IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tprsxx/v53y2015i10p3062-3085.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Value of maturity models in performance measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Umit S. Bititci
  • Patrizia Garengo
  • Aylin Ates
  • Sai S. Nudurupati

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, the field of performance measurement (PM) has evolved from measurement to management. Investigations demonstrated the relevance of PM in management of organisations’ results. Although maturity model concept was widely used, the value of maturity models in PM has not been purposefully investigated. To address this gap, this research formulated three research questions: (1) How do maturity models in the field of performance measurement and management (PM&M) add value in practice? (2) How do such maturity models compliment and/or replicate the value added by an expert? (3) How do maturity models contribute to the development of the organisation’s PM&M practices? Using a predefined research protocol, 12 European manufacturing organisations and independent experts were engaged in conducting two separate studies: (1) the experts conducted reviews with 12 companies using a standard business review format; (2) research team adopted one of the available maturity models and facilitated self-assessments with the management teams of the same 12 companies. Results from both the studies were compared and high levels of congruence were identified. The analysis demonstrates that the maturity models with certain characteristics, promote organisational learning as well as enabling efficient and effective assessment of the performance management practices of the organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Umit S. Bititci & Patrizia Garengo & Aylin Ates & Sai S. Nudurupati, 2015. "Value of maturity models in performance measurement," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(10), pages 3062-3085, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tprsxx:v:53:y:2015:i:10:p:3062-3085
    DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2014.970709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00207543.2014.970709
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00207543.2014.970709?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paulina Golinska-Dawson & Karolina Werner-Lewandowska & Monika Kosacka-Olejnik, 2021. "Responsible Resource Management in Remanufacturing—Framework for Qualitative Assessment in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Ricardo Malagueño & Ernesto Lopez-Valeiras & Jacobo Gomez-Conde, 2018. "Balanced scorecard in SMEs: effects on innovation and financial performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 221-244, June.
    3. Elisabete Correia & Helena Carvalho & Susana G. Azevedo & Kannan Govindan, 2017. "Maturity Models in Supply Chain Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, January.
    4. Mihai Dragomir & Sorin Popescu & Călin Neamțu & Diana Dragomir & Ștefan Bodi, 2017. "Seeing the Immaterial: A New Instrument for Evaluating Integrated Management Systems’ Maturity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    5. Okechukwu Okorie & Fiona Charnley & Jennifer Russell & Ashutosh Tiwari & Mariale Moreno, 2021. "Circular business models in high value manufacturing: Five industry cases to bridge theory and practice," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1780-1802, May.
    6. Rebekah Schulz & Andrew Sense & Matthew Pepper, 2021. "Combining Participative Action Research with an Adapted House of Quality Framework for the Stakeholder Development of Performance Indicators in Local Government," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 307-330, June.
    7. Majid Azadi & Balal Karimi & William Ho & Reza Farzipoor Saen, 2022. "Assessing green performance of power plants by multiple hybrid returns to scale technologies," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 44(4), pages 1177-1211, December.
    8. Davidson de Almeida Santos & Osvaldo Luiz Gonçalves Quelhas & Carlos Francisco Simões Gomes & Luis Perez Zotes & Sérgio Luiz Braga França & Guilherme Vinagre Pinto de Souza & Robson Amarante de Araújo, 2020. "Proposal for a Maturity Model in Sustainability in the Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-37, November.
    9. Abalala, Turki Shjaan & Islam, Mazharul & Alam, Md. Mahmudul, 2021. "Impact of ethical practices on small and medium enterprises’ performance in Saudi Arabia: An Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling analysis," OSF Preprints xg3bf, Center for Open Science.
    10. Laura Kreiling & Ahmed Bounfour, 2020. "A practice-based maturity model for holistic TTO performance management: development and initial use," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1718-1747, December.
    11. Sandra Rolim Ensslin & Kassia Tonheiro Rodrigues & Luiz Junior Maemura Yoshiura & Jessica Carvalho da Silva & André Andrade Longaray, 2022. "Organizational Performance Management and the ‘Sustainability’ of the Performance Evaluation System: A View Guided by the Integrative Review Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-16, September.
    12. Karolina Werner-Lewandowska & Paulina Golinska-Dawson, 2021. "Sustainable Logistics Management Maturity—The Theoretical Assessment Framework and Empirical Results from Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Marek Szelągowski & Justyna Berniak-Woźny, 2022. "How to improve the assessment of BPM maturity in the era of digital transformation," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 171-198, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tprsxx:v:53:y:2015:i:10:p:3062-3085. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/TPRS20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.