Benchmarking process formalization and a case study

Abstract

Aims to formalize the benchmarking process by proposing methods and tools for the steps of the process. Focuses on the first two phases of the benchmarking process: measurement and self analysis (phase 1), and determination of subject and partners of a benchmarking study (phase 2). For this purpose, related to the first phase, a method of diagnosis is employed. In the second phase, three different data analysis methods (lexical analysis, principal components analysis and common factor analysis) are utilized. These two phases serve the purpose of an internal benchmarking (comparison between different domains of activities in the enterprise) and of an external benchmarking study (comparison between different enterprises). Three enterprises are selected for the benchmarking application. Related data are collected and analyzed, and results are reported.

En route to a theory of benchmarking

“…In a simple situation, a subjective prioritisation may apply but for complex situations where there are substantial numbers of related processes contributing to the selected organizational objective, prioritisation of what to benchmark may be objectively assessed through analysis. Quantitative techniques such as analytical hierarchy process (AHP) (Partovi, 1994), principal component analysis (PCA) and common factor analysis (CFA) (Büyüközkan and Maire, 1998) may stand as examples. AHP scrutinizes En route to a theory of benchmarking relationships between organizational objectives and their associated processes to be quantified which leads into subsequent sensitivity analysis determining benchmarking factors (or "relata").…”

A Methodology Based on Benchmarking to Learn Across Megaprojects: The Case of Nuclear Decommissioning

“…This process is divided into the following 5 phase, divided into 15 steps and is a cyclical, "never-ending and learning" process. Büyüközkan & Maire (1998) also state the serious difficulties of implementing a continuous improvement activity is that "there are no standard performance metrics to be utilized in such studies". The author then illustrates the methods and tools for the first 5 steps of the benchmarking process through a case study.…”

“…industrialists that think that their business processes are very company specific and that it is not ethical to look at other companies' technology and manufacturing methodology, and the lack of formal benchmarking methodology. Büyüközkan & Maire (1998) define a general benchmarking process to cover the different types of benchmarking (i.e. internal, external, industry, competitive, and generic benchmarking).…”

“…Analysis 3. Implementation 4. Review "Benchmarking process formalization and a case study" (Büyüközkan & Maire 1998) "Benchmarking is the continuous process of evaluation of products, services and practices, with respect to those of the strongest competitors or of the enterprises recognized as leaders" (Büyüközkan & Maire 1998, quoting Camp (1995) "In a direct way, benchmarking is a process of evaluation and improvement of performance" (Büyüközkan & Maire 1998) Büyüközkan & Maire (1998) state that benchmarking is one of the most efficient and effective management tools to help an enterprise to improve its performance. The author also points out some of the obstruction against the benchmarking approach, e.g.…”

An Effective Approach for Benchmarking Implementation

“…According to a study conducted by Amaral and Sousa (2009), the barriers that constrains the company from implementing benchmarking consists of organizational barriers (people, culture and context), benchmarking project management barriers (planning and implementation, leadership and business pressures) and benchmarking data barriers (difficulty to access/compare data). As the result, formalizing the benchmarking model with methods and tools would be one of the best ways to overcome the obstacles (Buyukozkan and Maire, 1998).…”