Please enter verification code
Confirm
New Performance Measurement Trends: Evidence from Selected Multinational Corporations
Journal of World Economic Research
Volume 6, Issue 4, August 2017, Pages: 54-58
Received: May 28, 2017; Accepted: Jun. 15, 2017; Published: Jul. 20, 2017
Views 1973      Downloads 386
Author
Murtala Zakari, Post Graduate School of Accounting and Finance, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
This study seeks to examine new trends in the performance measurement system over the traditional system, how corporate organizations respond to the emerging trends, how the changes impact their businesses performance in the challenging contemporary business environment, and identify the new approaches adopted to manage the changes. To achieve this, data were collected through the deployment of case studies and analyzed content of the case studies results. As a major contribution, this study enlightens readers with new insights on performance measurement. It also provides useful guidelines for effective measurement of performance. Findings from the analysis show that traditional performance appraisals were no longer working and the business corporations are now adopting new performance measurement such as individual check-ins, team touch points, and individual development plan (IDP). The study concludes that traditional performance measurement systems such as profitability, strict working capital, revenue, volume, cash flow, return on capital employed, etc were falling short of meeting the needs of managers in a much changed business environment. It has become increasingly important for organizations to develop systems of performance measurement which reflect the growing complexity of the business environment, monitor their strategic response to this complexity.
Keywords
Performance Measurement, Traditional System, Individual Check-ins, Team Touch Point, Individual Development Plan
To cite this article
Murtala Zakari, New Performance Measurement Trends: Evidence from Selected Multinational Corporations, Journal of World Economic Research. Vol. 6, No. 4, 2017, pp. 54-58. doi: 10.11648/j.jwer.20170604.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Aberdeen Group (2005) ‘Aligning Employee Performance Management (EPM) with Corporate Performance Management (CPM)’, available from www.abergeengroup.com.
[2]
Accenture Corporate Site, viewed 25th December 2016, from www.accenture.com.
[3]
Adobe Corporate Site, viewed 1st January 2016, from www.adobe.com.
[4]
Barrows, E. and Neely, A. (2012) “Managing Performance in Turbulent Times – Analytics and Insights”. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
[5]
Bell, J. (1999) “Introduction till forskningsmetodik”. Lund, Sweden: Student literature.
[6]
Bititci, U. S., Carrie, A. S., McDevitt, L. (1997) “Integrated Performance Measurement Systems: A Development Guide”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17 (6).
[7]
Bourne, M., et al. (2000) “Designing, implementing and updating performance measurement systems”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 20 (7), pp. 754-771.
[8]
Bourne, M. (2008) “Performance measurement: learning from the past and projecting the future”. Measuring Business Excellence, 12 (4), pp. 67-72.
[9]
Cargil Corporate Site, viewed 25th December 2016, from www.cargill.co.uk.
[10]
CEB Global (2015) “World-class organizations are rethinking their performance management approach”, available from: www.cebglobal.com.
[11]
CIMA (2005) “Effective Performance Management with the Balanced Scorecard Technical Report”, London SW1P 4NP Printed in Great Britain.
[12]
Clear Review (2016) ‘What does performance management look like in 2016?’ available from https://clearreview.com.
[13]
Deloitte Corporate Site, viewed 25th December 2016, from www2.deloitte.com.
[14]
Fast Company (2016) “Six companies that are redefining their performance management”, available from www.fastcompany.com.
[15]
General Electric Corporate Site, viewed 25th December 2016, from www.ge.com.
[16]
Insala (2016) “Performance Management: Current Trends”, available from: http://www.insala.com.
[17]
Johnson, S. (2005) “The Pyramids and Pitfalls of Performance Measurement” available from http://www.accaglobal.com.
[18]
Kennerley, M. and Neely, A. (2002) “A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22 (11), pp. 1222-1245.
[19]
Kennerley, M. and Neely, A. (2003) “Measuring performance in a changing business environment”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23 (2), pp. 213-229.
[20]
Lafarge Corporate Site, viewed 25th December 2016, from www.lafargeholcim.com.
[21]
Likierman, A. (2009) “The five traps of performance measurement’. Harvard Business Review, October, pp. 96-101.
[22]
Lynch, R. L, and Cross, K. F. (1991) “Measure up, Yardsticks for Continuous Improvement”: USA, Blackwell, 1st edition.
[23]
Merriam, S. B. (1994). Fallstudien som forskningsmetod. Lund, Sweden: Student literature.
[24]
Salloum, M. and Cedergren, S. (2012) “Managing change in performance measures – An inter-company case study approach” Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 53-66.
[25]
Yin, R. K. (1994). “Case study research: Design and methods’, California, USA: Sage Publications, 2nd edition.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186