Limitations of Performance Measurement Systems based on Key Performance Indicators

Measuring performance is a key to optimize business processes. However, many of them cannot be easily measured due totheir non-deterministic or qualitative nature. So, to fit in common performance measurement systems (PMS) that normallyuse numeric parameters (KPIs), artificial and simplifying measures have to be used that are complicated and costly to createand evaluate. Using a literature review, this paper documents the dominance of PMS that rely on KPIs and a lack of thosethat also incorporate non-numeric, generic indicators that better address qualitative problems. Combined with the discussionof different viewpoints to PMS properties as well as the demand for better transparency and comparability of businessprocesses, the necessity of deployment for a refined PMS using additional indirect indicators is derived. It would be able toassess hidden performance problems and hence to reveal additional business process improvement possibilities

The role of indicators in development cooperation: an overview study with a special focus on the use of key and standard indicators

With more and more emphasis being placed on results and the clamour for transparency and accountability growing ever more vocal, indicators are becoming increasingly important in development cooperation. By measuring changes and providing contextual information, they help to plan and implement development interventions or strategies, to monitor and evaluate, and also to report on development results. However, indicators are not always easy to use. The fact is that they come with many limitations and potential adverse effects. These challenges and risks differ among the three organisational levels suited to results-based management and reporting systems: agency, country and programme or project level. Against this background, this study analyses the use of indicators at the three organisational levels and makes recommendations on how they can best be used and how the associated risks can be mitigated. Special emphasis is placed on agency-level performance measurement systems, since evidence on them is scarce. With the aid of a literature review and a number of semi-structured interviews, the study compares the experiences of twelve selected donor agencies with key and standard indicators for reporting development results at agency level

Technology-driven online marketing performance measurement: lessons from affiliate marketing

Although the measurement of offline and online marketing is extensively researched, the literature on online performance measurement still has a number of limitations such as slow theory advancement and predominance of technology- and practitioner-driven measurement approaches. By focusing on the widely employed but under-researched affiliate marketing channel, this study addresses these limitations and evaluates the effectiveness of practitioner-led online performance assessment. The paper offers a comprehensive review of extant performance measurement research across traditional, online and affiliate marketing and, employing grounded theory, presents a qualitative in-depth analysis of 72 online forum discussions and 37 semi-structured interviews with the major affiliate marketing stakeholders. As a result, the research identifies a growing need for change in the technology-pushed measurement approaches in affiliate marketing, and proposes actionable improvement recommendations for affiliate and online marketing managers

CDFIs Stepping into the Breach: An Impact Evaluation—Summary Report

This report summarizes research undertaken by the Carsey School of Public Policy to evaluate impacts of the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund on CDFIs and of the CDFI industry on the people and communities it serves. In summary, we find a variety of evidence indicating that CDFIs are advancing the statutory purposes of the CDFI Fund to promote economic revitalization and community development through the provision of credit, capital and financial services to underserved populations and communities in the United State

System-level key performance indicators for building performance evaluation

Quantifying building energy performance through the development and use of key performance indicators (KPIs) is an essential step in achieving energy saving goals in both new and existing buildings. Current methods used to evaluate improvements, however, are not well represented at the system-level (e.g., lighting, plug-loads, HVAC, service water heating). Instead, they are typically only either measured at the whole building level (e.g., energy use intensity) or at the equipment level (e.g., chiller efficiency coefficient of performance (COP)) with limited insights for benchmarking and diagnosing deviations in performance of aggregated equipment that delivers a specific service to a building (e.g., space heating, lighting). The increasing installation of sensors and meters in buildings makes the evaluation of building performance at the system level more feasible through improved data collection. Leveraging this opportunity, this study introduces a set of system-level KPIs, which cover four major end-use systems in buildings: lighting, MELs (Miscellaneous Electric Loads, aka plug loads), HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning), and SWH (service water heating), and their eleven subsystems. The system KPIs are formulated in a new context to represent various types of performance, including energy use, peak demand, load shape, occupant thermal comfort and visual comfort, ventilation, and water use. This paper also presents a database of system KPIs using the EnergyPlus simulation results of 16 USDOE prototype commercial building models across four vintages and five climate zones. These system KPIs, although originally developed for office buildings, can be applied to other building types with some adjustment or extension. Potential applications of system KPIs for system performance benchmarking and diagnostics, code compliance, and measurement and verification are discussed

A cost and technical efficiency analysis of two alternative models for implementing the basic package of health services in Afghanistan.

Since 2003, the Afghan Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) and international partners have directed a contracting-out model through which non-governmental organisations (NGOs) deliver the Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) in 31 of the 34 Afghan provinces. The MoPH also managed health service delivery in three provinces under an alternative initiative entitled Strengthening Mechanisms (SM). In 2011, under the authority of the MoPH and Delegation of the European Union to Afghanistan, EPOS Health Management conducted a cost and technical efficiency study of the contracting-out and SM mechanisms in six provinces to examine economic trade-offs in the provision of the BPHS. The study provides analyses of all resource inputs and primary outputs of the BPHS in the six provinces during 2008 and 2009. The authors examined technical efficiency using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) at the BPHS facility level. Cost analysis results indicate that the weighted average cost per BPHS outpatient visit totalled $3.41 in the SM provinces and$5.39 in the NGO-led provinces in 2009. Furthermore, the data envelopment analyses (DEAs) indicate that facilities in the three NGO-led provinces scored 0.168 points higher on the DEA scale (0-1) than SM facilities. The authors conclude that an approximate 60% increase in costs yielded a 16.8% increase in technical efficiency in the delivery of the BPHS during 2009 in the six provinces