155 research outputs found
Contracting outsourced services with collaborative key performance indicators
While service outsourcing may benefit from the application of performanceâbased contracts (PBCs), the implementation of such contracts is usually challenging. Service performance is often not only dependent on supplier effort but also on the behavior of the buying firm. Existing research on performanceâbased contracting provides very limited understanding on how this challenge may be overcome. This article describes a design science research project that develops a novel approach to buyerâsupplier contracting, using collaborative key performance indicators (KPIs). Collaborative KPIs evaluate and reward not only the supplier contribution to customer performance but also the customer's behavior to enable this. In this way, performanceâbased contracting can also be applied to settings where supplier and customer activities are interdependent, while traditional contracting theories suggest that output controls are not effective under such conditions. In the collaborative KPI contracting process, indicators measure both supplier and customer (buying firm) performance and promote collaboration by being defined through a collaborative process and by focusing on endâofâprocess indicators. The article discusses the original case setting of a telecommunication service provider experiencing critical problems in outsourcing IT services. The initial intervention implementing this contracting approach produced substantial improvements, both in performance and in the relationship between buyer and supplier. Subsequently, the approach was tested and evaluated in two other settings, resulting in a set of actionable propositions on the efficacy of collaborative KPI contracting. Our study demonstrates how defining, monitoring, and incentivizing the performance of specific processes at the buying firm can help alleviate the limitations of traditional performanceâbased contracting when the supplier's liability for service performance is difficult to verify
EinstĂŒrzende Neubauten â Statikprobleme im SĂ€ulenmodell der Alterssicherung
Politische Debatten und wissenschaftliche Analysen ĂŒber die Entwicklung der Alterssicherung in Deutschland orientieren sich an dem âDrei-SĂ€ulen-Modellâ als Metapher fĂŒr die Gesamtstruktur der Altersvorsorge. Derzeitig entspricht die bundesdeutsche Alterssicherung aber eher einem ViersĂ€ulentempel mit höchst unterschiedlicher StĂ€rke der einzelnen SĂ€ulen. Die Grundsicherung ist als vierte SĂ€ule hinzugekommen, die Gesetzliche Rentenversicherung ist nach wie vor die stĂ€rkste und tragende SĂ€ule, die betriebliche Alterssicherung schwĂ€chelt und der Aufbau einer starken dritten SĂ€ule (âRiester-Renteâ) zur Kompensation der Leistungsreduktionen in der GRV ist gescheitert. Die jĂŒngsten ReformĂŒberlegungen zur betrieblichen Alterssicherung sind von der Vorstellung eines Zwei-SĂ€ulen-Modells getragen. Aus den internationalen Organisationen (OECD, EU) kommen dagegen Konzepte, die Sicherung im Alter an sechs Hauptquellen der Versorgung mit GĂŒtern, Dienstleistungen und Einkommen zu orientieren.
Â
Decline of the Three Pillar Model in German Pension Policy
Political debates as well as scientific studies on the development of pension schemes in Germany are based on the âthree-pillar modelâ as a metaphor for the system of old-age provision. Currently, the German pension system corresponds rather to a four-pillar building with very different strengths of the individual columns. The basic provision at old age has been added as the fourth pillar in 2001, the compulsory public pension insurance (GRV) continues to be the strongest pillar, the occupational pensions system shows signs of weakness and the construction of a strong third pillar (âRiester pensionâ) to compensate for the benefit reduction in the GRV has failed. The recent reform efforts in the field of occupational pensions are justified by the idea of a two-pillar model. By contrast, international organizations (OECD, EU) have pushed conceptions to rest old-age provision systems upon six different sources of the supply of goods, services and income
- âŠ