International International Jo urnal of Operations Operations & Produc tion Manageme Management nt The role of performance measurement in continuous improvement T.C. Bond,
Ar t i cl e in f or m ati o n:
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
To cite this document: T.C. Bond, (1999) "The role of performance measurement in continuous improvement", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 Issue: 12, pp.1318-1334, doi: 10.1108/01443579910294291 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579910294291 Downloaded on: 30 April 2017, At: 04:30 (PT) References: this document contains references to 34 other documents. To copy this document:
[email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 6934 times since 2006*
Users Users who d ownl oaded oaded this artic le also also do wnloaded: (1999),"Continuous improvement: the ten essential criteria", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss 5 pp. 485-509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910249801 (1999),"Developing strategic continuous improvement capability", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 Iss 11 pp. 1106-1119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579910291032 Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:205243 []
For Auth ors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
Ab ou t Emeral Em eral d w w w.emeral w.em eral di ns i gh t .co m Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing providing an extensive range of online products and and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
Processing continues
Yes In control?
No
Processing stops
Diagnose problem
Take corrective action
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
Starting position (where are we now?)
Evaluation (ensure arrival)
Implementation (introduce new working procedure)
New position (where do we want to be?)
Means (how do we get there?)
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
New control variables
Task
Monitor variables
Reports
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
Strategic evaluation
Analysis
Planning
Action
Analysis
Responses
Objectives and goals
Performance measures
Targets
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
This article has been cited by:
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
1. MaJie Jie Ma
[email protected] http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5575-2216 LinZhibin Zhibin Lin
[email protected] LauChi Keung Chi Keung Lau
[email protected] Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK . 2017. Prioritising the enablers for the successful implementation of Kaizen in China. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 34:4, 549-568. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 2. Deepa Mishra, Angappa Gunasekara n, Tha nos Papadopoulos, Benjamin Hazen. 2017. Green supply chain performance measures: A review and bibliometric analysis. Sustainable Production and Consumption 10, 85-99. [CrossRef ] 3. Songul Cinaroglu, Onur Baser. 2016. Understanding the relationship between effectiveness and outcome indicators to improve quality in healthcare. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1-18. [CrossRef ] 4. Walid Abdelfatta, Abdelwaheb Rebai. 2016. Measurement of Dyadic Supply Chains Efficiency under New Assumptions Using DEA Models. Journal of Applied Sciences 16:10, 445-453. [CrossRef ] 5. Joel Igba, Kazem Alemzadeh, Christopher Durugbo, Egill Thor Eiriksson. 2016. Through-life engineering services of wind turbines. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technolo gy . [CrossRef ] 6. Joseph Kwame Ofori-Kuragu Department of Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana Bernard Baiden Department of Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana Edward Badu Department of Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana . 2016. Critical success factors for Ghanaian contractors. Benchmarking: An International Journal 23:4, 843-865. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 7. J.K. Ofori-Kuragu, B.K. Baiden, E. Badu. 2016. Performance measurement tools for Ghanaian contra ctors. International Journal of Construction Management 16:1, 13-26. [CrossRef ] 8. Dara Schniederjans, Marc Schniederjans. 2015. Quality management and innovation: new insights on a structural contingency framework. International Journal of Quality Innovation 1:1. . [CrossRef ] 9. Shams Rahman, Aswini YadlapalliSupplier Assessment in Global Apparel Supply Cha ins 399-418. [CrossRef ] 10. Jagdeep Singh Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bhutta College of Engineering and Technology, Bhutta, India Harwinder Singh Department of Mechanical Engineering, Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India . 2015. Continuous improvement philosophy – literature review and directions. Benchmarking: An International Journal 22:1, 75-119. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 11. Maurice Bonney, Mohamad Y. Jaber. 2014. Deriving research agendas for manufacturing and logistics systems: A methodology. International Journal of Production Economics 157, 49-61. [CrossRef ] 12. Fatma Pakdil, Karen Moustafa Leonard. 2014. Criteria for a lean organisation: development of a lean assessment tool. Internat ional Journal of Production Research 52:15, 4587-4607. [CrossRef ] 13. Kevin M. Taaffe Industrial Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA Robert William Allen Industrial Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA Lindsey Grigg Lockheed Martin Corporation, Greenville, South Carolina, USA . 2014. Performance metrics analysis for aircraft maintenance process control. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 20:2, 122-134. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 14. Torbjørn H. Netland Department of Industrial Economics and Technology Management, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
Arild Aspelund Department of Industrial Economics and Technology Management, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway . 2014. Multi-plant improvement programmes: a literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 34:3, 390-418. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 15. Sara Haji‐KazemiNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway Bjørn AndersenNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway. 2013. Application of performance measurement as an early warning system. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 6:4, 714-738. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 16. Prasanta Kumar Dey, Walid Cheffi. 2013. Green supply chain performance measurement using the analytic hierarchy process: a comparative analysis of manufacturing organisations. Production Planning & Control 24:8-9, 702-720. [CrossRef ] 17. Annachiara Longoni, Mark Pagell, David Johnston, Anthony Veltri. 2013. When does lean hurt? – an exploration of lean practices and worker health and safety outcomes. International Journal of Production Research 51:11, 3300-3320. [CrossRef ] 18. Sanjay Bhasin NOMS College, Stretton-under-Fosse, UK . 2013. Analysis of whether Lean is viewed as an ideology by British organizations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 24:4, 536-554. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 19. Tim Pidun, Carsten FeldenThe Role of Performance Measurement Systems between Assessment Tool and Knowledge Repository 3426-3435. [CrossRef ] 20. Sanjay Bhasin. 2012. Performance of Lean in large organisations. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 31:3, 349-357. [CrossRef ] 21. Jagdeep SinghDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Regional Institute of Management & Technology‐ Institute of Engineering & Technology, Mandi Gobindgarh, India Harwinder SinghDepartm ent of Mechanical Engineering, Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India. 2012. Continuous improvement approach: state‐of‐art review and future implications. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 3:2, 88-111. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 22. Sanjay BhasinQuality Assurance, NOMS College, Rugby, UK. 2012. Prominent obstacles to lean. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 61:4, 403-425. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 23. Damjan MaletičFaculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor, Kranj, Slovenia Matjaž MaletičFaculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor, Kranj, Slovenia Boštjan GomiščekFaculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor, Kranj, Slovenia. 2012. The relationship between continuous improvement and maintenance performance. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 18:1, 30-41. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 24. Julio J. Garcia-Sabater, Juan A. Marin-Garcia, M. Rosario Perello-Marin. 2012. Is implementation of continuous improvement possible? An evolutionary model of enablers and inhibitors. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 22:2, 99-112. [CrossRef ] 25. Pedro C. OprimeSão Carlos Federal University, São Carlos, Brazil Glauco Henrique de Sousa MendesSão Carlos Federal University, São Carlos, Brazil Márcio Lopes PimentaUberlândia Federal University, Uberlândia, Brazil. 2011. Continuous improvement: critical factors in Brazilian industrial companies. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 61:1, 69-92. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 26. Dai Bibo, Jia NiyanResearch on optimal computing model based on public crisis management 473-476. [CrossRef ]
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
27. Sanjay BhasinNOMS Civil Service College, Rugby, UK. 2011. Performance of organisations treating lean as an ideology. Business Process Management Journal 17:6, 986-1011. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 28. Ming-Shian Wu, Sun-Jen Huang, Li-Wei Chen. 2011. The preparedness of critical success factors of IT service management and its effect on performance. The Service Industries Journal 31:8, 1219-1235. [CrossRef ] 29. Danilo Hisano BarbosaProduction Engineering Department, Engineering School of São Carlos, USP – University of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil Marcel Andreotti MusettiProduction Engineering Department, Engineering School of São Carlos, USP – University of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil. 2011. The use of performance measurement system in logistics change process. International Journal of Producti vity and Performance Management 60:4, 339-359. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 30. Ezutah Udoncy Olugu, Kuan Yew Wong, Awaludin Mohamed Shaharoun. 2011. Developme nt of key performance measures for the automobile green supply chain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 55:6, 567-579. [CrossRef ] 31. Jesús García-Arca, J. C. Prado-Prado. 2011. Systematic personnel participation for logistics improvement: A case study. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 21:2, 209-223. [CrossRef ] 32. Luo Jianfeng, Ma TianshanA Model on Customer Satisfaction Degree Evaluation of Third Party Logistics 543-546. [CrossRef ] 33. ShengLi DaiResearch on the Evaluation of the Administrative Capacity of City Public Crisis 1-4. [CrossRef ] 34. Juan A. Marin-Garcia, Julio J. Garcia-Sabater. 2010. Traducción al castellano de un cuestionario para identificar conductas de la mejora continua y etapas en el modelo de evolución. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management 1:1, 18. [CrossRef ] 35. Rafael Henrique Palma Lima, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro Carpinetti. 2010. Proposal of a method for performance measurement system design and implementation of a software application in SMEs. International Journal of Business Performance Management 12:2, 182. [CrossRef ] 36. M. Marrone, M. Kiessling, L. M. KolbeAre we really innovating? An exploratory study on Innovation Management and Service Management 378-383. [ CrossRef ] 37. S. Anderberg, T. Beno, L. PejrydA survey of metal working companies' readiness for process planning performance measurements 1910-1914. [ CrossRef ] 38. Rune Todnem ByOrganisational Change Management: A Critical Review 46-58. [ CrossRef ] 39. Sandra MoffettSchool of Computing and Intelligent Systems, University of Ulster, Londonderry, UK Karen Anderson‐GillespieBelfast City Council, Belfast, UK Rodney McAdamSchool of Business Organisation and Management, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK. 2008. Benchmarking and performance measurement: a statistical analysis. Benchmarking: An International Journal 15:4, 368-381. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 40. Alberto Grando, Valeria Belvedere. 2008. Exploiting the balanced scorecard in the Operations Department: the Ducati Motor Holding case. Production Planning & Control 19:5, 495-507. [CrossRef ] 41. Sanjay BhasinPrison Service College, Stretton‐under‐Fosse, UK. 2008. Lean and performance measurement. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 19:5, 670-684. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 42. Manuel F. Suárez‐Barraza1PhD Candidate, Department of Operations Management and Innovation, ESADE, Universitat Ramón Llull, Av.Pedralbes 60‐62, E‐08034 Barcelona, Spain Tony LinghamPhD
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
Doctor, Associate Professor Case Western Reserve University. 2008. Kaizen within Kaizen Teams: Continuous and Process Improvements in a Spanish municipality. Asian Journal on Quality 9:1, 1-21. [ Abstract] [PDF] 43. Juan A. Marin‐GarciaDepartment of Business Administration, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain Manuela Pardo del ValFaculty of Economy, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain Tomás Bonavía MartínDepartment of Social Psychology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 2008. Longitudinal study of the results of continuous improvement in an industrial company. Team Performance Management: An International Journal 14:1/2, 56-69. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 44. Carlos F. GomesFaculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica, Coimbra, Portugal Mahmoud M. YasinDepartment of Management & Marketing, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, USA João V. LisboaFaculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica , Coimbra, Portugal. 2007. The dimensionality and utilization of performance measures in a manufacturing operational context. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 14:4, 286-306. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 45. Karen AndersonSchool of Business, Organisation & Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown, UK Rodney McAdamSchool of Business, Organisation & Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown, UK. 2007. Reconceptualising benchmarking development in UK organisations: the effec ts of size and sector. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 56:7, 538-558. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 46. Tong Yan, Li Yi-junThe Evaluation of Enterprise Informatization Performance Based on AHP/GHE/ DEA 149-155. [CrossRef ] 47. ABHIJEET K. DIGALWAR, KULDIP SINGH S ANGWAN. 2007. DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR WORLD CLASS MANUFACTURING PRACTICES IN INDIA. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems 06:01, 21-38. [CrossRef ] 48. Shankar PurbeyIndian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India Kampan MukherjeeIndian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India Chandan BharIndian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India. 2007. Performance measurement system for healthcare processes. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 56:3, 241-251. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 49. Carlos F. GomesFaculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica, Coimbra, Portugal Mahmoud M. YasinDepartment of Management and Marketing, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, USA João V. LisboaFaculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica, Coimbra, Portugal. 2006. Key performance factors o f manufacturing effective performance. The TQM Magazine 18:4, 323-340. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 50. Sanjay BhasinStoke College, Shelton, UK Peter BurcherAston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK. 2006. Lean viewed as a philosophy. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 17:1, 56-72. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 51. Rune Todnem By. 2005. Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management 5:4, 369-380. [CrossRef ] 52. Charles A. SchumanDepartment of Engineering and Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa Alan C. BrentDepartment of Engineering and Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. 2005. Asset life cycle management: towards improving physical asset performance in the process industry. International Journal of Operati ons & Pr od uction Mana geme nt 25:6, 566-579. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
) T P ( 7 1 0 2 l i r p A 0 3 0 3 : 4 0 t A H T U O M S T R O P F O Y T I S R E V I N U y b d e d a o l n w o D
53. Karen AndersonSchool of Business Organisation and Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK Rodney McAdamSchool of Business Organisation and Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK. 2005. An empirical analysis of lead benchmarking and performance measurement. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 22:4, 354-375. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 54. Karen AndersonSchool of Business Organization and Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Belfast, UK Rodney McAdamSchool of Business Organization and Management, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Belfast, UK. 2004. A critique of benchmarking and performance measurement. Benchmarking: An International Journal 11:5, 465-483. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 55. Carlos F. GomesInstructor in the Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica, Coimbra, Portugal Mahmoud M. YasinProfessor of Management, Department of Management and Marketing, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, USA João V. LisboaProfessor of Management, in the Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica, Coimbra, Portugal. 2004. A literature review of manufacturing performance measures and measurement in an organizational context: a framework and direction for future research. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 15:6, 511-530. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 56. Salvador CarmonaInstituto de Empresa, Madrid, Spain Anders GrönlundStockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. 2003. Measures vs actions: the balanced scorecard in Swedish Law Enforcement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23:12, 1475-1496. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 57. Adam Paul BrunetSaïd Business School, Oxford, UK and Steve NewSaïd Business School, Oxford, UK. 2003. Kaizen in Japan: an empirical study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23:12, 1426-1446. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 58. Rick DelbridgeCardiff Business School, Cardiff, UK Harry BartonCardiff Business School, Cardiff, UK. 2002. Organizing for continuous improvement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22:6, 680-692. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 59. C Smallman, G John. 2001. British directors perspectiv es on the impact of health and safety on corporate performance. Safety Science 38:3, 227-239. [CrossRef ]