IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pal/palchp/978-1-4039-1453-8_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Benchmarking in Practice

In: Organization of R&D: An Evaluation of Best Practices

Author

Listed:
  • Pradosh Nath
  • N. Mrinalini

Abstract

The WAITRO study was methodologically complex because the practices of 60 RTOs were being compared with each other. All the practices for a sub-process were grouped together on the basis of their essential similarities. It would have been much easier if the exercise had been done for a particular RTO with a clear idea of what was to be bench-marked. In the case of the WAITRO study all the 60 RTOs would have their own specific characteristics. The practices had to be compared and the best practices had to be benchmarked, therefore, on an abstract level with a common denominator for all the RTOs. The effectiveness of RTO services for clients was chosen as a common denominator in the WAITRO study.

Suggested Citation

  • Pradosh Nath & N. Mrinalini, 2002. "Benchmarking in Practice," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Organization of R&D: An Evaluation of Best Practices, chapter 7, pages 86-111, Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palchp:978-1-4039-1453-8_7
    DOI: 10.1057/9781403914538_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:palchp:978-1-4039-1453-8_7. 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.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.