IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Proposing a taxonomy for performance measurement systems' failures


  • VAN CAMP, Jelle
  • BRAET, Johan


Failures of business performance measurement (BPM) systems are dispersedly discussed in the abundance of literature written. Due to the multi-disciplinarity of stakeholders and researchers involved, the basis of literature is expanding but not converging. The added value of this paper is twofold. Firstly, the nomenclature used in the BPM field is aligned and represented visually. Secondly, this paper compiles and discusses 36 identified failures of performance measurement systems (PMS), thereby proposing an easy taxonomy. The classification draws upon three layers: metric level, framework level and management level, with respectively 13, 9 and 14 failures. This paper holds information for both academics and business people. The former can employ the literature overview for further referencing and can use it as a guideline to construct new BPM frameworks or systems, or adjust old ones. By reading this paper, people from the field create an awareness of risks involved when implementing a PMS. Alternatively, they can use it as a checklist in their current situation or tool for easy communication. Further research is necessary, both for tackling the problems listed and for looking into the correlation of the presented failures.

Suggested Citation

  • VAN CAMP, Jelle & BRAET, Johan, 2013. "Proposing a taxonomy for performance measurement systems' failures," Working Papers 2013004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ant:wpaper:2013004

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Cedergren, Stefan & Wall, Anders & Norström, Christer, 2010. "Evaluation of performance in a product development context," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 359-369, July.
    3. Véronique Malleret & Annick Bourguignon & Hanne Norreklit, 2004. "The American balanced scorecard versus the French tableau de bord : the ideological dimension," Post-Print hal-00486648, HAL.
    4. Suwignjo, P. & Bititci, U. S & Carrie, A. S, 2000. "Quantitative models for performance measurement system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-3), pages 231-241, March.
    5. Wang, Juite & Hwang, W.-L., 2007. "A fuzzy set approach for R&D portfolio selection using a real options valuation model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 247-257, June.
    6. Verworn, Birgit & Herstatt, Cornelius, 1999. "Approaches to the "fuzzy front end" of innovation," Working Papers 2, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    7. Hauser, John & Katz, Gerald, 1998. "Metrics: you are what you measure!," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 517-528, October.
    8. L. Wade, 1988. "Review," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 99-100, July.
    9. Nilsson, Fredrik & Kald, Magnus, 2002. "Recent Advances in Performance Management:: The Nordic Case," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 235-245, June.
    10. Marc H. Meyer & Peter Tertzakian & James M. Utterback, 1997. "Metrics for Managing Research and Development in the Context of the Product Family," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 88-111, January.
    11. Hauser, John R. & Katz, Gerald M. & International Center for Research on the Management of Technology., 1998. "Metrics : you are what you measure!," Working papers 172-98, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Kostoff, Ronald N. & Geisler, Elie, 2007. "The unintended consequences of metrics in technology evaluation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 103-114.
    13. Pawar, Kulwant S. & Driva, Helen, 1999. "Performance measurement for product design and development in a manufacturing environment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 61-68, April.
    14. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Performance measurement; PMS; Nomenclature; Failures; Taxonomy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ant:wpaper:2013004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joeri Nys). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.