See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/378059130

Key Performance Indicators: The Complete Guide to KPIs for Business Success

Book · February 2024

DOI: 10.4324/9781032685465

CITATION READS

1 2,188

1 author:

Emanuel Camilleri
University of Malta
53 PUBLICATIONS 704 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Emanuel Camilleri on 06 January 2025.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

‘This book provides a practical, well‑designed, comprehensive and highly
adaptable framework for creating a relevant performance management system
in any enterprise, whether private or public. I therefore recommend it to all
administrative and operational managers in private entities, to public admin‑
istrators at any level and also to anyone else who is seriously interested in the
significant area of key performance indicators.’
Professor Peter J. Baldacchino Ph.D. (Lboro.), [Link]. (Lboro.), F.C.C.A.,
F.I.A., C.P.A., Faculty of Economics, Management & Accountancy, University of Malta

‘This book delivers the most practical and straightforward examples I have
ever read. It outfits you with a new way of seeing and working by using inno‑
vative performance management tools, including AI – sparking creativity and
innovation within the workplace. Simply a breath of fresh air! I would recom‑
mend this book to all leaders of government entities, private companies, and
academics alike.’
Renzo Farrugia [Link] Hons, MBA (Henley), CPA, FIA., Senior Manager,
Malta Investment Management Company Limited

‘This book by Emanuel Camilleri is a practical tool explaining, in understand‑

able language, the benefits of KPIs, without the use of complex academic
terms. It should serve as a useful vade mecum to those managers working in
the public service or the private sector.’
Joseph Said, Chairman, Maltapost Plc and CEO & Executive Director, L­ ombard Bank
Malta Plc

‘Dr Emanuel Camilleri has once again managed to make best use of both his
sound academic knowledge as well as extensive hands‑on experience at the
highest levels of management to publish this extremely useful and practical
book Key Performance Indicators: The Complete Guide to KPIs for Business Success. I gladly
endorse this high quality publication, focusing on such a topical theme, which
I consider a must for all managers who want to develop a successful career
within both the public as well as the private sector.’
Charles Deguara B.A. (Hons) Business Management, Auditor General, National
Audit Office, Malta

‘Key Performance Indicators: The Complete Guide to KPIs for Business Success is an ssential
manual that helps managers in public and private sectors devise and employ
performance indicators as a key approach that ensures accountability in fun‑
damental areas of management. The guide is thus an indispensable compan‑
ion for any manager who values professionalism as a leading ethos.’
Professor Frank Bezzina [Link]. (Hons), (Melit.), [Link]. (JEB), [Link].
(SHU), Ph.D. (Melit.), Pro‑Rector for International Development & Quality Assurance,
University of Malta
 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are widely used across organisations. But are
they fully understood in how they can properly shape, improve, or even under‑
mine organisational systems and outcomes? This book presents a framework and
tools for measuring and managing performance at various levels within an organ‑
isation, and helps managers re‑think the ways KPIs can be implemented to meet
organisational goals.
Innovative performance measurement and management is a vital function
within any organisation irrespective of its size and industry. Measuring and man‑
aging performance (whether on an individual, team, or departmental basis) assists
management in calibrating their established strategic goals by providing an insight
into how well their employees and the organisation are doing and identifying
areas of concern for rectification and improvement. This book focuses on the prac‑
ticality of performance management tools (for example, Performance Analytics;
Performance Reporting; Critical Success Factors; Balanced Scorecard; Benchmark‑
ing; Six Sigma; Business Excellence Models; Enterprise Risk Management) and
illustrates their use, and the changing nature of how organisational performance
will be evaluated in the future. This includes the application of Artificial Intel‑
ligence as an important trend in performance measurement and management.
This book provides a universal framework for implementing a performance
measurement and management system that is applicable to both the private and
public sectors. It is particularly relevant to HR and operational managers, and
organisational leaders and public administrators at all levels.

Emanuel Camilleri is a visiting senior lecturer at Malta University and has

authored several books. He has occupied senior management posts in industrial
engineering, finance, and ICT sectors in Australia and Malta. Recently, he was
appointed Chairman of the Planning Authority, Planning Board, Malta.
 KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS

The Complete Guide to KPIs

for Business Success

Emanuel Camilleri
Designed cover image: © Getty Images / Jian Fan
First published 2024
by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business
© 2024 Emanuel Camilleri
The right of Emanuel Camilleri to be identified as author of this work has been
asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised
in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered
trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent
to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing‑in‑Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging‑in‑Publication Data
Names: Camilleri, Emanuel, author.
Title: Key performance indicators: the complete guide to KPIs for business
success / Emanuel Camilleri.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2024. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023047583 (print) | LCCN 2023047584 (ebook) |
ISBN 9781032685458 (hardback) | ISBN 9781032648897 (paperback) |
ISBN 9781032685465 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Performance standards. | Performance—Management. |
Organizational effectiveness.
Classification: LCC HF5549.5.P35 C36 2024 (print) |
LCC HF5549.5.P35 (ebook) | DDC 658.3/12—dc23/eng/20231019
LC record available at [Link]
LC ebook record available at [Link]
ISBN: 978‑1‑032‑68545‑8 (hbk)
ISBN: 978‑1‑032‑64889‑7 (pbk)
ISBN: 978‑1‑032‑68546‑5 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781032685465
Typeset in Joanna
by codeMantra
Life and death flow from each other. I would like to dedicate this book to
Candy, my English Cocker Spaniel, whom I loved as a puppy and still loved
dearly as his life ebbed away in my arms as he took his last breath at the age
of almost fifteen years. I knew that I would miss him, but I never imagined
that it would be such a painful and heart‑breaking experience. When my
time is up and if I am worthy to enter the Kingdom of God, I will come
looking for you at Rainbow Bridge where we can be together with all our
loved ones for eternity. Life and death flow from each other, and during this
period of grief came Ellie, our first granddaughter, who is giving Maryanne,
my wife and I, so much joy and contentment.
 CONTENTS

List of Figures xvi

List of Tables xxi
Foreword xxiv
Preface and Acknowledgements xxvi
List of Abbreviations xxviii

PART I
Performance Measurement: The Essentials of Key
Performance Indicators 1

1 Performance Measurement: Key Performance Indicators

Concepts 3
Introduction 4
Key Performance Measures 6
Key Result Areas (KRAs) 11
Preparing Key Result Areas for Individuals 13
Preparing Key Result Areas for an Organisation 15
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) 16
Relationship between KRAs and KPIs 21
Conclusion 21
References 25
x Co n t en t s

2 Performance Management Concepts and Related Tools 26

Introduction 27
Overview of Performance Management and Tools 30
Aligning Organisational and Employee Needs 32
Achieving Sustainable and Enhanced Performance
Management 35
Performance Management Tools 39
Management Dashboards 41
Balanced Scorecards 44
Performance Analytics 45
Strategic Planning 46
Budgeting and Forecasting 48
Benchmarking 50
Business Excellence Models 52
Six Sigma 56
Enterprise Risk Management 58
Project/Programme Management 61
Performance Reporting 65
Conclusion 67
References 68

3 Root Cause Analysis and Its Impact on Performance

Management 70
Introduction 71
Development of Root Cause Analysis 72
Tay Bridge Disaster 73
New London School Catastrophe 73
West Gate Bridge Tragedy 74
Challenger Space Shuttle Misfortune 75
Sakichi Toyoda and Others 76
Root Cause Analysis 78
5‑Whys Approach 79
Challenger Interview Method 81
Role Playing Method 82
Process Maps (Flowcharts) 83
Ishikawa Diagram or Fishbone Diagram 85
Other Root Cause Analysis Methods 88
Rapid Problem Resolution (RPR) Problem
Diagnosis 88
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis 90
 Contents xi

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Procedure 92

Current Reality Tree 96
Root Cause Analysis: Finding the Cause of
Performance Issues 99
Conclusion 101
References 103

4 Performance Management Framework 104

Introduction 105
Creating the Right Organisational Environment 107
Developing a Proper Management and
Leadership Approach 107
Developing the Right Type of Organisational Commitment 113
Enhancing Employee Participation 120
Developing and Sustaining Employee Engagement 122
Enhancing Communication within the Organisation 127
Employee Development and Training 132
Performance Measurement Framework: Is There a
Difference between Public Sector (and Non‑Profit
Entities) and Private Sector? 135
Performance Management Framework 145
Conclusion 150
References 151

PART II
Performance Management Toolbox: Methods for Determining
Key Performance Indicators 155

5 Strategic Management and Business Planning as a Basis

for Establishing KPIs 160
Introduction 162
Strategic Planning as a Performance Management Tool 164
Prerequisites for Selecting Strategic KPIs 165
Financial and Non‑Financial Strategic KPIs 167
Suggested Financial and Non‑Financial Strategic KPIs 175
Business Planning as a Performance Management Tool 188
Defining the Budget for the Organisation 190
Measuring Business Performance: KPIs for Budgeting
and Forecasting at Departmental (or Responsibility
Unit) Level 193
xii Contents

Standard Cost Systems and Variance Analysis as KPI

Measuring Tools 207
Variance Analysis as KPI Tools 209
Example: Standard Cost Approach Using Variance
Analysis as KPI Tools 210
Performance Analytics as a Performance Management Tool 221
Performance Management in a Data‑Driven Organisation 225
Analytical Insights to Boost Business Performance 231
Performance Analytics in the Public Sector 235
Performance Analytics in Managing Projects 249
Performance Reporting as a Performance Management Tool 275
Performance Reporting Deployment 276
Performance Reporting Principles 280
Conclusion 295
References 295

6 Critical Success Factors for Establishing and Applying KPIs 299

Introduction 300
Types of Critical Success Factors 303
Implementing Critical Success Factor Model 307
Strategic Objectives 310
Strategy 310
Identify CSFs 312
Define KPIs 313
Determine the Critical Information Set 313
Example One: Applying the Critical Success Factor
Methodology Framework 314
Example Two: Applying the Critical Success Factor
Methodology Framework 320
Example Three: Applying the Critical Success Factor
Methodology Framework 322
Conclusion 325
References 326

7 Balanced Scorecard and Benchmarking:

Basis for Applying KPIs 327
Introduction 328
Balanced Scorecard 332
Roadmap for Applying the Balanced Scorecard
Methodology 334
 Contents xiii

Example: Applying the Balanced Scorecard

Methodology – Private Sector 342
Applying the Balanced Scorecard Methodology in the
Public Sector 347
Example: Applying Balanced Scorecard (BSC)
Methodology in the Public Sector 353
Benchmarking 365
Benchmarking Classification 367
The Benchmarking Process 372
Benchmarking Challenges 376
Conclusion 377
References 378

8 Six Sigma: Basis for Continuous Process Improvement 380

Introduction 381
Establishing Goal Values for Six Sigma 384
The Key Principles of Six Sigma 389
The Six Sigma Methodology 391
Six Sigma Case Studies 396
Six Sigma Methodology: Reducing Inventory Levels 396
Six Sigma Methodology: Reducing Call Centre Responses 398
Conclusion 399
References 401

9 Business Excellence Models, Enterprise Risk Management,

and Programme Management as a Basis for Performance
Improvement 402
Introduction 404
Development of Business Excellence Models 405
Business Excellence Model 406
Emergence of Other Business Excellence Models 410
Varying Approach to Implementing Business
Excellence Models 411
Other Business Excellence Models Framework 416
Other Considerations Regarding Business Excellence Models 418
Enterprise Risk Management 419
Enterprise Risk Management Theory and Concepts 420
Difference between Risk Management and
Enterprise Risk Management 422
Advantages of an Enterprise Risk Management Framework 422
xiv Contents

Integrating Strategy and Performance into Enterprise

Risk Management 423
Implementation of the Enterprise Risk Management
Framework 425
Outlook for Enterprise Risk Management Framework 427
Programme Management 428
Key Attributes of Programme Management 429
Programme Management Operational Aspects 430
Programme Management System of Measurement 431
Conclusion 435
References 436

PART III
Practical Application of Performance Management Tools and
Future Trends 439

10 Application of the Performance Management Tools:

Private Sector 442
Description of the Organisation 443
Operating Segments of Organisation 443
Other Organisational Characteristics 444
Organisational Risk Factors 446
Financial Condition and Results of Operations 449
Application of the Performance Management Tools: Private
Sector 454
Strategic Planning as a Performance Management Tool 454
Financial and Non‑Financial Strategic KPIs for GeoMed
Limited 456
KPIs for Budgeting and Forecasting at Departmental
Level for GeoMed Limited 467
Standard Cost Systems and Variance Analysis at
Component Level for GeoMed Ltd 472
Selected Component Information 473
Interpretation of Variance Analysis Findings 474
General Lessons Learnt from the GeoMed Ltd Case Study 477
Other Applicable Performance Management Tools for
GeoMed Ltd 478
Conclusion 479
References 479
 Contents xv

11 Application of the Performance Management Tools: Public

Sector 480
Description of Selected Governmental Organisation 481
Applicable Strategic Performance Management KPIs for
the Public Service 482
Cross‑Sectional Categories of KPIs for Public Service:
National Level 485
Finance Category 487
Operations Category 490
Public Services Category 491
Citizens Category 493
Human Resources Category 495
Cross‑Sectional Categories of KPIs for Public Service:
Ministerial Level 496
Cross‑Sectional Categories of KPIs for Public Service:
Departmental Level 508
Conclusion 523
References 524

12 Performance Measurement and Management: Future Trends 525

Introduction 527
Remodelling Performance Management 531
Performance Management Transformation 537
Contemporary Performance Management and
Measurement Trends 541
Artificial Intelligence: The Future in Performance
Management 557
Conclusion 565
References 566

Index 569
 FIGURES

1.1 The Relationship between Key Performance Measures,

Key Performance Areas, and Key Performance Indicators 17
1.2 Key Result Areas for an Individual Within an Organisation 22
1.3 Key Result Areas for an Organisation (Department) 23
2.1 Example of Using RACI Matrix 36
2.2 Example of Management Dashboard 43
2.3 Exemplification of the EFQM Business Excellence Model 54
3.1 The 5‑Whys Approach 79
3.2 Example: The 5‑Whys Approach 80
3.3 Example: Process Map – University Admissions Process
for New Students 85
3.4 Example: Constructing an Ishikawa Diagram 87
3.5 Identification of Recurring Grey Problems Model 89
3.6 FMEA Procedure Model 93
3.7 Example: Cause/Effect Relationships – Customer Care Service 98
3.8 Example: Current Reality Tree – Customer Care Service 99
4.1 Top Level Performance Management Framework 146
4.2 Detailed Level Performance Management Framework 147
5.1 Integrated Strategic and Business Planning Performance
Management Model 163
5.2 Summary of Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Category  168
 Figures x vii

5.3 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs Used in Private and

Public Sector Organisations  180
5.4 Example Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs for the
Customer Category  183
5.5 Example Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs for the
Operations Category  185
5.6 Example Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs for the
Human Resources Category  188
5.7 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Cash
Availability and Profitability Category  194
5.8 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Cash
Generation and Liquidity Category  195
5.9 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Total Budget
Category  196
5.10 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Budget
Expenses Line Items Category  197
5.11 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Budget Revenue
Line Items Category  198
5.12 Example Dashboard for Financial KPIs for Sales of
Products and Services Category  198
5.13 Example Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs for Employee
Characteristics Category  199
5.14 Variance Analysis for a Standard Variable Costing System
by Category  209
5.15a KPIs Performance Dashboard for Part‑X: Operation 1 222
5.15b KPIs Performance Dashboard for Part‑X: Operation 1 222
5.16 Conceptual Framework of Business Performance
Management (BPM) 226
5.17 Top Ten Drivers for Organisations to Implement Big Data
Analytics231
5.18 Further Findings of Ernst & Young (2015) Study Related
to a Mixture of Issues 232
5.19 Illustration of the Data Analytics Continuum 234
5.20 Performance Management and Performance Analytics
Process237
5.21 Flowchart of Stat Program Appraisal Process – Readiness
for Implementation 240
x viii Figures

5.22 Project Success Road Map – Sutton’s Project Success

Framework251
5.23 Processes Controlling Project Information Flow and Data
Warehouse Contents 254
5.24 Project Data Warehouse and Datamining 255
5.25 Principles Defining the Performance Reporting Framework 281
5.26 Organisation’s Readiness for Implementing a Performance
Reporting Framework 292
5.27 Diagnosis Principle 1: Defining the Organisation’s Vision
and Mission 293
5.28 Diagnosis Principle 3: Defining the Objectives for Each
Priority293
5.29 Diagnosis Principle 6: Discussing Strategic Context of Plan
and Reported Outcomes 294
5.30 Diagnosis Principle 7: Ensuring Performance Information
Provides a Comparative Analysis 294
5.31 Diagnosis Principle 8: Ensuring Information is Relevant,
Reliable, and Meaningful 295
6.1 Relationship between Strategic Planning, CSFs, and KPIs 301
6.2 Critical Success Factors Methodology Framework 309
6.3 Example Applying the Critical Success Factor
Methodology Framework324
7.1 Balanced Scorecard Results‑oriented Perspective 336
7.2 Balanced Scorecard Perspectives Pyramid 339
7.3 Balanced Scorecard Cascading Process 340
7.4 Balanced Scorecard Activity Framework 341
7.5 Pinnacle’s Strategic Objectives 343
7.6 Pinnacle’s Balanced Scorecard Perspectives Pyramid 344
7.7 Pinnacle’s Balanced Scorecard System 346
7.8 Silverton City Balanced Scorecard Structure 356
7.9 Strategy Map for the City of Silverton 357
7.10 Transformation from Strategic Objectives to the Strategic
Initiatives for Silverton 359
7.11 Transformation of Strategy into Operational Terms 361
7.12 Linking the Strategy to the Budget 362
7.13 Operational and Strategic Feedback Systems  362
7.14 Systematic Model for Implementing Benchmarking
Successfully373
 Figures xix

8.1 Smaller is Better: Depicting the Target Value and Upper

Specification Limit 385
8.2 Larger is Better: Depicting the Target Value and Lower
Specification Limit 386
8.3 Nominal is Best: Depicting the Upper and Lower
Specification Limits and Target Values 386
8.4 Example Critical to Quality (CTQ) Tree 387
8.5 Example of a Kano Diagram 388
8.6 DMAIC Phases and Their Respective Steps 393
8.7 Six Sigma Methodology: Key Statistical and Data
Evaluation Tools 394
8.8 Case Study: Supply Chain Channel  397
9.1 Example of the EFQM: Business Excellence Model 408
9.2 Vanguard Method to Self‑Assessment: Performance
Improvement414
9.3 Example of the Baldrige Criteria for Performance
Excellence417
9.4 Defining Programme Management Metrics 433
10.1 Integrated Strategic and Business Planning Performance
Management Model: GeoMed Limited 455
10.2 Summary of Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Category for
GeoMed Limited  456
10.3 Typical Dashboard for Financial KPIs Related to GeoMed
Limited  462
10.4 Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs GeoMed Limited:
Customer and Operations Category  464
10.5 Dashboard for Non‑Financial KPIs GeoMed Limited:
Human Resources Category  466
10.6 Dashboard for Additional KPIs Related to Budgeting and
Forecasting for GeoMed Limited 470
10.7 Application of Performance Management Tools Using
KPIs at Three Organisational Levels 477
11.1 Typical Dashboard for the Finance Category KPIs Showing
Target and Benchmark Countries 489
11.2 Typical Dashboard for the Operations Category KPIs
Showing Target and Benchmark Countries 491
11.3 Typical Dashboard for Public Services Category KPIs
Showing Target and Benchmark Countries 493
xx Figures

11.4 Typical Dashboard for the Citizens Category KPIs Showing

Target and Benchmark Countries 494
11.5 Typical Dashboard for Human Resources Category KPIs
Showing Target and Benchmark Countries 496
11.6a Hospital Healthcare Dashboard 503
11.6b Hospital Healthcare Dashboard 504
11.7a Patient Healthcare Dashboard 505
11.7b Patient Healthcare Dashboard 506
11.8 Eight Categories of KPIs Applicable to Managing an
Education Institution 510
11.9a Education Institution: Scholastic Category 513
11.9b Education Institution: Financial Resources Category 514
11.9c Education Institution: Students and Staff Category 515
11.9d Education Institution: Study Programmes Category 516
11.9e Education Institution: Academic Staff Category 517
11.9f Education Institution: Amenities and Services Provided
Category518
11.9g Education Institution: Technology Category 519
11.9h Education Institution: Accommodation Category 520
12.1 Typical Performance Evaluation Cycle 529
12.2 Objectives and Interlocking Procedures of Performance
Management System 536
12.3 Integration of Systems in a Multi‑Level Systems Environment 545
12.4 Overcoming the Challenges in Designing Performance
Measurement and Management Models 550
12.5 Five Phases of a Performance Measurement System 555
12.6 Proposed Performance Measurement System Conceptual
Model557
 TABLES

1.1 Differences between KRAs, KPAs, and KPIs 18

1.2 Significant Measures across Particular Industries 20
2.1 Organisational and Employee Needs 34
3.1 FMEA Tabular Template 94
4.1 Applicable Tools for the Proposed Performance
Management Framework 149
5.1a Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category 169
5.1b Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category 171
5.1c Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category 173
5.2 Standard Cost Card for Part‑X: Operation 1 211
5.3 Budgeted Costs Based on the Standard Cost Card for
Part‑X: Operation 1 211
5.4 Actual Costs and Profit for Part‑X: Operation 1 212
5.5 Reconciliation of Budgeted and Actual Profit Using
Variances for Part‑X: Operation 1 221
5.6 30 Reasons Why Governments Should Consider
Establishing a Stat Program 243
5.7a Self‑diagnostic Assessment Questionnaire for Performance
Reporting Framework 284
5.7b Self‑diagnostic Assessment Questionnaire for Performance
Reporting Framework 285
x xii Ta b l e s

5.7c Self‑diagnostic Assessment Questionnaire for Performance

Reporting Framework 287
5.8 Database for Responses of Self‑diagnostic Assessment
Questionnaire288
5.9 Average Scores Computed in the Database of Responses of
Diagnostic Assessment Questionnaire 291
6.1 Different Notions the CSFs and KPIs Represent 302
6.2 Steps in CSF Methodology and Organisational Support
Required317
6.3a IRD Example: Steps in CSF Methodology and
Support Required 318
6.3b IRD Example: Steps in CSF Methodology and
Support Required 319
7.1 BSC Usage by Local Government Bodies 348
7.2 Difference in the Focus of the BSC for the Private and
Public Sectors 356
7.3 Difference in the Focus of the BSC for the Private and
Public Sectors 363
7.4 Relevance of Use for Different Categories of
Benchmarking and Different Management Purposes 366
9.1 EFQM Framework: Fundamental Concepts 409
9.2 International Business Excellence Models 412
9.3 Comparison between Traditional Thinking and Systems
Thinking415
10.1 Key Operational and Industry Risk Factors Identified by
GeoMed Limited 447
10.2 Other Key Risk Factors Identified by GeoMed Limited 448
10.3 Comparison of the GeoMed Limited Results of Operations
for Fiscal Years 2022 and 2021 449
10.4 Comparison of the GeoMed Limited Cashflows for Fiscal
Years 2022 and 2021 450
10.5 GeoMed Limited Current (2022) Contractual Obligations 450
10.6 GeoMed Limited Consolidated Balance Sheet Statement 450
10.7 GeoMed Limited Consolidated Income Statement 452
10.8 GeoMed Limited Consolidated Cashflow Statement 453
10.9a Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category for
GeoMed Limited 457
 Tables x xiii

10.9b Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category for

GeoMed Limited 458
10.9c Financial Ratios (KPIs) by Application Category for
GeoMed Limited 460
10.10 Additional KPIs for GeoMed Limited Related to Budgeting
and Forecasting 468
10.11 GeoMed Limited Standard Cost Card for a Component
Manufactured in a Single Operation 473
10.12 GeoMed Limited Actual Cost for March for a Component
Manufactured in a Single Operation 474
10.13 GeoMed Limited Variance Analysis Calculations for
March for the Manufactured Component 474
11.1 Cross‑Sectional Categories of KPIs for the Public Service 485
11.2 Values for Cross‑Sectional Categories of KPIs Related to
Target Country and Other Countries 486
11.3a Critical Set of Healthcare KPIs 499
11.3b Critical Set of Healthcare KPIs 500
Values for the Critical Set of Healthcare KPIs and their
11.4a 
Benchmark Target 501
11.4b Values for the Critical Set of Healthcare KPIs and their
Benchmark Target 502
11.5 Critical Set of KPIs for Managing an Education Institution 511
12.1 Cost System Report for Producing Required Components 547
12.2 Capability Evaluation System Report for Producing
Required Components 547
12.3 Performance System Report for Producing Required
Components547
12.4 Contribution per Special Purpose Machine Hours for
Producing Required Components 548
12.5 Production Plan for Producing Required Components to
Maximise Total Contribution 548
12.6 Summary of Murtala’s (2017) Research Findings
Regarding Big Companies 553
 FOREWORD

Peter Drucker is famous for saying ‘if

you can’t measure it, you can’t man‑
age it.’
Excellence is not achieved by merely
setting out clear targets or goals, but
by also ensuring that they are meas‑
urable, and are continuously assessed.
This book, authored by Dr Emanuel
Camilleri, offers an extensive frame‑
work that does just that. It features a
plethora of performance management
tools that can be immensely useful
for organisations seeking to improve
their operations and achieve their
goals. Moreover, the approach is one
which is forward‑looking, and the
book itself covers new developments, such as the use of artificial intel‑
ligence in performance measurement and management.
The book demonstrates, in a clear fashion, just how much management
science has evolved over the years, and how operators in the private and
public sectors can benefit from the adoption of new techniques. Many seem
to associate increased productivity and efficiency solely with the adoption
 Fore word xxv

of technological developments, yet the reality is, that having access to the
best technology is no guarantee of success if the organisations remain
rooted in dated approaches to performance management. The adoption of
innovative management systems is a key step forward for countries com‑
mitted to successfully achieving the twin transformations of digitalisation
and climate neutrality.
These challenges require a holistic reform of the way organisations
set their goals and measure their performance. In this light, the tenets
espoused in this book can be of great help to organisation leaders in the
coming decades, where change will be a key part of organisational opera‑
tions, and where the measurement of success will become ever more criti‑
cal and challenging.
In contrast to many management science books, which tend to focus
simply on theoretical constructs, this book is indeed practical, as the per‑
formance management tools described herein are applied on two authentic
organisations: One from the private sector and the other from the pub‑
lic sector. This not only confirms the general applicability of the recom‑
mended performance management tools, but also shows how these can be
tweaked to reflect very different goals that organisations set for themselves.
Performance management is not only essential to enhancing profits or the
balance sheet of an entity; it is equally important for public sector entities
with wider goals, which may not be measured as easily.
The challenges of digitalisation and climate neutrality are complex, as
over the coming decades many nations are expected to have an ageing
workforce. The availability of human resources will become scarcer and
there will be increased competition for talent. In such an environment,
performance management will become even more important. Organisa‑
tions will need to achieve more with fewer resources, and in order to do
this they will need to plan better and pay more attention to how they
deploy their limited resources.
I believe that the approaches outlined in this book present an impor‑
tant steppingstone for organisation leaders determined to transform their
organisation. Dr Camilleri has done a great service to managers by putting
this comprehensive guidebook together. I am confident that it will stand
them in good stead in the years to come.

His Excellency Dr Robert Abela KUOM, BA, LLD, Adv Trib Melit, MP
Prime Minister, Malta
 PREFACE AND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book, entitled Key Performance Indicators: The Complete Guide to KPIs for Busi‑
ness Success, is not about performance but about performance measurement
and management. This is an important distinction, because the word per‑
formance in its simplest form means the action of carrying out a task or
function. Moreover, good performance is defined as conducting a task in
a precise and consistent fashion that adheres to a well‑defined process.
However, none of these definitions refer to how performance is measured
and managed. There is also a difference between measuring and manag‑
ing the performance of an individual and an organisation. In fact, there is
a range of performance measurement and management practices, with the
individual at the lower end of the spectrum and the organisation at the top
end, amongst teams, departments, divisions, products, and many others in
between. Additionally, performance is dependent on many variables, some
of which may be known and others unknown. Therefore, the performance
of an individual or entity (and constituents in between this spectrum) is
not measured by just one variable but through several variables. Moreover,
these variables are indicative of the performance that is expected from the
individual or entity. In other words, they are suggestive or emblematic.
On an individual level, research has shown that traditional performance
management systems and their associated annual employee appraisal meth‑
ods are time‑consuming. Often a supervisor goes through the mechanics
 Preface and Acknow ledgements x x vii

of the appraisal process without realistically assessing the extent to which

an employee was contributing towards to the achievement of the organisa‑
tion’s strategic objectives. Experience has shown that these appraisal sys‑
tems, particularly in the public sector, are a way of giving an employee a pay
rise without upsetting the organisational salary scales that may have been
negotiated with the trade unions. Performance at an organisational level
is even more difficult to assess, particularly during a recession. Achieving
results during a recession is much harder than during an economic boom.
Yet, during a recession, managers are penalised when targets are not fully
achieved. It has become apparent that better performance measurement
and management systems are required.
This book is aimed at overcoming the anomalies described above. The
book offers a common performance management framework that is sup‑
ported by an extensive set of tools, which may be applied in various cir‑
cumstances to satisfy the wide spectrum of roles, from the individual to the
organisation level (and in between) in both the public and private sectors.
The content of this toolbox is not prescriptive but provides suggestions.
Most of all, the tools provided are meant to stimulate the manager’s think‑
ing to adopt and adapt these tools to their own organisational circum‑
stances. Performance is like holding a bird. Squeeze it too hard and you are
likely to stifle it; loosen your grip and you run the risk of losing control of
it. Performance needs to be fairly measured and managed and be within
reach. Performance is not only the outcome of hard work, but also the out‑
come of applying suitable tools that focus on the things that matter to make
the organisation successful.
Finally, I would like to acknowledge the effort of all the staff at Rout‑
ledge publishing, namely Rebecca Marsh, Lauren Whelan, Sarah Hudson
and Jade Ridgill, who provided their invaluable and professional advice
during the whole publication process, and the marketing team for the pro‑
fessional way they promoted this book. I would also like to thank my wife,
Maryanne, who painstakingly checked all the chapters, and Aidan Cross,
who meticulously carried out the copy‑editing, ensuring that the book was
to the highest standard possible.

Dr Emanuel Camilleri
 ABBREVIATIONS

ABC Activity Based Costing

AHT Average Handling Time
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
ASRS Aviation Safety Reporting System
BQF British Quality Foundation
BE Business Excellence
BPE Business Process Engineering
BPM Business Performance Management
BSC Balanced Scorecard
CAC Customer Acquisition Cost
CBS Cost Breakdown Structure
CMIS Customer Management Information System
CPM Corporate performance management
CRT Current Reality Tree
CSCW Computer‑supported cooperative work
CSF Critical Success Factors
CTQ Critical to Quality
DFSS Design for Six Sigma
DMADV Define, Measure, Analyse, Design, Verify
DMAIC Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, Control
DPMS Dynamic performance measurement system
 A bbreviations xxix

DSO Days Sales Outstanding

DSS Decision Support Systems
EFQM European Foundation for Quality Management
EIS Executive Information Systems
ERM Enterprise Risk Management
ERP Enterprise Resource Planning
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
FMIS Financial Management Information System
GDPR General Data Privacy Regulation
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
HRMIS Human Resource Management Information System
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IDP Individual Development Plan
IoT Internet‑of‑things
IRD Inland Revenue Department
KPA Key Performance Area
KPI Key Performance Indicator
KPM Key Performance Measure
KRA Key Result Area
KRI Key result indicator
LTV Lifetime Value
MIS Management Information Systems
MSSP Measurement Systems Strategic Performance
NESC NASA Engineering and Safety Center
NPS Net Promoter Score
OCF Operating Cash Flow
ODS Operating Data Store
OKR Objectives and Key Results
OLAP On‑Line Analytical Processing
OPM Organisational Performance Management
PAF Performance and assessment framework
PI Performance indicator
PMI Project Management Institute
PMM Performance Measurement and Management
PMP Performance management and planning
PMS Performance measurement systems
xxx A bbreviations

PPM People performance management

RACI Responsibility assignment matrix
RADAR Results, Approach, Deployment, Assessment, and Review
RDBMS Relational Database Management Systems
RI Result indicator
ROE Return on Equity
ROI Return‑on‑investment
RPR Rapid Problem Resolution
SCR Salary Competitiveness Ratio
SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely
SQA Singapore Quality Award
TJC The Joint Commission
TOC Theory of Constraints
TPS Toyota Production Model
TQM Total Quality Management
WAN Wide Area Network
WBS Work Breakdown Structure
 Part I
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

THE ESSENTIALS OF KEY PERFORMANCE

INDICATORS

According to the Collins Dictionary, the word ‘performance’ means how

successful someone or something is, or how well they do something. It
is contended that the term ‘performance’ is illusive because it does not
provide a specific meaning, or more precisely it is difficult to pin down
its exact significance. For example, a student may obtain a mark of 90%
in an exam, and one may describe his/her performance as being excel‑
lent. However, what if the exam was considered simple when compared
to previous examinations on the same topic? How would you classify a
student who obtained a mark of 75% in an exam that was considered dif‑
ficult with a student who obtained 90% in an exam that was considered
simple? Consider a student who obtains 70% for the simple examination.
How would one describe his/her performance? Would it make a difference
to our judgement of the performance of the student who obtained 70% if
this student was dyslexic? The message being conveyed is that someone’s
or something’s performance is dependent on certain variables, some of
which may be known and others unknown. It is realised that the examples

DOI: 10.4324/9781032685465‑1
2 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

provided are about individuals. However, similar types of examples may be

applied to organisations as well.
Furthermore, performance of an individual or entity is not measured
by just one variable but through several variables. Moreover, these sev‑
eral variables are indicative of the performance that is expected from the
­individual or entity. In other words, they are suggestive or emblematic.
Therefore, in measuring the performance of an individual or entity, one
must be aware that the measure is indicative depending on the circum‑
stances and thus the variables selected to measure performance must be
chosen­­carefully. The selected variables to measure the concept of perfor‑
mance must be c­onsidered as key performing elements. If these simple
principles are understood, then the fundamental concept of Key Perfor‑
mance Indicators (KPIs) becomes clearer.
In simple terms, KPIs are a category of performance measurements that
gauge the success of an organisation or of an activity in which the organisa‑
tion participates. Hence, it is a measurable value that illustrates the degree
of effectiveness an organisation achieves in implementing its fundamental
business objectives. Additionally, organisations utilise KPIs at various levels
to assess their achievement at attaining their targets. Therefore, high‑level
KPIs tend to focus on the holistic or general performance of the organisa‑
tion. On the other hand, low‑level KPIs are inclined to focus on activities or
processes in departments, such as operations, marketing, quality control,
personnel (HR), and administrative support, amongst others, depending
on the industry the organisation operates in.
KPIs are important because they keep business objectives at the head
of the decision‑making process. This is the reason why an organisation
needs to have an effective communications strategy to ensure that its busi‑
ness objectives are disseminated accurately across the organisation, so that
employees grasp and become accountable for their own KPIs. This ensures
that the organisation’s key targets are embedded or entrenched in the
employees’ mindset as a way of routine thinking.
 1
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS CONCEPTS

‘Selecting the right measure and measuring things right are both art and sci‑
ence. And KPIs influence management behaviour as well as business culture.’
Pearl Zhu
Author

KPIs help an organisation to obtain consistent and acceptable results that

will eventually enable the organisation to grow and succeed in a com‑
petitive and turbulent environment. However, these organisational results
can only be realised when employees work as a well synchronised team
that constantly achieves the organisational objectives and goals through
the established KPIs. As defined previously, a KPI is a computed measure
to assess how well individual goals and/or the organisational targets are
being achieved. Normally, managers do not rely on just one KPI but tend
to define several KPIs to determine how well departments, work teams, or
individual employees are faring at performing the tasks allocated to them.
This implies that there is a distinction between high‑level KPIs (at depart‑
mental level) and low‑level KPIs (at individual level).

DOI: 10.4324/9781032685465‑2
4 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

For example, if a consultancy firm is evaluating how well an eGov‑

ernment application is working at the Inland Revenue Department (IRD)
regarding the taxpayers’ tax returns submissions and associated tax pay‑
ments, it may establish a group of specific KPIs to determine the success of
this specific eGovernment application. These KPIs may appraise different
aspects, including:

(a) Information Technology Reliability. File Server and WAN are to have an uptime
of 99.9%; less than three seconds response time; and no reported or
observed security violations.
(b) Information System Reliability. The application system is to have an uptime
of 99.9%; less than five seconds response time; and no reported or
observed security violations.
(c) Legal Framework. Appropriate laws are in place to support the electronic
transactions policy with no legal challenges in court regarding transac‑
tion authentication and verification policies.
(d) Organisational Framework. Appropriate human resource policies are in place
that result in less than 10% staff turnover rate; an average of less than
two days’ sick leave per worker; an average of less than 50 client com‑
plaints per month; and an average decrease in operational cost per year
of 7.5%.
(e) System Utilisation by Taxpayers: System penetration growth rate per month
of 1.5%.

As one may observe, the above KPIs would be integrated in the IRD’s strat‑
egy for implementing a particular eGovernment Taxpayer IRD service.
There is no golden rule as to how KPIs are constructed and defined, but
they should be quantitative, measurable, practical, and directional to assess
whether the organisation is advancing in the defined strategic path. This
example also illustrates the significance of KPIs as a facilitator of organisa‑
tional growth, in this case the application system penetration rate in the
taxpayer market space.

Introduction
It has been established that KPIs are measurable factors that exemplify the
effectiveness of an organisation to achieve its main business goals. However,
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 5

KPIs may be applied at two specific levels, namely high‑level KPIs that high‑
light the generic performance of the organisation, and low‑level KPIs that
have at the centre of interest a particular organisational activity and/or
individual. Therefore, KPIs are values, which are expressed in numerical
terms that are intended to communicate as much information as possible
in concise terms. Acceptable KPIs are those that are properly defined, are
suitably presented, and generate opportunities and motivate action. KPIs
are rarely presented as raw data; they are typically considered to be infor‑
mation, which is the outcome of processing raw data into a meaningful
value, such as averages, percentages, and ratios. For example, the Current
Ratio for a firm is calculated by dividing its Current Assets by its Cur‑
rent Liabilities. This ratio measures if the organisation under examination
can currently pay off short‑term debts by liquidating its assets. Hence, raw
accounting data is transformed into meaningful information that summa‑
rises the organisation’s liquidity position in concise and explicit terms.
A fundamental principle related to performance indicators is deciding
which indicators are ‘Key’ to shedding light on the performance of the
organisation under examination. This decision is normally assigned to the
company executives who manage the organisation, namely the Board of
Directors and Senior Management. According to PriceWaterhouseCoopers
(2007), many Boards tend to be given financial performance indicators,
even if these KPIs are communicating strategies, such as maximising cus‑
tomer experience, or attracting and retaining the best and brightest people.
In their view, the main concern is whether the KPIs presented to the Board
of Directors are those KPIs that provide the Board with the proper informa‑
tion to permit them (and those using the information) to appraise progress
against the stated strategic objectives. A difficulty that may arise is whether
the Board of Directors takes the initiative to define its KPI requirements.
In many cases, this initiative is taken by the Chief Executive Officer and
Financial Controller, which may not be desirable, particularly if the KPIs
are used as the basis for computing their performance bonus payments.
KPIs are also dependent on the industry and on the degree of operating
leverage.
PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2007) cite an example where a firm in the
retail industry might use sales per square foot and customer satisfaction as
KPIs, whereas a company in the oil and gas industry may possibly choose
measures related to the success in exploration, such as the value of new
6 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

reserves. Furthermore, companies trade in different products with the

result of having different operating leverage depending on the product
being traded. For instance, if the operating leverage of a company is high,
a small percentage increase in sales can produce a much larger percentage
increase in net operating income. Hence, operating leverage measures the
degree of sensitivity on the part of net operating income to percentage
changes in sales. Thus, a company that makes few sales, with each sale pro‑
viding a very high gross margin, such as selling luxury cars or up‑market
real estate, is said to be highly leveraged. However, a business that makes
many sales, with each sale contributing a very slight margin, such as goods
in a supermarket, is said to be less leveraged. Therefore, the KPIs for high
operating leverage companies will need to be different for those companies
with low operating leverage. Thus, a business that has a higher proportion
of fixed costs and a lower proportion of variable costs is said to have used
more operating leverage, and a business with lower fixed costs and higher
variable costs is said to employ less operating leverage. Therefore, the KPIs
for such companies need to reflect the nature of the business and their cost
structure.
The above illustrates that it is essential for the KPIs to be relevant and
applicable to that individual organisation. The ultimate objective of man‑
agement is to implement the strategies defined and approved by the Board
of Directors. Thus, the choice of KPIs for a particular organisation should
support the strategic objectives. These KPIs must make available adequate
details on how they are measured and the critical data set that needs to be
collected to allow one to determine whether the KPIs are being achieved.

Key Performance Measures

We have established that a KPI consists of two basic characteristics, namely:
(a) it is a measurable value, and (b) this measurable value demonstrates to
some extent the effectiveness with which an organisation is achieving its
key strategic objectives. However, it may take several KPIs to demonstrate
this level of effectiveness. Therefore, a combination of these two charac‑
teristics for several KPIs permits the organisation’s management to assess
the level of achievement an organisation has attained in conducting its
activities. Hence, it is extremely important to identify the key performance
measures that will be used to assess organisational or activity or individual
performance.
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 7

In many cases, such as in manufacturing, success is merely the constant

and continual periodic attainment of an established level of an operational
goal. For instance, a manufacturing firm may have a quality control goal of
zero component defects and/or keeping to (0% deviation from) the prom‑
ised delivery schedule. An organisation offering computing services as a
provider may aim for a 99.9% uptime in its computing facility and net‑
working capability. Thus, key performance measures need to be selected
carefully depending on the nature of the organisation and its business
activities. Therefore, KPIs are established to reflect the desired organisa‑
tional performance outcome, which is linked to the organisation’s strate‑
gic objectives. In selecting the key performance measures, management
requires a good understanding of what is essential and of significance to
the organisation. This is precisely the reason why KPIs have been success‑
fully exploited in manufacturing industries, particularly by those organisa‑
tions that had initially implemented Activity Based Costing (ABC) systems,
where the impact of the cost and profit drivers were fully understood.
Hence, it is important that the operational intricacies of the organisation
are fully understood before defining the organisational objectives and the
associated key performance measures.
It is therefore essential that the organisational objectives are suitably
defined. It is suggested that in defining the organisational objectives, the
‘SMART’ concept is applied. Organisational objectives define the general
direction or path the organisation needs to take by providing management
with the appropriate motivation and unambiguous focus. Hence, organi‑
sational objectives establish the targets that management should aim for.
The SMART concept is an abbreviation or acronym that stands for Specific,
Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely. It encompasses these five
fundamental norms to assist one to focus its efforts and increase the pos‑
sibility of achieving the established objectives. The SMART objectives are
as follows:

(a) Specific: The objectives are to be precisely and unambiguously defined.

Objectives that are precise and clear have a considerably greater prob‑
ability of being achieved. To make a goal precise and clear, the five ‘W’
questions are to be reflected on:
•• Who: Who is involved in this objective?
•• What: What is to be accomplished by this objective?
•• Where: Where is this objective to be achieved?
8 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

•• When: When is this objective to be achieved?

•• Why: Why is this objective to be achieved?
For example, a general objective would be ‘I want to increase pro‑
ductivity.’ A more specific objective might be ‘I want to increase capital
investment by 10% to upgrade machinery at the foundry division by
the end of the financial year to increase production by 25%.’
(b) Measurable: Objectives are to have explicit criteria for measuring the pro‑
gress being made to achieve them. The aim is to have objectives that
have a set of criteria for measuring progress. Unless this is done there
is no way of determining whether progress is being made towards the
set objective. Objectives may be made measurable by reflecting on the
following:
•• Quantity: How many or how much?
•• Target: How does one know whether the objective has been
achieved?
•• Gauge: What is the indicator that determines the progress being
made to achieve the objective?
For example, by end of this financial year I want to increase produc‑
tion at the foundry division by 25%.
(c) Achievable: Objectives need to be doable and reasonable to achieve. An
objective must be within reach, manageable, and attainable so that one
is motivated to work towards its achievement. The attainability of the
objectives may be ascertained by addressing the following:
•• Competency: Are the resources and capabilities available to achieve
the objective?
•• Assessment: What is required, if the resources and capabilities are
not available?
•• Look to the past: Has the objective been achieved successfully in
the past?
(d) Realistic: Objectives must be manageable, practical, and pertinent. The
objective must be realistic given that the objective needs to be practi‑
cally accomplished within the available resource and time constraint.
The objective’s fulfilment may be assessed by asking the following:
•• Practical: Is the objective reasonable, manageable, and within
reach?
•• Achievable: Is the objective doable, given the available time and
resources?
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 9

•• Commitment: Is the necessary commitment present for the attain‑

ment of the objective?
(e) Timely: Create a sense of urgency by having an unambiguous time‑
line, with a definite start and completion date. The objective must be
time‑bound with an explicit start and completion date, else there will
not be the appropriate motivation to achieve the objective. The timeli‑
ness of the objectives may be assessed by asking the following:
•• Does the objective have a deadline for its completion?
•• What is the target date for achieving the objective?
For example, an objective would be ‘I want to increase capital invest‑
ment by 10% to upgrade the machinery at the foundry division by the
end of the financial year to increase production by 25%, not later than
the first quarter of the following year.’

The SMART concept mitigates failure. Often management will position

itself for failure by establishing wide‑ranging and impractical objectives,
which are defined in vague terms with imprecise challenges that, instead of
motivating employees, will demoralise them. SMART objectives lead to suc‑
cess by ensuring that objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, real‑
istic, and timely. This helps to establish realisable challenges for employees
that motivate them to put in extra effort for achieving the set objectives.
Once the objectives have been defined, these need to be transformed into
suitable KPIs. To avoid confusion, it must be stressed that KPIs are not the
company objectives, goals, or targets themselves. They are a measurement
of the objectives, goals, or targets (i.e., the key performance measures). For
example, if your organisation’s objective is to produce a certain volume of
components each month, the KPIs will illustrate and gauge the extent to
which the objective is being achieved.
A KPI in this situation may be reported weekly and thus indicate that
the production team for a particular component is producing only 90% of
the budgeted volume during that month. The KPI will alert the manager
to this status and the reason for not achieving the required production
volume, and allow him/her to take appropriate corrective action. Hence,
when a manager can measure the objectives in this way, it gives him/her
the opportunity to comprehend what is going on in the process and make
decisions that help to achieve the objectives more rapidly and take whatever
action is deemed necessary. This is the significance of KPIs.
10 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

KPIs also help to create a learning organisation through the ability to

measure goals and discuss the cause of the variances that occur. Hence, the
key performance measures lead to the establishment of KPIs, which are con‑
tinuously monitored and discussed with the individual or team responsible
for that specific activity and associated KPI. This provides management with
the opportunity to coach employees to be innovative and show them how
to do things differently to improve their performance, and thus achieve the
established objectives. Moreover, the continuous monitoring of KPIs and the
resultant analysis for the causes of any variances that may result provides an
opportunity to review and, if necessary, amend KPIs to reflect current cir‑
cumstances and thus ensure that the goals are practical and realistic to realise.
The key performance measures and resultant KPIs in combination pro‑
vide an instantaneous holistic snapshot of the organisation’s performance
and allow management to drill down to reveal the causes of success and
failure at an activity (or lower) level. The immediate information pro‑
vided by KPIs permit management to make systematic modifications and
fine‑tuning to processes so that organisational objectives are attained, thus
avoiding panicked actions to maintain the desired performance level as the
end of a reporting period approaches. This is particularly important in a
highly competitive market where the aim is not only to have a cost‑effective
organisation but also to keep ahead of competitors.
Various organisations exploit KPIs to determine whether they are suc‑
ceeding in their social responsibilities, which are not directly related to
financial performance. For instance, organisations are currently more con‑
scious of issues related to ‘climate change’ and how they may contribute
through green technology to mitigate the adverse effects their industry is
causing. For example, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs of the United Kingdom issued a document entitled ‘Environmental
Key Performance Indicators: Reporting Guidelines for UK Business’ (Defra,
2006). This document claims that reporting on environmental perfor‑
mance will benefit the organisation in two ways: (a) It will provide man‑
agement information to help management to exploit the cost savings that
good environmental performance usually brings; and (b) It gives manage‑
ment the opportunity to set out what it believes is significant in its firm’s
environmental performance. Hence, in this case the KPIs will assist com‑
panies in managing and communicating the links between environmental
and financial performance.
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 11

The Defra (2006) guidelines establish 22 environmental KPIs, together

with information on how environmental impacts arising from the supply
chain and from the use of products can be considered. However, no one
company is expected to report on all the defined KPIs. According to Defra,
an analysis of business sectors suggests that around 80% of companies are
likely to have five or fewer KPIs. It also claims that whilst some companies
already have sophisticated reporting systems in place, the Guidelines aim
to help many more companies reach a level where they understand their
environmental performance and can improve it.
Information is the basis for all decisions. Hence, without KPIs depicting
fundamental statistics about performance, management is at risk of reach‑
ing incorrect decisions about a host of situations. KPIs should be aligned
with a responsibility centre. This responsibility centre could be an indi‑
vidual or work team. This way KPIs may be used as a tool to foster account‑
ability for employees as individuals or as a team. Additionally, the analysis
of the combined KPIs on a holistic organisational basis also encourages
accountability for management in relation to organisational performance.
If KPIs are defined according to the SMART principles, they can moti‑
vate employees and increase job satisfaction, which will in turn facilitate
organisational performance and organisational commitment, and build a
culture of achievement. Therefore, it is important that KPIs are realistic
and practical; otherwise instead of being a motivator, unachievable KPIs
can demoralise both employees and management. Suitable KPIs create a
sense of purpose that helps to maintain both the management team and
employees alike, focused on achieving the established objectives. Key per‑
formance measures that are transformed into suitable and achievable KPIs
help to achieve the defined organisational objectives and have the potential
to stimulate both the management team and employees towards a higher
level of performance on an individual level. However, identifying key per‑
formance measures is just one step in the desirable direction. What is also
important is identifying the key result areas.

Key Result Areas (KRAs)

According to The Economic Times (2021), key result areas (KRAs) refer
to the general metrics or parameters which the organisation has fixed for
a specific role; where the term outlines the scope of the job profile and
12 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

captures almost 80% to 88% of a work role. KRAs refer to a short list of
overall goals that guide an employee on how to conduct their function.
KRAs may also be defined at a higher level so that they describe the general
achievement and progress goals for an organisation or its individual divi‑
sions. Therefore, KRAs facilitate the scope definition for specific functions,
departmental or divisional goals, and organisational objectives. Moreover,
they help to define the optimum outcomes and results of daily work at the
various organisational levels; thus they are essential for an employee, divi‑
sion, or organisation to be successful in achieving their daily tasks.
KRAs are those areas in which a manager has complete ownership and
accountability. It is important for the manager of a KRA to itemise the daily
tasks that are within the mandate of the KRA. The focus is on day‑to‑day
activities. Therefore, KRAs will likely be different from one organisation to
another and from one work area to another. There are no golden rules for
defining KRAs; however, they generally summarise the job profile, includ‑
ing the key impact areas for which the employees are expected to deliver.
Hence, KRAs largely describe the job profile of the various categories of
employees so that they have a clear understanding of their practical role.
Therefore, KRAs must be unambiguously defined, quantifiable, and easy to
measure. The objective is to facilitate the alignment of the employees’ role
with that of the organisation.
KRAs are general issues or themes on which the employee must focus
during the year. In practice, this means that a manager working at a manu‑
facturing environment would have a different KRA than a manager work‑
ing for a service‑related organisation. For example, a manager working
in a manufacturing organisation would need to focus on maintaining the
production budget of the division, the safety level of the employees, coor‑
dination with different organisational divisions, staff development, and
reporting, including launching new technologies to enhance productiv‑
ity. Furthermore, management must identify and define the objectives and
standards for each KRA that are clearly and easily quantifiable. This ensures
that the employees have a clear comprehension of their specific KRA to
conduct their various tasks efficiently.
As stated previously, KRAs vary a great deal, depending on the organi‑
sation, or the stipulated goals of a division within an organisation, or the
specific role of an employee. Although KRAs vary, there are several major
characteristics that are critical for developing a KRA; namely they must be
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 13

specific, clear, and measurable. These criteria need to be addressed while

the KRA is being defined and not after. In defining KRAs, it is critical that
they are task‑specific under the direct responsibility of an individual or a
division and that they embrace a fundamental activity of the organisation.

Preparing Key Result Areas for Individuals

The identification of KRAs is very important because if one applies the
Pareto principle, 80% of the outcomes or after‑effects of an activity or task
is the result of 20% of the causes. Thus, if this principle is applied to how
departments, divisions, organisations, or individuals perform their work,
then 80% of the value of the work being done will result from 20% of the
tasks or activities conducted. Consequently, it is vital that one recognises
and comprehends the most significant 20% of the work being conducted,
which will reveal the somewhat small portion of the work that produces
the most value to the organisation. Developing KRAs requires a systematic
process that is straightforward and includes the following:

•• Communicate: Communication is seen as a two‑way process. In other

words, it is important that everyone is permitted to participate in
the KRA definition process. When defining KRAs for a department
or organisation, provide team members with the opportunity to dis‑
cuss and decide the KRAs. If a KRA is being defined for an individual
employee’s post within the organisation, the employee should be con‑
sulted when defining the KRAs for the position. This consultation pro‑
cess allows employees and managers to share information related to
what is under their direct control and what is important to achieving
the organisation’s goals. Using this approach everyone will understand
the indicators that are appropriate to the KRAs. This approach will
ensure that the KRAs are viewed as being reasonable and achievable,
and have value for the individual and organisation.
•• Define the Job Profile: The KRAs will likely itemise a list of functions and
activities that are considered important to the success of performing the
function. If the KRAs are being defined for a specific position, ensure
that they broadly define that job function and provide the employee
with clear and unambiguous understanding of their role within the
organisation.
14 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

•• Confirm that the KRAs are suitable for the position: KRAs should only require
specific objectives from an employee if that employee has the capacity
within the organisation’s structure to achieve the defined objective.
•• Apply the SMART principle: All KRAs should be specific, measurable, achiev‑
able, relevant, and time‑bound.
•• Limit the number of objectives: KRAs, whether for individuals, departments,
or organizations, should reflect the most crucial objectives. Hence,
limit the number of objectives to between three and a maximum of
seven objectives. It should be noted that resources are required to mon‑
itor KRAs; therefore make sure that the process is manageable by hav‑
ing only significant objectives.
•• Categorise tasks: To ensure the process is manageable by grouping related
tasks together.
•• Document the KRAs: The KRAs must be documented, evaluated, revised,
approved, and signed by pertinent stakeholders. KRAs for individual
employees should be discussed with the individual concerned with the
aim of having a document that is signed by the individual.

In determining the appropriate KRAs for an individual it is necessary to

firstly evaluate how the employee currently spends his/her time on the
assigned job. Secondly, itemise the tasks the employee should be doing but
is not currently doing, and thirdly ask and obtain responses to the follow‑
ing questions with the help of the employee:

(a) Why was the employee employed by the organisation?

(b) What is the employee expected to achieve?
(c) What are the employee’s daily and weekly duties (as separate lists)?
(d) Which of the employee’s daily and weekly duties are most important
to the success of the organisation?
(e) Why is the employee’s position important to the organisation’s success?
(f) What makes the employee’s position vital to the success of the
organisation?
(g) What are the tasks that only the employee can do to attain definite
results for the organisation?
(h) Are there tasks that are being done by the employee that can be
delegated?
(i) What tasks are not essential for the employee to perform well, or are
getting in the way of doing his/her job well?
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 15

The KRAs should be reviewed frequently with the employee and amended
when necessary. As a manager or supervisor, itemise what the unit or
department should be doing to demonstrate its importance.

Preparing Key Result Areas for an Organisation

When defining the KRAs for an organisation, these must focus on the criti‑
cal areas that best support the organisation’s strategic objectives, which
directly provide the thrust for its success. Thus, it is important that an
analysis is conducted with the participation of employees and managers to
define the success factors. Furthermore, the organisation’s strategic objec‑
tives and the KRAs for the various divisions and functional areas are con‑
gruent across the organisation. Hence, it is essential that employees in an
organisation work as a well synchronised group pulling in the same direc‑
tion with the same priorities. This is achieved by having a realistic number
of significant KRAs that support the strategic objectives. Moreover, it will
ensure that the organisation will grow and succeed.
It should be noted that that each general KRA will have a detailed met‑
rics, referred to as key performance indicators, which may be monitored to
assess the progress that is being made in each area. Although the KRAs will
vary from one organisation to another, there are several general areas that
are part of the KRAs, which are common to various organisations, such
as: Profitability; employee contentment; product quality; customer satisfac‑
tion; effective organisational management; and innovation.
In developing KRAs several barriers need to be overcome, such as: (i)
ensuring that KRAs are unambiguous in relation to the main tasks and
outcomes employees should focus on; (ii) ensuring that employees focus
on daily tasks that are truly of value to the success of the organisation; (iii)
ensuring that employees are involved in defining their KRAs, because the
imposition of KRAs in an organisation will result in conflicts that generate
a performance system that habitually fails.
The identification and monitoring of KRAs is fundamental for ensuring
that the appropriate performance level is achieved by the employees and
the organisation as a whole. The outcome without suitable KRAs that act as
a tool for focusing efforts of employees is loss of effectiveness. Employees
will be distracted by tasks that may appear important to them but may
not add sufficient value to the organisation. Hence, the accumulation of
these insignificant tasks may be substantial and hinder the organisation’s
16 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

performance. Defining KRAs, especially when employees are involved in

their definition, will likely result in a significant growth in motivation and
job satisfaction. Giving employees specific and realistic targets that they and
their supervisors can monitor to assess progress is likely to motivate them
to work harder.
The KRAs also help the holistic organisation to remain on track because
KRAs compel the organisation to make a distinction between those activi‑
ties that are important to focus on and those that are considered critical
(firefighting). Apart from KRAs there are also Key Performance Areas (KPAs)
that describe the general areas for which an individual or organisation may
be responsible. However, unlike KRAs, the KPAs are not monitored because
they merely describe the general areas of responsibility. For example, the
general area of responsibility related to a specific organisational division
may involve financials that include financial trends, expenditure, revenue,
and net profits; customer satisfaction in terms of frequency of complaints
and faulty product returns; and productivity related to achieving overall
objectives, meeting growth estimates, and the customers’ perception of the
organisation and its services.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

In the previous section the concept of Key Resultant Areas (KRAs) was dis‑
cussed, which basically explained that KRAs refer to a short list of overall
goals that guide employees as to how to conduct their function. However,
KRAs also consist of several Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that seg‑
ment the KRAs into lower‑level goals. Typically, a KPI is any metric that
measures whether an organisation is achieving certain defined objectives,
whose outcome assists the organisation to be successful in its undertakings.
Hence, KPIs may be expressed by ratios that reflect sales, productivity, rate
of return on capital investment, and many other potential indicative figures
that reflect performance.
Figure 1.1 depicts the concepts described in the previous sections.
­Figure 1.1 and Table 1.1 illustrate that a KRA is related to the KPAs but the
KPAs are not monitored. In fact, a KPA assists with identifying the KPIs for a
KRA. One needs to keep in mind that a KRA consists of several KPIs. Finally,
the KPIs are directly related to the outcomes; that is, the achievement of the
objectives. It should be noted that the Key Performance Measures as shown
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 17

Key Performance Measures

Specific Key Result Areas
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Key
Timely Performance
Areas

Key Performance
Indicators

Outcomes

Figure 1.1 The Relationship between Key Performance Measures, Key Performance
Areas, and Key Performance Indicators

in the diagram are illustrating that the KRAs and KPIs must follow the
SMART concept of having a metric that is specific, measurable, achievable,
realistic, and timely. Therefore, the KPIs are viewed as being the measure‑
ments associated with the general objectives delineated in a KRA.
KPIs must be effective and specific to an organisation’s operating envi‑
ronment. Often organisations adopt KPIs that may be industry‑recognised
and find that they fail to affect any positive change. However, the common
reason for this is that the adopted KPIs do not reflect accurately their own
business activities. KPIs are an important communications tool and as such
must abide by a suitable set of guidelines that represent the most efficient
or sensible course of action in each business situation.
It should be noted that a KPI that is concise, clear, and consists of rel‑
evant information is much more likely to be understood and acted upon.
Therefore, when formulating KPIs it is best to first itemise and understand
the organisational objectives; secondly plan how these objectives are to be
achieved; and finally identify the person who would be responsible for
18 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

Table 1.1 Differences between KRAs, KPAs, and KPIs

Key Resultant Area (KRA) Key Performance Area Key Performance
(KPA) Indicator (KPI)
Definition Areas of work that Overall segments A measure
are critical to the of outcomes or that assists
performance of an accountabilities for in assessing
employee, unit, an entity, division or performance in
division, or entity. individual. KRAs.
Scope Measurability of General description A system of
key areas within an of work areas, measurement
entity. particularly e.g., explicit
non‑essential aspects number or rate.
of work that are not
results‑oriented.
Objective Target for unit Responsibility areas Evaluated
or entity to be of entity, division, progress toward
successful, including or individual. defined targets
how employees are to identified in
conduct their work, KRAs.
providing overall
attainment of goals.
Example Growth of online Online sales Growth in sales
sales. expansion. of a particular
service from 8%
to 15%.

monitoring them and taking action. The full KPIs formulation process is
iterative and encompasses feedback from the technical and managerial staff.
Thus, with the passage of time and experience, employees in the organi‑
sation will better appreciate and comprehend the business processes that
need to be measured and included in a KPI dashboard, and who should
have access to this information. Defining KPIs is not as straightforward as it
seems.
The essential overtone for KPIs is the word ‘key’ because each KPI should
be related to a specific business consequence with a specific performance
measure. Hence, KPIs are to be defined in a way that corresponds to the
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 19

critical or core objectives of the organisation. In defining a KPI, the follow‑

ing should be taken into consideration:

•• What is the required outcome?

•• What is the significance of this outcome?
•• How is progress to be measured?
•• How will you know that the required outcome is being achieved?
•• How frequently will progress be reviewed to ensure that you are mov‑
ing towards the required outcome?

For example, let us assume that the objective is to increase productivity this
year and management has decided to call this the ‘Productivity Growth’
KPI. The ‘Productivity Growth’ KPI might be defined as follows:

a) Required outcome: Increase productivity by 20% this year.

b) Significance of outcome: By achieving this target the business will be able to
deliver its product on time.
c) Measuring progress: Calculate the difference between promised delivery
date and actual delivery date.
d) Knowing that outcome is being achieved: The production manager is responsible
for this metric, with product delivery time variance to be close to zero.
This will lead to a 20% increase in productivity by this year.
e) Frequency of review: The review of productivity variance will be daily.

KPIs differ from industry to industry, as illustrated by Table 1.2. However,

as stated previously, KPIs should not be blindly accepted just because they
are industry‑recognised, but should be defined specifically for the organi‑
sation. Hence, Table 1.2 is being provided as an indication of what KPIs
may look like for some specific industries.
It is important that only the performance measures that are essen‑
tial (key) to managing an organisation are included and these should
be explained in sufficient detail to ensure everyone understands what is
required. This facilitates KPI transparency. As noted above, KPIs should be
specific to an organisation depending on its strategic objectives; therefore
there is no golden rule that specifies how many KPIs an organisation should
have. However, the literature related to KPIs suggests around a handful, but
there is no precise amount. It must be remembered that the more KPIs an
20 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

Table 1.2 Significant Measures across Particular Industries

Insurance General Retail Mining
Customer loyalty Capital investment Capital invested
Customer growth rate Store product range Exploration success rate
changes
Credit rating Projected return on Equipment utilisation
latest stores rate
Claims rate Customer satisfaction Extraction capacity
rate
Insurance type Same store comparable Degree of anticipated
growth reserves
Claim frequency Sales per square metre Degree of confirmed
floor space reserves

organisation has, the more management effort is required to collect the

relevant data to monitor them.
An important consideration is for management to establish the process
for collating the KPIs and reporting them internally. For instance, man‑
agement should establish whether the KPIs convey the right message or
seem correct when accumulated and reported at a group level. It may be
more beneficial and practical to report the KPIs on a unit, department, or
divisional level. KPIs should not be considered as being eternal. Hence,
management needs to review the selected KPIs and determine whether they
are relevant at any point in time. Moreover, organisational strategies and
objectives are not static; they change over time. Therefore, the KPIs that
were applicable to them will also change.
The choice of KPIs often depends on the information that is available
at a specific point in time. Hence, new KPIs may be included, and others
changed due to the ability of management to collect new information that
permits them to compute new KPIs that provide a greater comprehension
of business activity. An important issue related to KPIs is their reliability.
There are no reliability standards that are applicable to specific KPIs. How‑
ever, the definition of KPIs should be supported by underlying assumptions
and any data restrictions or weaknesses. This will permit those exploiting
the KPIs to evaluate the usefulness of the KPIs for themselves.
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 21

Relationship between KRAs and KPIs

The relationship between KRAs and KPIs is better explained through sample
reports, namely those on an individual basis and those on an organisational
basis. Figure 1.2 provides a sample report that shows the KRAs definition
design for an individual within an organisation and the associated KPI
measures. Figure 1.2 is divided into three main reporting segments that
illustrate the relationship between the KRAs and KPIs. The first report seg‑
ment consists of the employee work position details, including the appli‑
cable supervisor and reviewer details. The second report segment describes
the employee position mission (how it serves the organisation’s strategic
objectives) and the related growth plan. The third report segment consists
of a detailed description of each KRA (job profile) in order of s­ ignificance
and associated KPI details, outcomes for each quarterly period, and overall
goal. The information from the third segment signifies the ­relationship
between the KRAs and the KPIs, and demonstrates how they are applied
to assess the employee’s performance in those specific areas. Figure 1.3
­provides a sample report for an organisation (in this case a department
within an organisation) and the associated KPI measures. F­ igure 1.3 is very
similar to Figure 1.2, the only difference being the titles of the first and
second report segments.

Conclusion
This chapter has covered the fundamental principles regarding the defini‑
tion and usage of key performance indicators (KPIs). It has shown that KPIs
may be defined at different levels within the organisation. For example,
KPIs may be established at organisational, divisional, departmental, activ‑
ity, and individual levels. Hence, KPIs are about accountability of those who
are responsible for a specific segment of the organisation.
The opening point of the KPI process is commitment of all the parties
concerned, beginning with the Board of Directors, and cascading to the
individual employees towards having a KPI methodology as the perfor‑
mance management appraisal system. Therefore, it is extremely important
for all concerned to be closely involved in the KPI process. Furthermore,
it is essential that all employees at the various organisational levels are
aware of the strategic objectives of the organisation and how their specific
 Employee Details

22
Name Position Commencement Date I.D Number Signature

T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S
Workplace Details
Department Supervisor Date Supervisor Signature

Reviewer Details
Name Designation Date Last Reviewed Reviewer Signature

Position Mission Growth Plan

Provide main purpose of your role and describe how it aligns with the After the KRAs and KPIs are reviewed, describe what you
overall mission of the department and organisation. List the key tasks that intend on doing to focus on improving in the next period.
are carried out often by you to perform your role well.

Key Result Areas (KRA) in order of priority Results (per month)

KRA Description KPI Description of KPI M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9 M10 M11 M12 Moving Ave. Goal
KRA 1: 1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
KRA 2: 2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
KRA 3: 3.1
3.2
3.3

Figure 1.2 Key Result Areas for an Individual Within an Organisation

 Department Details
Department Supervisor Date Supervisor Signature

Reviewer Details
Name Designation Date Last Reviewed Reviewer Signature

Position Mission Growth Plan

Describe main objective of the department. Describe how it aligns with After the KRAs and KPIs are reviewed, describe what you
the overall mission of the organisation. intend on doing to focus on improving in the next period.

Key Result Areas (KRA) in order of priority Results (per month)

KRA Description KPI Description of KPI M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9 M10 M11 M12 Moving Ave. Goal
KRA 1: 1.1

P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
KRA 2: 2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
KRA 3: 3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5

23
Figure 1.3 Key Result Areas for an Organisation (Department)
24 T H E E S S EN T I A L S O F K E Y P ER F O R M A N C E IN D I C ATO R S

function contributes towards the achievement of these strategic objectives.

Once these basic principles are recognised, the actual KPI definition devel‑
opment may commence.
The KPI definition development process starts off by defining an imple‑
mentation plan. This plan will set out when the various KPI implementa‑
tion levels are scheduled to come on board, starting from the organisational
holistic level and ending with the individual employees. The KPIs imple‑
mentation plan must be realistic, with each phase defining in detail the
tasks to be conducted at each specific level. These specific levels are referred
to as Key Result Areas (KRAs).
The KRAs refer to a short list of overall goals and describe the general
achievement and progress goals for an organisation, department, activity,
or individual employees. Therefore, KRAs facilitate the scope definition
for specific functions, departmental or divisional goals, and organisational
objectives. Moreover, they help to define the optimum outcomes and results
of daily work at the various organisational levels, thus they are essential for
an employee, division, or organisation to be successful in achieving their
daily tasks. KRAs are those areas in which a manager has complete owner‑
ship and accountability.
It is important for the manager of a KRA to itemise the daily tasks that
are within the mandate of the KRA. The focus is on day‑to‑day activities.
Therefore, KRAs will likely be different from one organisation to another
and from one work area to another. The KRAs may (if deemed necessary)
be segmented further into Key Performance Areas (KPAs) that describe the
general areas for which an organisation, department, or individual may be
responsible. However, unlike KRAs, the KPAs are not monitored, because
they merely describe the general areas of responsibility.
Therefore, taking each specific level (KRA), identify the Key Performance
Measures (KPMs) for that level. The KPMs will be used to assess the per‑
formance of the specific level, be it the organisation, department, activity,
or individual. The KPMs are to follow the SMART concept, namely, being
specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely. The combination of
the KRAs and KPMs will provide the KPIs for that specific organisational
level. As one may appreciate, the KPI definition process is iterative. Hence,
each KPI must be closely monitored and fine‑tuned until management (and
employees) are satisfied that the resultant KPIs are equitable and represent
the realistic circumstances of the functional level being measured. Once
 P ER F O R M A N C E M E A S U R EM EN T 25

the KPIs are recognised as being accurate and realistic, the KPIs are accepted
as part of the performance dashboard for that specific organisational level.
Finally, there is a need to regularly review the KPIs, since these may not
be appropriate if the strategic objectives of the organisation change at any
point in time. Having said this, generally, if the KPIs are being achieved
then the strategic objectives of the organisation are being accomplished,
with the consequent desirable organisational outcome.

References
Defra (2006). Environmental Key Performance Indicators: Reporting Guidelines
for UK Business. Available at: [Link] (Accessed 20 November
2023).
Eby, K. (2019). The Most Comprehensive List of Key Results Areas for Depart‑
ments & Positions. Available at: [Link]
key‑result‑areas (Accessed 20 November 2023).
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007). Guide to Key Performance Indicators: Com‑
municating the Measures That Matter. Available at: [Link]
gx/en/audit‑services/corporate‑reporting/assets/pdfs/uk_kpi_guide.pdf
(Accessed 20 November 2023).
The Economic Times (2021). Human‑Resource: Definition of ‘Key Result
Areas’. Available at: [Link]
key‑result‑areas (Accessed 20 November 2023).
Performance Measurement
Defra (2006). Environmental Key Performance Indicators: Reporting Guidelines for UK
Business. Available at: [Link] (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
Eby, K. (2019). The Most Comprehensive List of Key Results Areas for Departments &
Positions. Available at: [Link] (Accessed 20
November 2023 ).
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007). Guide to Key Performance Indicators: Communicating the
Measures That Matter. Available at: [Link]
reporting/assets/pdfs/uk_kpi_guide.pdf (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
The Economic Times (2021). Human-Resource: Definition of ‘Key Result Areas’. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 20 November 2023
).

Performance Management Concepts and Related Tools

Azadinamin, A. (2011). Modern Tools for Performance Measurements. SMC University.
Available at:
[Link]
ements (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
Dusenbury, P. (2000). Governing for Results and Accountability: Strategic Planning and
Performance Measurement. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
EFQM (2021). The EFQM Model Revised 2nd edition. Brussels: EFQM.
Hearn, S. (2021). Continuous Performance Management: Your Definitive Guide to Success.
Clear Review. Available at: [Link]
management-ebook (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
Higgins, J.M. and Vincze, J.W. (1993). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases. Chicago,
IL: Dryden Press.
HR Tech (2021). Performance Management System – A Complete Guide. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 20
November 2023 ).
Marr, B. (2021). What is Performance Management? A Super Simple Explanation for Everyone.
Available at: [Link]
explanation-for-everyone/ (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
Merchant, N. (2011). Culture Trumps Strategy, Every Time. Harvard Business Review.
Available at: [Link] (Accessed 20 November
2023 ).
Mintzberg, H. (1994). ‘The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning.’ Harvard Business Review, 72,
pp. 107–114.
Pearce, J.A. and Robinson, R.B. (1994). Strategic Management: Formulation, Implementation
and Control. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Pirtea, M. , Nicolescu, C. , and Botoc, C. (2009). ‘The Role of Strategic Planning in Modern
Organisations.’ Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 11(2).
Poister, T.H. (2003). Measuring Performance in Public and Non-profit Organizations. San
Francisco, CA.: Jossey-Bass.
Seddon, J. (2021). The Business Excellence Model – Will it Deliver? Available at:
[Link]
[Link] (Accessed 20 November 2023 ).
Taiwo, A.S. and Idunnu, F.O. (2010). ‘Impact of Strategic Planning on Organizational
Performance and Survival.’ Research Journal of Business Management, 4(1), pp. 73–82.
Zairi, M. (2005). Benchmarking for Best Practice: The Power of Its Adoption and the Perils of
Ignoring Its Use in a Modern Business Environment. Pakistan’s 9th International Convention on
Quality Improvement November 14–15, 2005 – Karachi, Pakistan.
Zairi, M. and Leonard. P. (1996). Practical Benchmarking: The Complete Guide: A Complete
Guide. Dordrecht: Springer (Science and Business Media).
ZOKRI (2021). The Complete Guide to Performance Management in 2021. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed November 20 2023 ).

Root Cause Analysis and Its Impact on Performance Management

Aboagye, R. , Cherala, S. , Senesac, P. , and Johnston, J. (2016). Quality Improvement (QI) in
Evaluation: Ask Why Again and Again and Again. Centre for Health Policy and Research
(CHPR) Publications. Available at: [Link]
(Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Institute of Medicine . (2009). To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Shirouzu, N. and Murphy, J. (2008). ‘Toyota to Change Leader Amid Global Sales Slump.’ Wall
Street Journal, 24 December 2008.

Performance Management Framework

Amirkhanyan, A.A. , Kim, H.J. , and Lambright, K.T. (2014). ‘The Performance Puzzle:
Understanding the Factors Influencing Alternative Dimensions and Views of Performance.’
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), pp. 1–34.
Atkinson, A.A. and McCrindell, J.Q. (1997). ‘Strategic Performance Measurement in
Government.’ CMA, 71(3), pp. 20–23.
Bass, B.M. (1990). ‘From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the
Vision.’ Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), pp. 19–31.
Behn, R.D. (2003). ‘Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different
Measures.’ Public Administration Review, 63(5), pp. 586–606.
Berman, E. and Wang, X. (2000). ‘Performance Measurement in US Counties: Capacity for
Reform.’ Public Administration Review, 60(5), pp. 409–420.
Blue Rubicon and Henley Management College (2002). Employee Communications and
Relationships Report 2002.
Boland, T. and Fowler, A. (2000). ‘A Systems Perspective of Performance Management in
Public Sector Organizations.’ International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(5), pp.
417–446.
Boyne, G.A. (2002). ‘Public and Private Management: What’s the Difference?’ Journal of
Management Studies, 39(1), pp. 97–122.
Camilleri, E. (2002). ‘Some Antecedents of Organizational Commitment: Results from an
Information Systems Public Service Organization.’ Bank of Valletta Review, 25, pp. 1–29.
Camilleri, E. (2006). ‘Towards Developing an Organizational Commitment- Public Service
Motivational Model for the Maltese Public Service Employees.’ Public Policy and Administration,
21(1), pp. 63–83.
Camilleri, E. and van der Heijden, B. (2007). ‘Organizational Commitment, Public Service
Motivation, and Performance within the Public Sector.’ Public Performance and Management
Review, 31(2), pp. 241–274.
Carlin, T. (1999). ‘Simplifying Corporate Performance Measurement.’ Australian CPA
December, pp. 48–50.
Carter, N. (1989). ‘Performance Indicators: “Back Seat Driving” or “Hands Off” Control?’ Policy
and Politics, 17(2), pp. 131–138.
Centrelink (2001). Annual Report 2000–01. Centrelink, Sydney.
Chang, L. , Lin, S.W. , and Northcott, D.N. (2002). ‘The NHS Performance Assessment
Framework: A Balanced Scorecard Approach?’ Journal of Management in Medicine, 16(5), pp.
345–358.
Chow-Chua, C. and Goh, M. (2002). ‘Framework for Evaluating Performance and Quality
Improvement in Hospitals.’ Managing Service Quality, 12(1), pp. 54–66.
Crawford, L.H. (2003). ‘Assessing and Developing the Project Management Competence of
Individuals,’ in J.R. Turner (ed.), People in Project Management. Aldershot, UK: Gower
Publishing Company Limited, pp. 13–29.
Curtright, J.W. , Stolp-Smith, S.C. , and Edell, E.S. (2000). ‘Strategic Performance
Management: Development of a Performance Measurement System at the Mayo Clinic.’
Journal of Healthcare Management, 45(1), pp. 58–68.
De Lancer Julnes , J.P. and Holzer, M. (2001). ‘Promoting the Utilization of Performance
Measures in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and
Implementation.’ Public Administration Review, 61(6), pp. 693–708.
De Waele, L. and Polzer, T. (2021). ‘A Little Bit of Everything? Conceptualising Performance
Measurement in Hybrid Public Sector Organisations through a Literature Review.’ Journal of
Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(3), pp. 343–363.
Evans, P. and Bellamy, S. (1995). ‘Performance Evaluation in the Australian Public Sector: The
Role of Management and Cost Accounting Control Systems.’ International Journal of Public
Sector Management, 8(6), pp. 30–38.
Frederickson, H.G. (1990). ‘Public Administration and Social Equity.’ Public Administration
Review, 50(2), pp. 228–237.
Frederickson, H.G. (2010). Social Equity and Public Administration: Origins, Developments and
Applications. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Gallup, Inc . (2017). State of the American Workplace. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 23 November 2023 ).
Gibson, H. (1990). Eastern Arterial Road and Ringwood Bypass Panel of Review. Report to the
Victorian Government, Australia.
Goleman, D. , Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002). The New Leaders. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
Gooijer, J.D. (2000). ‘Designing a Knowledge Management Performance Framework.’ Journal
of Knowledge Management, 4(4), pp. 303–310.
Halachmi, A. and Bouckaert, G. (1994). ‘Performance Measurement, Organizational
Technology and Organizational Design.’ Work Study, 43(3), pp. 19–25.
Harris, J. (1998). ‘Performance Models: Enhancing Accountability in Academe.’ Public
Productivity and Management Review, 22(2), pp. 135–139.
Henry, G.T. and Dickey, K.C. (1993). ‘Implementing Performance Monitoring: A Research and
Development Approach.’ Public Administration Review, 53(3), pp. 203–212.
House, R.J. (1971). ‘A Path-goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness.’ Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16 (September), pp. 321–338.
House, R.J. and Mitchell, T.R. (1974). ‘Path-goal Theory of Leader.’ Contemporary Business, 3
(Fall), pp. 81–98.
Marshall, J. and Heffes, E.M. (2006). ‘Communication: Employee Communication Linked to
Performance.’ Financial Executive, 22(1), pp. 11–12.
McLaughlin, J.A. and Jordan, G.B. (1999). ‘Logic Models: A Tool for Telling Your Programs
Performance Story.’ Evaluation and Program Planning, 22(1), pp. 65–72.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991). ‘A Three-component Conceptualization of Organizational
Commitment.’ Human Resource Management Review, 1, pp. 61–89.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and
Application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Micheli, Pietro and Kennerley, Mike (2005). ‘Performance Measurement Frameworks in Public
and Non-profit Sectors.’ Production Planning & Control, 16(2), pp. 125–134.
Moriarty, P. and Kennedy, D. (2015). Performance Measurement in Public Sector Services:
Problems and Potential. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Monash University-Caulfield
Campus, Caulfield East, Victoria, Australia.
Oliveira, J. (2001). The Balanced Scorecard: An Integrative Approach to Performance
Evaluation. Healthcare Financial Management, 55(5), pp. 42–46.
Osborne, S.P. , Bovaird, T. , Martin, S. , Tricker, M. , and Waterston, P. (1995). ‘Performance
Management and Accountability in Complex Public Programmes.’ Financial Accountability and
Management, 11(1), pp. 19–37.
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis – into
the Age of Austerity. Oxford: Oxford University [Link] Workplace (2021). What is
Employee Engagement? What, Why and How to Improve It. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Reichheld, F.F. (1996). The Loyalty Effect. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Rosenblatt, A. , Wyman, N. , Kingdon, D. , and Ichinose, C. (1998). ‘Managing what You
Measure: Creating Outcome-driven Systems of Care for Youth with Serious Emotional
Disturbances.’ Journal of Behavioural Health Services and Research, 25(2), pp. 177–193.
SHRM (2021). Developing and Sustaining Employee Engagement. Available at:
[Link]
samples/toolkits/pages/[Link] (Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Thompson, G.D. (2001). ‘The Impact of New Zealand’s Public Sector Accounting Reforms on
Performance Control in Museums.’ Financial Accountability and Management, 17(1), pp. 5–19.
Tourish, D. and Hargie, O. (1998). ‘Auditing Staff–management Communication in Schools: A
Framework for Evaluating Performance.’ International Journal of Educational Management,
12(4), pp. 176–182.
Turner, J. R. and Müller, R. (2005). ‘The Project Manager’s Leadership Style as a Success
Factor on Projects: A Literature Review.’ Project Management Journal, 36(2), pp. 49–61.
Van Peursem, K.A. , Prat, M.J. , and Lawrence, S.R. (1995). ‘Health Management Performance:
A Review of Measures and Indicators.’ Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(5),
pp. 34–70.
Willis Towers Watson (2021). Employee Insights for a Better Employee Experience. Available
at: [Link] (Accessed 21
November 2023 ).
Wilson, L.A. and Durant, R.F. (1994). ‘Evaluating TQM: The Case for a Theory Driven
Approach.’ Public Administration Review, 54(2), pp. 137–146.
Wisniewski, M. and Stewart, D. (2001). ‘Using the Statutory Audit to Support Continuous
Improvement in Scottish Local Authorities.’ International Journal of Public Sector Management,
14(7), pp. 540–555.

Strategic Management and Business Planning as a Basis for

Establishing KPIs
Ayre, L.B. (2006). Data Mining for Information Professionals. Available at:
[Link]
als (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Bala, P.K. (2008). ‘A Technique for Mining Generalized Quantitative Associated Rules for Retail
Inventory Management.’ International Journal of Business Strategy, 8(2), pp. 114–127.
Barber, P. , Graves, A. , Hall, M. , Sheath, D. , and Tomkins, C. (2000). ‘Quality Failure Costs in
Civil Engineering Projects.’ International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(4/5),
pp. 479–492.
BearingPoint (2019). Data & Analytics. Analytical Insights to Boost Your Business Performance.
Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Behn, R.D. (2014). The PerformanceStat Potential: A Leadership Strategy for Producing
Results. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Cleland, D.I. and Ireland, L.R. (2006). Project Management: Strategic Design And
Implementation. Fifth Edition. Clarksville, TN: McGraw-Hill.
Cooke-Davies, T. (2002). ‘The “Real” Success Factors on Projects.’ International Journal of
Project Management, 20, pp. 185–190.
Datta, R.P. (2008). ‘Data Mining Applications and Infrastructural Issues: An Indian Perspective.’
ICFAI Journal of Infrastructure, VI(3), pp. 42–50.
Day, R and Rogers, E. (2006). ‘Enhancing NASA’s Performance as a Learning Organization.’
NASA Ask Magazine, 22, pp. 36–39.
Drury, C. (2012). Management and Cost Accounting. Eighth Edition. Cengage India (1 January,
2012).
Dusenbury, P. (2000). Governing for Results and Accountability: Strategic Planning and
Performance Measurement. The Urban Institute Washington, USA.
Dye, R. , and Sibony, O. (2007). ‘How to Improve Strategic Planning.’ The McKinsey Quarterly
(3), p. 41–49.
Earl, M. (2001). ‘Knowledge Management Strategies: Toward a Taxonomy.’ Journal of
Management Information, 18(1), pp. 215–233.
Eberle, W. and Holder, L. (2007). Discovering Structural Anomalies in Graph-based Data.
Published in: Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW
2007), Omaha, NE, USA.
Ernst & Young (2015). Becoming an Analytics Driven Organization to Create Value: A Report in
Collaboration with Nimbus Ninety. Ernst & Young Global Limited, UK.
Hensher, D.A. and Jones, S. (2007). ‘Forecasting Corporate Bankruptcy: Optimizing the
Performance of the Mixed Logit Model.’ ABACUS, 43(3), pp. 241–264.
Hubbard, D. (2009). The Failure of Risk Management: Why It’s Broken and How to Fix It.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Hicks, R.C. , Dattero, R. , and Galup, S.D. (2006). ‘The Five-tier Knowledge Management
Hierarchy.’ Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), pp. 19–31.
Hicks, R.C. , Galup, S.D. , and Dattero, R. (2007). ‘The Transformations in the Five Tier
Knowledge Management Transformation Matrix.’ Journal of Knowledge Management, 8, p. 1.
Iranmanesh, S.H. and Mokhtari, Z. (2008, August). ‘Application of Data Mining Tools to
Predicate Completion Time of a Project.’ Proceedings of World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, 32, pp. 234–239.
Johns Hopkins University (2022). What Is Performance Analytics? Centre for Government
Excellence, Johns Hopkins University. Available at:
[Link]
[Link] (Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Keating, B. (2008). ‘Data Mining: What Is It and How Is It Used?’ The Journal of Business
Forecasting, 27(3), pp. 33–35.
Keegan, M.J. (2015). Introduction Perspective on the PerformanceStat Potential: A Leadership
Strategy for Producing Results. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 23
November 2023 ).
Król, K. and Zdonek, D. (2020). ‘Analytics Maturity Models: An Overview.’ Information 2020, 11,
p. 142.
Nagadevara, V. , Srinivasan, V. , and Valk, R. (2008). ‘Establishing a Link between Employee
Turnover and Withdrawal Behaviours: Application of Data Mining Techniques.’ Research and
Practice in Human Resource Management, 16(2), pp. 81–99.
Nayak, R. and Qiu, T. (2004). Data Mining Application in a Software Project Management
Process. Published in: Proceedings of Australian Data Mining Conference, Cairns, Australia.
Nemati, H.R. and Barko, C.D. (2002). ‘Enhancing Enterprise Decisions through Organizational
Data Mining.’ Journal of Computer Information Systems, Summer, pp. 21–28.
O'Mahony, J. and Lyon, J. (2015). Performance Reporting: An Eye on the Facts. KPMG LLP,
UK. Available at: [Link]
[Link] (Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Palace, B. (1996). Data Mining: What is Data Mining? Anderson Graduate School of
Management at UCLA. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 21 November 2023 ).
Parsons, V.S. (2007). ‘Searching for “Unknown Unknowns”.’ Engineering Management Journal,
19(1), pp. 43–46.
Pechenizkiya, M. , Puuronenb, S. , and Tsymbalc, A. (2008). ‘Towards more Relevance-
oriented Data Mining Research.’ Intelligent Data Analysis, 12, pp. 237–249.
Pirtea, M. , Nicolescu, C. , and Botoc, C. (2009). ‘The Role of Strategic Planning in Modern
Organisations.’ Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 11(2), pp. 953–957.
Pugna, I.B. , Dutescu, A. , and Stanila, G.O. (2018). Performance Management in the Data-
driven Organisation. Published in: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on
Business Excellence 2018, Bucharest.
Pyle, D. (2003). ‘Making the Case.’ IBM Database Magazine, 8(4). Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 22
November 2023 ).
Rennolls, K. and Al-Shawabkeh, A. (2008). ‘Formal Structures for Data Mining, Knowledge
Discovery and Communication in a Knowledge Management Environment.’ Intelligent Data
Analysis, 12, pp. 147–163.
Sharda, R. , Delen, D. , and Turban, E. (2015). Business Intelligence and Analytics: Systems for
Decision Support. 10th Edition. New York: Pearson Education.
Srinivas and Harding, J.A. (2008). ‘A Data Mining Integrated Architecture for Shop Floor
Control.’ Proc. IMechE Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture, 222(5), pp. 605–624.
Sutton, B. (2010). Why Projects Fail – Mastering the Monster (Part 1): Examining the
Underlying Reasons for Project Failure, and How to Use That Knowledge to Get Your Projects
Back On Track. ArchItect, Bearpark Publishing Ltd. Available at:
[Link]
part-1/ (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Turner, K. and Zizzamia, F. (2008). ‘Predicting Better Claims Management.’ Risk Management,
55(7), pp. 52–55.
Van Someren, M. and Urbancic, T. (2006). ‘Applications of Machine Learning: Matching
Problems to Tasks and Methods.’ The Knowledge Engineering Review, 20(4), pp. 363–402.
Wang, K. (2007). ‘Applying Data Mining to Manufacturing: The Nature and Implications.’ Journal
of Intellectual Manufacturing, 18, pp. 487–495.
Wong, H.K. (2004). ‘Knowledge Value Chain: Implementation of New Product Development
System in a Winery.’ The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(1), pp. 77–90.
Zhu, H. (2006). ‘Role Mechanisms in Collaborative Systems.’ International Journal of Production
Research, 44(1), pp. 181–193.

Critical Success Factors for Establishing and Applying KPIs

Caralli, R.A. , Stevens, J.F. , Willke, B.J. , and Wilson, W.R. (2004). The Critical Success Factor
Method: Establishing a Foundation for Enterprise Security Management. Technical Report.
CMU/SEI-2004-TR-010 ESC-TR-2004–010, Carnegie Mellon University.
Daniel, D.R. (1961). ‘Management Information Crisis.’ Harvard Business Review, 39(5), pp.
111–121.
Parmenter, D. (2007). Key Performance Indicators (KPI): Developing, Implementing and Using
Winning KPIs. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, John & Sons, Inc.
Rockart, J.F. (1979). ‘Chief Executives Define Their Own Data Needs.’ Harvard Business
Review, 57(2), pp. 81–93.

Balanced Scorecard and Benchmarking

Anderson, K. and McAdam, R. (2004). ‘A Critique of Benchmarking and Performance
Measurement: Lead or Lag?’ Benchmarking: An International Journal, 11(5), pp. 465–483.
Arveson, P. (2003). An Introduction to the Balanced Scorecard for City & County Governments.
Cary, NC: Balanced Scorecard Institute.
Camp, R.C. (1989). Benchmarking the Search for Industry Best Practices That Lead to Superior
Performance. White Plains, NY: Quality Resources.
Ghețe, A. (2014). Southwest Airlines: From Benchmarking to Benchmarked. Performance
Magazine – The KPI Institute. Available at: [Link]
airlines-from-benchmarking-to-benchmarked/ (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1993). ‘Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work.’ Harvard
Business Review, September–October 1993 issue.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (2001). ‘Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance
Measurement to Strategic Management: Part 1 .’ Accounting Horizons, 15(1), pp. 87–104.
Northcott, D. and Taulapapa, T.M. (2012). ‘Using the Balanced Scorecard to Manage
Performance in Public Sector Organisations: Issues and Challenges.’ International Journal of
Public Sector Management, 25(3), pp. 166–191.
Poister, T.H. (2003). Measuring Performance in Public and Non-profit Organizations. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rohm, Howard . (2008). Using the Balanced Scorecard to Align Your Organisation. Cary, NC:
Balanced Scorecard Institute.
Sarkis, J. (2001). ‘Benchmarking for Agility.’ Benchmarking: An International Journal, 8(2), pp.
88–107.
Watson, G.H. (1992). The Benchmarking Workbook: Adapting Best Practices for Performance
Improvement. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.

Six Sigma
Heavey, C. and Murphy, E. (2012). ‘Integrating the Balanced Scorecard with Six Sigma.’ The
TQM Journal, 24(2), pp. 108–122.
Kano, N. , Seraku, N. , Takahashi, F. , Tsuji, S. (1984). ‘Attractive Quality and Must-be Quality.’
Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, 14(2), pp. 147–156.
Six Sigma Daily . (2020). What is Six Sigma? Available at: [Link]
is-six-sigma/ (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
White, K.S. (2018). What is Six Sigma? Streamlining for Quality. [Link]. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Zomes, T. (2021). Target Values. 6σSTUDY [Link]. Target Values – What You Need to
Know to Pass a Six Sigma Certification. Available at: [Link] (Accessed
22 November 2023 ).

Business Excellence Models, Enterprise Risk Management, and

Programme Management as a Basis for Performance Improvement
Aabo, T. , Fraser, J.R.S. , and Simkins, B.J. (2005). ‘The Rise and Evolution of the Chief Risk
Officer: Enterprise Risk Management at Hydro One.’ Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,
17(3), pp. 62–75.
Baldridge Excellence Framework (2021). Baldrige Performance Excellence Program,
Gaithersburg, Maryland. Available at: [Link]
excellence-framework/businessnonprofit (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
COSO (2017). Enterprise Risk Management Integrating with Strategy and Performance.
Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Culp, C.L. (2002). ‘The Revolution in Corporate Risk Management: A Decade of Innovations in
Process and Products.’ Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14(4), pp. 8–26.
EFQM (2021). The EFQM Model. London. EFQM Revised 2nd edition. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Gates, S. , Nicolas, J. , and Walker, P.L. (2012). ‘Enterprise Risk Management: A Process for
Enhanced Management and Improved Performance.’ Management Accounting Quarterly, 13(3),
pp. 28–38.
Gensuite . (2020). Enterprise Risk Management – Integrating Strategy. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 22
November 2023 ).
Gordon, L.A. , Loeb, M.P. , and Tseng, C. (2009). ‘Enterprise Risk Management and Firm
Performance: A Contingency Perspective.’ Public Policy, 28, pp. 301–327.
Kalita, M. (2004). ‘Enterprise-Wide Risk Management: Myth or Reality?’ Business Credit,
106(3), pp. 22–23.
Liu, J. (2012). ‘The Enterprise Risk Management and the Risk Oriented Internal Audit.’
iBusiness, 4, pp. 287–292.
Lukianchuk, G. (2015). ‘The Impact of Enterprise Risk Management on Firm Performance of
Small and Medium Enterprises.’ European Scientific Journal, 11(13).
Mavenlink . (2019). 8 Steps for Practical Program Management Metrics. Available at:
[Link]
(Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Nocco, B.W. and Stulz, R.M. (2006). ‘Enterprise Risk Management: Theory and Practice.’
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 18(4), pp. 8–20.
Seddon, J. (2022). Vanguard Set Up the Beyond Command-and-Control Network. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 22
November 2023 ).
Stanton, T.H. (2012). Why Some Firms Thrive While Others Fail. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Weidner, S. (2010). Risk Management for Small and Medium Sized Incoming Tour Operators:
Shown at the example of Skylimit Travel S.A., Isla Margarita, Venezuela. GRIN Verlag OHG.

Application of the Performance Management Tools

Camilleri, E. and Camilleri, R. (2017). Accounting for Financial Instruments: A Guide to
Valuation and Risk Management. Oxford and New York: Routledge.

Application of the Performance Management Tools

insightsoftware . (2021). 10+ Government KPIs for 2021 Reporting. Available at:
[Link] (Accessed 22
November 2023 ).
Jackson, T. (2022). Key Performance Indicators for Schools & Education Management.
Available at: [Link]
(Accessed 22 November 22, 2023 ).
Rozner, S. (2013). Developing and Using Key Performance Indicators: A Toolkit for Health
Sector Managers. Bethesda, MD: Health Finance & Governance Project, Abt Associates Inc.

Performance Measurement and Management

Arnauts, S. (2019). Corporate Performance Management – The Impact and Role of AI and New
Technologies. Available at: [Link]
new-
technologies/#:~:text=The%20face%20of%20corporate%20performance,and%20more%20chan
ge%2Doriented%20enterprise%2D (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Bourne, M.C.S. , Mills, J.F. , Wilcox, M. , Neely, A.D. , and Platts, K.W. (2000). ‘Designing,
Implementing and Updating Performance Measurement Systems.’ International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 20(7), pp. 754–771.
Buckingham, M. and Goodall, A. (2015). ‘Employee Performance Management: Reinventing
Performance Management.’ Harvard Business Review, April 2015.
Cappelli, P. and Tavis, A. (2016). ‘Employee Performance Management: The Performance
Management Revolution.’ Harvard Business Review, October 2016.
Farris, J.A. , van Aken, E.M. , Letens, G. , Chearksul, P. , and Coleman, G. (2011). ‘Improving
the Performance Review Process: A Structured Approach and Case Application.’ International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(4), pp. 376–404.
Gartner . (2023). Gartner Glossary. Available at: [Link]
technology/glossary/cpm-corporate-performance-management (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Idrees, A. (2016). ‘A Survey on Exploring Key Performance Indicators.’ Future Computing and
Informatics Journal, 1(1).
Murtala, Z. (2017). ‘New Performance Measurement Trends: Evidence from Selected
Multinational Corporations.’ Journal of World Economic Research, 6(4), pp. 54–58.
Ossovski, N.C. , de Lima, E.P. , and da Costa, S.G. (2016). Performance Measurement System
– A Conceptual Model. Available at: [Link]
measurement-system-%E2%80%93-a-conceptual-model-
Ossovski/2a2b64f82fede4fb1c5ff7e34480f157f8032a39 (Accessed 22 November 2023 ).
Tabassum, F. and Ghosh, N. (2018). ‘Future of Performance Management in Artificial
Intelligence ERA.’ International Journal of Arts, Science and Humanities, 6(1).
Taticchi, P. , Balachandran, K. , and Tonelli, F. (2012). ‘Performance Measurement and
Management Systems: State of the Art, Guidelines for Design and Challenges.’ Measuring
Business Excellence, May 2012.
Taticchi, P. and Balachandran, K.R. (2008). ‘Forward Performance Measurement and
Management Integrated Frameworks.’ International Journal of Accounting and Information
Management, 16(2), pp. 140–154.
Taticchi, P. , Tonelli, F. , and Cagnazzo, L. (2009). ‘A Decomposition and Hierarchical Approach
for Business Performance Measurement and Management.’ Measuring Business Excellence,
13(4), pp. 47–57.

View publication stats