Abstract
Since the past two decades there has been an increased activity in development of performance management systems aimed at various organisational levels, covering a multitude of dimensions. Since the focus of performance management is on enabling actionable learning aimed at business improvement, these systems should lead to innovation in management processes. In contemporary organizations, the pervasiveness of information and communication technologies underscores the importance of measuring their performance to drive a culture of continuous improvement. It is particularly relevant for asset managing engineering organisations, which are increasingly becoming information technology intensive by utilising a multitude of operational and administrative technologies to execute their business. Performance management of information technologies utilised in asset lifecycle management, therefore, should not only be aimed at reporting on the fit of existing asset management processes with the these technologies, but also on how to enhance the effectiveness of asset lifecycle management strategies enabled by various technologies. Therefore, it is important to assess the impact of performance management systems on business improvement, so as to enable assessment and establish credibility of the performance management system itself. However, literature is relatively silent on this issue. The lack of empirical research on this important issue has been attributed to the relatively immature theoretical nature of the field of performance management. This paper develops a theoretical framework for performance management research to guide empirical examination of the impact of performance management systems on business and management process innovation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Haider, A 2009, ‘Value Maximisation from Information Technology in Asset Management – A Cultural Study’, 2009 International Conference of Maintenance Societies (ICOMS), 2-4 June, Sydney, Australia.
Haider, A 2007, Information Systems Based Engineering Asset Management Evaluation: Operational Interpretations, PhD Thesis, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Hastings, NAJ 2000, ‘Asset management and maintenance’, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland.
IIMM 2006, ‘International Infrastructure Management Manual’, Association of Local Government Engineering NZ Inc, National Asset Management Steering Group, New Zealand, Thames, ISBN 0-473-10685-X.
Haider, A, Koronios, A, & Quirchmayr, G 2006, ‘You Cannot Manage What You Cannot Measure: An Information Systems Based Asset Management Perspective’, in Proceedings of Proceedings of Inaugural World Congress on Engineering Asset Management, eds J. Mathew, L Ma, A Tan & D Anderson, 11-14 July 2006, Gold Coast, Australia
Davis, S, Albright, T 2004, ‘An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard implementation in financial performance’, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 15, No.2, pp.135-153.
Ittner, D, Larcker, DF, & Randall, T 2003, ‘Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firms’, Accounting Organisation and Society, Vol. 28, No.7/8, pp.715-741.
Neely, A, Kennerley, M, & Martinez, V 2004, ‘Does the balanced scorecard work: an empirical investigation’, in Proceedings of Performance Measurement Association Conference, Edinburgh, July.
Atkinson, AA, Waterhouse, JH, & Wells, RB 1997, ‘A stakeholders approach to strategic performance measurement’, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 25-37.
Meekings, A 1995, ‘Unlocking the potential of performance measurement: A practical implementation guide’, Public Money and Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 5-12.
Tangen, S 2004, ‘Performance measurement: from philosophy to practice’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 726-737.
Edvardsson, B, Thomasson, B, & Ovretveit, J 1994, Quality of Service, McGraw-Hill, London.
Oakland, JS 1995, Total Quality Management: Text with Cases, Butterworth-Heinemann, New York, NY.
Teubner, RA 2005, ‘The IT21 Checkup for IT Fitness: Experiences and Empirical Evidence from 4 Years of Evaluation Practice’, in working papers, European Research Center for Information Systems No. 2., eds. J Becker, K Backhaus, HL Grob, T Hoeren, S Klein, H Kuchen, U. Muller-Funk, UW Thonemann, G Vossen, Munster, ISSN 1614-7448.
Brown, MG 1996, Keeping Score: Using the Right Metrics to Drive World-class Performance, Quality Resources, New York, NY.
De Toni, A, & Tonchia, S 1998, ‘Manufacturing flexibility: a literature review’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 36, No.6, pp.1587-1617.
Garvin, D 1993, ‘Building a learning organization’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 78-92.
Chan, CCA, & Scott-Ladd, B 2004, ‘Organisational learning: Some considerations for human resource practitioners’, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 336-347.
Anderson, M, Banker, RD, & Hu, N 2002, ‘Estimating the business value of investments in information technology, in Proceedings of the Eighth Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2002, Dallas, TX. pp. 1195-1197.
Leibs, S 2002, ‘A step ahead: Economist Erik Brynjolfsson leads the charge toward a greater appreciation of IT’, CFO Magazine, NY, pp.38-41.
Devaraj, S, & Kohli, R 2002, Measuring the Business Value of Information Technology Investments, 1st edn, Financial Times Prentice Hall, New York, NY.
Ehrhart, T 2002, ‘All Wound Up: Avoiding Broken Promises in Technology Projects’ Risk Management, vol. 49, no. 4, pp.12-16.
Serafeimidis, V, & Smithson, S 2000 ‘Information Systems Evaluation in Practice: a case study of organisational change’, Journal of Information Technology, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 93-105.
Khalifa, G, Irani, Z, Baldwin, LP, & Jones, S 2001, ‘Evaluating Information Technology with You in Mind’, Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, EJISE, vol. 4, issue 1.
Pennington, D & Wheeler, F 1998 ‘The Role of Governance in IT Projects: Integrating the Management of IT Benefits’, in Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on IT Investment Evaluation. pp.25-34.
Pouloudi, A & Whitley, A 1997 ‘Stakeholder identification in interorganizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems’, European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.1-14.
Liyanage, JP, & Kumar, U 2003, ‘Towards a value-based view on operations and maintenance performance management’, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 333-350.
Liyanage, JP, & Kumar, U 2000, ‘Utility of maintenance performance indicators in consolidating technical and operational health beyond the regulatory compliance’, in Proceedings of Safety Engineering and Risk Analysis: The International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition-2000, pp.153-160.
Ballantine, J, & Stray, SJ 1998, ‘Financial appraisal and the IS/IT investment decision making process’, Journal of Information Technology, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3-14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag
About this paper
Cite this paper
Haider, A. (2010). Driving innovation through performance evaluation. In: Kiritsis, D., Emmanouilidis, C., Koronios, A., Mathew, J. (eds) Engineering Asset Lifecycle Management. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-320-6_49
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-320-6_49
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-321-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-320-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)