In recent years, literature has identified the increasing complexity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and highlighted their sensitivity to differences in managerial culture and management systems. Research has shown that performance measurement systems (PMSs) could play an important role in supporting managerial development in these companies. In this paper, the literature on performance measurement in manufacturing SMEs is reviewed and the diffusion, characteristics and determinants of performance measurement in SMEs are analysed. Shortcomings in the performance measurement systems are highlighted and the many factors that seem to constrain PMSs in manufacturing SMEs are defined, e.g. lack of financial and human resources, wrong perception of the benefits of PMS implementation, short-term strategic planning. Moreover, using dimensions defined according to the information found in the literature, two PMS models specifically developed for SMEs are compared with generic PMS models. The comparison points out an evolution in PMS models over time; in particular, the models developed in the last 20 years are more horizontal, process-oriented and focus on stakeholder needs. However, it is not clear whether these changes are due to the evolution of the generic models or an attempt to introduce models suited to the needs of SMEs. To clarify this matter and better to understand PMSs in SMEs, further theoretical and empirical studies are necessary. The main issues still requiring investigation are listed in a research agenda at the end of the paper.

A large body of research has pointed out the need for a contingent approach in the design of new product development processes, highlighting the risk of simply accepting a normative perspective that leads to the identification and diffusion of decontextualized ''best practices.'' In the literature there are contrasting views regarding the identification of the characteristics of product innovation processes in extremely uncertain and dynamic conditions. Some studies propose a fascinating dichotomy: the contraposition between flexible processes and Stage-Gate s processes. They maintain that Stage-Gate s processes are characterized by ''early and sharp'' product definition and clear separation between concept development and implementation (detail design and production ramp-up), whereas flexible development models seek to delay the concept freeze point and overlap product development stages going beyond concurrent engineering. Other studies have arrived at seemingly conflicting results; the suitability of the early and sharp product definition approach in turbulent environments is debated without supporting the dichotomy between flexible processes and Stage-Gate s processes. Moreover, additional reasons for questioning the contraposition between Stage-Gate s and flexible processes come from a series of studies on the management of discontinuous innovation. The aim of the present study was to develop a conceptual framework that can overcome this widely accepted but controversial dichotomy. The framework is based on the recognition of the orthogonality among three analytical dimensions: organizational, informational, and temporal. The organizational dimension refers to the structuration of the process. The informational dimension deals with classifying the development activities and investigating the firm's product definition approach (early and sharp mode vs. late freeze mode). The temporal dimension relates to the execution strategies of development tasks. The three-dimensional framework enables us to better understand the complex relationships between the degree of structuration in process design (organizational dimension), the degree of intersection between problem-formulation and problem-solving in product definition (informational dimension), and different types of execution strategies (temporal dimension).

Managing processes with the aim of improving them necessarily requires both analysis and critical evaluation of organizational practice. This article takes up the theme of business process analysis with the aim of highlighting and comparing alternative techniques and approaches. Four approaches have been identified: action analysis, process mapping, co-ordination analysis and social grammar analysis. An interpretative model of the fundamental differences between these approaches is proposed. This paper discusses both the limits and the possibilities offered by each approach and concludes with a reflection on the problem of integrating diverse analytical perspectives

No abstract

The analysis of the studies on performance measurement systems (PMSs) for small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) shows an important contradiction: on the one hand, we often find evidence that such enterprises have a hard time rationalising their operational practices and strategic processes, and consider strategy as mainly emerging; on the other hand, scholarly literature offers methodologies for the implementation of a PMS that are based upon a top-down approach and that aim at translating strategy into action, with little consideration to the tendency of small enterprises not to give much importance to the formalisation of their strategic choices. To contribute to this research gap, the authors identify a circular methodology to implement a strategically aligned PMS in SMEs. The proposed methodology is based on the balanced scorecard model and features four main phases: (1) the analysis of current 'individual dashboards' to actually show the performances that are kept under control; (2) the clarification of the key success factors (critical success factors (CSFs)) underlying the measures under control; (3) the definition of the desired strategy map as a result of the comparison between CSFs that are currently under control and the desired strategy; (4) the translation of the desired strategy map into a dashboard of indicators necessary for the implementation of the strategy. The identified implementation process features key aspects, connecting the actual strategy with the intentional strategy and engaging SMEs in a process of observation and clarification of their future vision.

Examines the problems, and the limitations, of the use of process mapping techniques in the light of sociotechnical experience in systems analysis. To do this, first, the fundamental characteristics of the various process mapping techniques are illustrated, highlighting how these can be characterised by a conception of business processes based on the notion of``technology'' which has been developed within modernist organisation theory. Then, the contribution of sociotechnical theory to office work analysis and design is presented, with particular reference to the work of Calvin Pava on the relationship between the method of analysis and the nature of work. Concludes with some reflections on the residual role attributed to social aspects within process mapping and on the problem of artificial rationality and linearity linked to an acritical use of modelling languages.

Argues that the way work organization in lean production environments is assessed depends heavily on the choice of the variables that are adopted to ascertain the degree of innovation in the workplace. Many studies evaluate the change in work organization observing only those elements which are functional for the just‐in‐time production principles while excluding crucial dimensions that characterize the working situation from the worker’s perspective. Moreover, besides the choice of the variables employed to ascertain the degree of innovation in work organization, the method adopted for measuring these variables would seem to be critical if one wishes to bring to light what is hidden behind the popular terms like team, empowerment, problem‐solving groups, quality circles, etc. Suggests that only a research approach which is able to give “thick descriptions” of workplaces can reveal the “reality of working” within lean production systems.

Purpose-A large amount of research deals with the identification of management practices related to new product development (NPD) success. To this purpose, assessment tools capable of helping enterprises to set up improvement processes are of extreme importance. The aim of this paper is to build a product development assessment model based upon a normative-contingent approach. Design/methodology/approach-First, a literature review of the main approaches and models used in NPD assessment was carried out. Second, the tool was tested in five firms. The case studies allowed the authors to test the tool in its prototypal phase in order to assess both its limits and potential and also to highlight possible improvements. Findings-The assessment tool developed yields a clear understanding of the current state of product development process in an organization in order to facilitate a shared understanding of the weakness and deficiencies, to enable effective process management, to develop implementation plan to support change initiatives and to support process improvement using metrics. Originality/value-The product development assessment model is based upon a normativecontingent approach meaning that the prescriptive requirements are defined according to the logic of coherence: requirements vary in relation to contextual conditions. In particular, there are two important context factors which are considered to have a significant influence on NPD process: the complexity of the product-market interface and the enterprise's NPD strategic orientations.