IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i5p2173-d1351902.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Performance Measurement Systems’ Ability to Mitigate or Eliminate Typical Barriers Compromising Organisational Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Flávio Cunha

    (Algoritmi Centre, Department of Production and Systems, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal)

  • José Dinis-Carvalho

    (Algoritmi Centre, Department of Production and Systems, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal)

  • Rui M. Sousa

    (Algoritmi Centre, Department of Production and Systems, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal)

Abstract

This paper aims to identify the main performance measurement systems (PMSs) documented in the literature and assess their ability to overcome/mitigate a set of 19 specific barriers (identified in a previous paper) to their effectiveness. It also aims to understand what makes each PMS capable of or not capable of dealing with these barriers (i.e., what traits it has) and to explore their connection to some sustainable development goals (SDG). The PRISMA methodology was used to identify the relevant publications, which were then subjected to a detailed content analysis with statistical treatment, followed by the assessment of the potential of each PMS to deal with the barriers. The results made it possible to identify the PMSs most referred to in the literature (ordered list), quantitatively classify the PMSs according to their ability to overcome/mitigate barriers, and identify the barriers most and least addressed by the PMSs. While no single PMS offers a comprehensive solution, certain common traits contribute significantly to overcoming prevalent barriers. The complex interplay between barriers means that some traits can effectively address multiple barriers either directly or indirectly. Regarding implications, these findings provide important inputs (e.g., key recommendations) for developing or improving PMS frameworks that are able to comprehensively address the barriers, thus contributing to organisational effectiveness and, consequently, to the achievement of the SDGs. This constitutes the innovative contribution of this paper. As for limitations, this work is based on the analysis of 28 PMSs resulting from the systematic literature review in two databases (Scopus and Web of Science).

Suggested Citation

  • Flávio Cunha & José Dinis-Carvalho & Rui M. Sousa, 2024. "Assessment of Performance Measurement Systems’ Ability to Mitigate or Eliminate Typical Barriers Compromising Organisational Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2173-:d:1351902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2173/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2173/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bititci, U. S. & Suwignjo, P. & Carrie, A. S., 2001. "Strategy management through quantitative modelling of performance measurement systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 15-22, January.
    2. José Dinis-Carvalho & Rui M. Sousa & Inês Moniz & Helena Macedo & Rui M. Lima, 2023. "Improving the Performance of a SME in the Cutlery Sector Using Lean Thinking and Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Silvestro, Rhian, 2014. "Performance topology mapping: understanding the drivers of performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 269-282.
    2. Giachetti, Ronald E. & Martinez, Luis D. & Saenz, Oscar A. & Chen, Chin-Sheng, 2003. "Analysis of the structural measures of flexibility and agility using a measurement theoretical framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 47-62, October.
    3. Quezada, Luis E. & Cordova, Felisa M. & Palominos, Pedro & Godoy, Katherine & Ross, Jocelyn, 2009. "Method for identifying strategic objectives in strategy maps," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 492-500, November.
    4. Chung, Shu-Hsing & Lee, Amy H. I. & Pearn, W. L., 2005. "Analytic network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning in semiconductor fabricator," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 15-36, April.
    5. Mistry, Jamshed & Sarkis, Joseph & Dhavale, Dileep G., 2014. "Multi-criteria analysis using latent class cluster ranking: An investigation into corporate resiliency," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 1-13.
    6. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    7. L. Berrah & V. Clivillé & J. Montmain & G. Mauris, 2019. "The Contribution concept for the control of a manufacturing multi-criteria performance improvement," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 47-58, January.
    8. Braz, Renata Gomes Frutuoso & Scavarda, Luiz Felipe & Martins, Roberto Antonio, 2011. "Reviewing and improving performance measurement systems: An action research," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 751-760, October.
    9. Md Sajjad Hosain, 2019. "The Impact of Accounting Information System on Organizational Performance: Evidence from Bangladeshi Small & Medium Enterprises," Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(2), pages 133-147, December.
    10. Valérie Neyns & Laurent Karsenty, 2013. "How do you control performance while maintaining trust-based relationships? [Comment contrôler la performance tout en préservant des relations de confiance ?]," Post-Print hal-04464246, HAL.
    11. Sarkis, Joseph, 2003. "Quantitative models for performance measurement systems--alternate considerations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 81-90, October.
    12. Kim, Soo Wook, 2007. "Organizational structures and the performance of supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 323-345, April.
    13. VAN CAMP, Jelle & BRAET, Johan, 2013. "Proposing a taxonomy for performance measurement systems' failures," Working Papers 2013004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    14. Onaolapo Adekunle Abdul-Rahamon & Adegbite Tajudeen Adejare, 2014. "The Analysis of the impact of Accounting Records Keeping on the Performance of the Small Scale Enterprises," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, January.
    15. Emre Akyuz & Hristos Karahalios & Metin Celik, 2015. "Assessment of the maritime labour convention compliance using balanced scorecard and analytic hierarchy process approach," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 145-162, February.
    16. Cliville, Vincent & Berrah, Lamia & Mauris, Gilles, 2007. "Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the MACBETH multi-criteria method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 171-189, January.
    17. Brent, Alan C. & Rogers, David E.C. & Ramabitsa-Siimane, Tsaletseng S.M. & Rohwer, Mark B., 2007. "Application of the analytical hierarchy process to establish health care waste management systems that minimise infection risks in developing countries," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(1), pages 403-424, August.
    18. S P Santos & V Belton & S Howick, 2008. "Enhanced performance measurement using OR: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(6), pages 762-775, June.
    19. da Silveira, Giovani J. C., 2005. "Improving trade-offs in manufacturing: Method and illustration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 27-38, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2173-:d:1351902. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.