Analysis of the performance measurement models according to the requirements of the procurement business process

Komatina, Nikola; Nestić, Snežana; Aleksić, Aleksandar

doi:10.24867/ijiem-2019-3-241

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accurate knowledge of customer needs and the transmission and communication of these features and requirements to suppliers is key. Continuous supplier performance measurement can keep the requirement of the end user of the supply chain [32].…”

Section: External Relationship Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional QCD framework of supply chain

Sipos

Pató

2022

IRASE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study focuses on the supply chain actors’ QCD framework. The authors present an innovative tool that illustrates the operating system of different actors in the supply chain by combining virtual and physical reality. The study aims to present and “visualize” the QCD coherence system with the help of the PaTeNt© – QCD spatial model. The study, therefore, focuses on the supplier, the central company; the relationship between the supply chain actors and the QCD framework, which is suitable for the agile, proactive collaboration. The parts of the model, which is the result of the development: the elements of quality, the elements of cost, the elements of delivery. The development of the model was brought to life by the tasks which need to be solved and this model helps the understanding and transparency during the work.

show abstract

Section: External Relationship Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional QCD framework of supply chain

Sipos

Pató

2022

IRASE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there are limited academic papers on PMSs in the supply chain and procurement domain. The limited studies on PMS in logistics, procurement and supply are focused on the practice-corporate performance link from a financial measures perspective (Komatina, Nestic and Aleksić, 2019, Shao, Moser and Henke, 2012, Zimmermann and Foerstl, 2014, Hofmann, 2014. There is no consensus on a framework for a procurement (direct or indirect) PMS (Belvedere, Grando and Legenvre, 2018).…”

Section: Pms Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of a performance measurement system for indirect procurement: a Delphi study

Darom

Plant

2020

MBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to address the current gap in knowledge of indirect procurement performance management. It attempts to argue the need for a specific and tailored performance management approach for the indirect procurement function that incorporates a balanced approach, beyond financial measures. Design/methodology/approach The case study approach evaluated key performance indicators from a balanced scorecard (BSC) perspective in the development of a performance measurement system (PMS) for a Middle Eastern university’s indirect procurement division. It initially reviewed the literature to assess potential indicators for this context. It used vision and mission statement analysis alongside expert interviews to augment the literature. The candidate indicators were then evaluated and ranked by an expert panel through applying a four-round Delphi technique. Findings Twenty-nine procurement-specific indicators are suggested in a BSC framework. The five highest-ranked indicators were not in the financial perspective unlike other BSC studies in the broader field of supply chain management (SCM). Practical implications The study suggests a framework and indicators for a procurement PMS for practitioners to consider. It also highlights there is no one-size-fits-all and that organisations need to tailor PM to the organisation and divisional strategy and operational needs. This study aids the development of guidelines for executives and procurement management that wish to develop indicators and a PMS. Originality/value This study contributes to knowledge by partly addressing the under-researched field of indirect procurement PM. The literature suggested that various roles in SCM require specific PM indicators. This study puts forward a BSC framework with 29 indicators specifically for indirect procurement. Fourteen of these indicators were derived from non-literature sources. This study enhances knowledge and contributes to the limited debate and evidence on indirect procurement PM and the broader PM literature.

show abstract

“…In the world of Project Portfolio Management (PPM), two key managerial tasks after selection and prioritization of projects are: 1) assessing the current performance of a portfolio [1], and 2) forecasting the future performance of a portfolio based on its current status. Assessing and controlling the performance of an organization not only facilitates the achievement of the strategic goal [2] but also supports the management system of an organization [3]. Despite the importance of measuring and forecasting the performance of project portfolios, there is a paucity of research on this subject.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%