A model for internal benchmarking: when and how?

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -To determine the criteria for internal benchmarking candidate processes. Using those criteria, to develop a decision flowchart to employ internal or external benchmarking. To then propose a framework for implementing internal benchmarking in an organization. Finally, to use a case study to apply both the Decision Flowchart and the proposed implementation framework. Design/methodology/approach -The method is theoretical framework design supported by a case study. Findings -The development of a practical flowchart and framework is achieved. This is successfully used in improving a business process thorough an actual case study.Research limitations/implications -The information is limited to situations where quality programs including benchmarking are used or anticipated. Information is drawn from a single successful case study and existing literature. Practical implications -Provides a practical prescriptive approach for identifying and applying the quality tool of benchmarking to internal processes. Originality/value -This provides a new method of evaluating processes for improvement based on the availability of internal knowledge. No such flowchart has been proposed to date. It should be of use to both practitioners and academics by offering a step-by-step approach to improving their business processes and profitability.

How Benchmarking and Higher Education Came Together

“…Some of the largest of these include the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and its many offshoots ( Barriers to Benchmarking in Higher Education. Whereas benchmarking has become a staple tool for process improvement in business and industry (Southard and Parente, 2007;Stapenhurst, 2009), examples of full-scale benchmarking in higher education are scarce in the literature. It is not hard to identify reasons why benchmarking has failed to gain traction in higher education.…”

Internal Benchmarking for Institutional Effectiveness

“…Theoretically, intra-institutional benchmarking should encounter fewer barriers than cross-institutional comparisons. Data is more accessible and accurate, and transferring practices is likely to be better accepted because of similarity in culture and environment (Southard and Parente, 2007;Stapenhurst, 2009). Goals for improvement seem more realistic when they are already being accomplished elsewhere in the organization.…”

Barriers to internal benchmarking initiatives: an empirical investigation

“…In our review of the implementation literature, we found great variation in the detailed steps used by companies in carrying out benchmarking (Bhutta and Huq, 1999;Southard and Parente, 2007;Maire et al, 2005;Binder et al, 2006). For example, Bhutta and Huq (1999) report that some companies have used up to 33 steps, while others have used only four.…”

“…Each company seems to employ the number of steps that better suits its individual needs, depending on the complexity and the size of the project that is undertaken. However, despite this variation, the major stages of the benchmarking process remain relatively similar, independently of the amount of attention given to a specific area, which will add or remove a few steps to/from the process (Southard and Parente, 2007;Prasnikar et al, 2005). In this context, two main approaches to benchmarking implementation were identified in the literature: the traditional benchmarking process, associated with the so-called "Traditionalists' perspective"; the diagnostic benchmarking process, associated with the so-called "Modernists' perspective" (Longbottom, 2000).…”

“…Barriers to internal benchmarking companies often derive value from simply going through the implementation steps and therefore it is important that the implementation process itself is well conducted (Zairi and Ahmed, 1999). Unfortunately, there is no widely accepted process for conducting benchmarking exercises (Dattakumar and Jagadeesh, 2003;Zairi and Ahmed, 1999;Southard and Parente, 2007) and managers are faced with complex challenges when planning to implement benchmarking (Dervitsiotis, 2000).…”