Building a Process Performance Measurement System: Some Early Experiences

Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research

Volumn 58, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 149-159

  Kueng, P ^a   Krahn, A J W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

^b A T Kearney (International)   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347664005     PISSN: 00224456     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Harrington H J, Business Process Improvement: The breakthrough strategy for total quality, productivity, and competitiveness (McGraw-Hill, New York) 1991, pp.82 and 167.
2. Willcocks L, Does IT-enabled business process re-engineering pay off? Recent findings on economics and impacts, in L Willcocks (ed.), Investing in Information Systems: evaluation and management (Chapman & Hall, London) 1996, 171-192.
3. Kueng P, Supporting BPR through a Process Performance Measurement System, in P. Banerjee et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Information Technology Management (Har-Anand Publications, New Delhi) 1998, 422-434.
4. Kueng P & Kawalek P, Goal-based business process models: creation and evaluation, Business Process Manage J, 3 (1997) 17-38.
5. Eccles R G, The Performance Measurement Manifesto, Harvard Business Rev, 69 (1991) 131-138.
6. Letza S R, The design and implementation of the balanced business scorecard: an analysis of three companies in practice, Business Process Manage J, 2 (1996) 54-76.
7. Brimson J & Antos J, Activity-Based Management for Service Industries, Government Entities, and Nonprofit Organizations (Wiley, New York) 1994.
8. Glad E & Becker H, Activity-based Costing and Management (Wiley, New York) 1996.
9. Kaplan R S & Norton D P, The Balanced Scorecard: measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Rev, 70 (1992) 71-79.
10. Kaplan R S & Norton D P, The Balanced Scorecard: translating strategy into action (Boston MA, Harvard Business School Press) 1996, 92.
11. MBNQA, Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria for Performance Excellence, United States Department of Commerce, NIST, Gaithersburg MD, USA; http://www.quality.nist.gov/docs/98_crit/98crit.htm; accessed 12 June 1998.
12. EFQM, Guidelines on Self-Assessment, European Foundation for Quality Management, Brussels, Belgium; http://www.efqm.org/model.htm; accessed 12 June 1998.
13. Gadd K, Business self-assessment: strategic tool for building process robustness and achieving integrated management, Business Process Re-eng & Manage, 1 (1995) 66-85.
14. Cross R & Iqbal A, The Rank Xerox Experience: benchmarking ten years on, in A Rolstadås (ed.), Benchmarking: theory and practice (Chapman & Hall, London) 1995, 1-10.
15. Juran J & Gryna F, Quality Planning and Analysis: from product development through use (McGraw-Hill, New York) 1993.
16. Paulk M C, Curtis B, Chrissis M B & Weber C V, Capability Maturity Model, Version 1.1, IEEE Software, 10, 1993, 18-27.
17. SEI, SW-CMM v2.0, Draft C, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/activities/ cmm/draft-c/c.html, accessed 12 June 1998.
18. McLellan M, Workflow Metrics: one of the great benefits of workflow, Praxis des Workflow-Management edited by H. Österle & P. Vogler (Vieweg Verlag, Braunschweig) 1996, pp.301-318.
19. Workflow Management Coalition, Terminology & Glossary, http://www.aiim.org/wfmc/; accessed 12 June 1998.
20. Austin R D, Measuring and Managing Performance in Organizations (Dorset House Publishing, New York) 1996.