Driving innovation through performance evaluation

  • Abrar Haider


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.


Asset Management Balance Scorecard Evaluation Exercise Performance Evaluation System Performance Management System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    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.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haider, A 2007, Information Systems Based Engineering Asset Management Evaluation: Operational Interpretations, PhD Thesis, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hastings, NAJ 2000, ‘Asset management and maintenance’, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    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.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    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, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Neely, A, Kennerley, M, & Martinez, V 2004, ‘Does the balanced scorecard work: an empirical investigation’, in Proceedings of Performance Measurement Association Conference, Edinburgh, July.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Atkinson, AA, Waterhouse, JH, & Wells, RB 1997, ‘A stakeholders approach to strategic performance measurement’, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 25-37.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meekings, A 1995, ‘Unlocking the potential of performance measurement: A practical implementation guide’, Public Money and Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 5-12.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tangen, S 2004, ‘Performance measurement: from philosophy to practice’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 726-737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Edvardsson, B, Thomasson, B, & Ovretveit, J 1994, Quality of Service, McGraw-Hill, London.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oakland, JS 1995, Total Quality Management: Text with Cases, Butterworth-Heinemann, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    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.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown, MG 1996, Keeping Score: Using the Right Metrics to Drive World-class Performance, Quality Resources, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Toni, A, & Tonchia, S 1998, ‘Manufacturing flexibility: a literature review’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 36, No.6, pp.1587-1617.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Garvin, D 1993, ‘Building a learning organization’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 78-92.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leibs, S 2002, ‘A step ahead: Economist Erik Brynjolfsson leads the charge toward a greater appreciation of IT’, CFO Magazine, NY, pp.38-41.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Devaraj, S, & Kohli, R 2002, Measuring the Business Value of Information Technology Investments, 1st edn, Financial Times Prentice Hall, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ehrhart, T 2002, ‘All Wound Up: Avoiding Broken Promises in Technology Projects’ Risk Management, vol. 49, no. 4, pp.12-16.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    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.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    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.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    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.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abrar Haider
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.CRC for Integrated Engineering Asset ManagementBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of South AustraliaMawson LakesAustralia

Personalised recommendations