden, S.C., Sowa, J.E.: Testing a multi-dimensional model of organizational performance: prospects and problems. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 14(3), 395–416 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Epstein, M.J., McFarlan, F.W.: Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of a non-profit’s performance. Strat. Finance 10(1), 26–34 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Henri, J.F.: Performance measurement and organizational effectiveness: bridging the gap. Manage. Finance 30(6), 93–123 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Simons, R.: Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ahmada, M.M., Dhafr, N.: Establishing and improving manufacturing performance measures. Robot. Comput.-Integr. Manuf. 18(3–4), 171–176 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lohman, C., Fortuin, L., Wouters, M.: Designing a performance measurement system: a case study. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 156(2), 267–286 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hayes, R.H., Wheelwright, S.C.: Restoring Our Competitive Edge: Competing Through Manufacturing. Wiley, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spitzer, D.R.: Transforming Performance Measurement. Amacom, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Burbidge, J.L.: A classification of production system variables. In: Hubner, H. (ed.) IFIP Production Management Systems: Strategies and Tools for Design, pp. 3–16. Elsevier, North Holland, Amsterdam (1984)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burbidge, J.L.: A production system variable connectance model. Cranfield Institute of Technology, England (1984)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tan, K.H., Platts, K.: Operationalising strategy: mapping manufacturing variables. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 89(3), 379–393 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., Alpkan, L.: Effects of innovation types on firm performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 133(2), 662–676 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koo, L.C., Koo, H.: Holistic approach for diagnosing, prioritising, implementing and monitoring effective strategies through synergetic fusion of SWOT, balanced scorecard and QFD. WREMSD 3(1), 62–78 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koller, T., Goedhart, M., Wessels, D.: Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Electronic Statistics Textbook. StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Technical SciencesUniversity of Novi SadNovi SadSerbia

Personalised recommendations