Advancing Performance Measurement Theory by Focusing on Subjects: Lessons from the Measurement of Social Value

Abstract

Performance measurement and management (PMM) researchers have recently called for a closer inspection of social controls – the cultural and behavioural aspects of PMM inside organizations – as a complement to longstanding inquiries into technical controls – the rational and structural processes that enable measurement. The authors address this call by first reviewing the principal findings obtained in the field of social value measurement (SVM), which focuses on the measurement of how and to what extent individuals and groups perceive and realize subjective changes (i.e. in knowledge, access and health) from interactions with organizations. Subsequently, the authors distil the main characteristics of SVM research (i.e. the basic conceptualizations, stated purposes and normative principles). They find that SVM tends to highlight the importance of individual and group wellbeing and welfare, aim to understand how organizational actions influence these conditions, and focus on individuals’ lived experiences of measuring or being measured. In comparison, PMM research concentrates on technical controls, relies mainly on notions of systems and structured processes, and assumes people's behaviours are impacted by measures, but does not fully explore their responses. The authors argue that to acknowledge and integrate social aspects of PMM properly into research and practice, subjects – with their thoughts, emotions and experiences – should be included more explicitly in future studies and theorizations.

Connecting relational mechanisms to performance measurement in a digital service supply chain

“…Previous researchers have shown that if companies aim to create and sustain a competitive advantage through collaboration, their organizational routines should be understood (Beer and Micheli, 2018); otherwise, the objectives will not be achieved, and the collaboration will fail (Verdecho, Alfaro, and Rodriguez-Rodriguez 2009; Pekkola and Ukko 2016).…”

“…Although many frameworks for measuring the performance of the supply chain have been developed, little is known about the mechanisms that initiate and enhance social interactions in performance measurement (Smith and Bititci 2017;Beer and Micheli 2018). Successful supply chain relationships require firms work independently and in collaboration with other supply chain actors, by encouraging, for example, exchanging information in a trusting manner, joint sense making and integrating knowledge (Poppo, Zhou, and Ryu 2008;Cheung, Myers, and Mentzer 2010;Papakiriakopoulos and Pramatari 2010;Liang 2015;Nollet, Beaulieu, and Fabbe-Costes 2017).…”

“…The core of performance measurement is providing timely information to suppliers that reveal buyers' expectations and enables corrective actions (Cousins, Lawson, and Squire 2008). This requires taking into account social aspects of the measurement process parallel with technical aspects (Smith and Bititci 2017), which are realized as implementing organizational routines related to performance measurement, such as different uses of performance information, and the dynamics of important inter-organizational exchanges (Beer and Micheli 2018). Thus, successful measurement of the performance of a supply chain is heavily influenced by the collaboration between the different actors in the supply chain, and this collaboration brings relational mechanisms to the forefront.…”

“…Such interest in the use of and effects of performance measurement systems and frameworks, rather than just in their existence, has begun to illuminate the 'behavioral assumption' (de Leeuw and van den Berg 2011). This idea presupposes that performance measurement systems directly influence people's behaviours (Bititci et al 2012;Beer and Micheli 2018). However, few studies have focused on relational mechanisms.…”

“…Kreye, Roehrich, and Lewis (2015) suggest that increasing levels of service complexity increase the level of relational mechanism development between the provider and the customer and can be realized as positive impacts on relationship performance. Beer and Micheli (2018) further argued that there is a need for qualitative research that focuses not only on performance measurement processes but also on how people's experiences are created and understood during this process. For this reason, the study focuses on relational mechanisms rather than contractual mechanisms.…”