IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v53y2002i3d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Good enough’ performance measurement: a trade-off between activity and action

Author

Listed:
  • R Johnston

    (University of Warwick)

  • S Brignall

    (Aston University)

  • L Fitzgerald

    (University of Warwick)

Abstract

Performance measurement systems along the lines of the EFQM and the balanced scorecard have developed rapidly in recent years, and now occupy much management time and effort. There is limited evidence that performance improvement has received proportionate attention. Six organisations selected for their success were studied using a grounded theory approach based on interviews with management accountants and operations managers in each of the organisations. It is clear that they are all making strenuous efforts to use their performance measurement systems but with a focus on the ‘good enough’ rather than the detail. This gave managers in these organisations the time and space to concentrate on the use of performance measures on forward looking relevance, understanding and action, rather than retrospective and detailed control. This approach was promoted by senior managers and was based on their ability to see the business in simple terms and their understanding of the key drivers of business performance.

Suggested Citation

  • R Johnston & S Brignall & L Fitzgerald, 2002. "‘Good enough’ performance measurement: a trade-off between activity and action," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(3), pages 256-262, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:53:y:2002:i:3:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601217
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601217
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601217?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:53:y:2002:i:3:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.