access to measuring and balancing of enterprise's key
TRANSCRIPT
Journal of Mechatronics, Automation and Identification Technology Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 1 – 11, 2020.
This paper is selected from V International Conference MECHANICAL ENGINEERING IN XXI CENTURY, Niš, December 9-10, 2020. 1
Access to Measuring and Balancing of Enterprise's
Key Performance Indicators Rado MAKSIMOVIĆ
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Novi Sad, Serbia
Abstract— Measuring performances business processes
nowadays, has become routine practice in enterprises that
have adopted quality management system according to ISO
9001 standard requests, since that is one of the key requests
of that standard. On the other hand, in recent scientific
literature the term "Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)" is
introduced, primarily as a tool for enterprise’s market
performance analysis. However, reviewing the mentioned
literature as well as insight into practical use in the
enterprises have shown that measuring and analyzing
enterprise’s performances doesn’t have a systematic
approach, and that there is a large number of different
models in use. Rarely, one can find a business field where Key
Performance Indicators model has been brought to the level
of standardization. This paper is about establishing a
comprehensive, systematic model of enterprise’s
performances identification and their measuring methods
through appropriate key indicators, according to the existing
models, a step forward was made in terms of suggesting the
way of reaching the satisfying level of performances balance,
by putting them into Balanced Scorecard. The method of
constant monitoring over the performances is implied (over
their indicators), as well as the case study.
Keywords— Enterprise, Performance, Key Performance
Indicators, Balanced Scorecard, Monitoring
I. INTRODUCTION
Today, enterprise performance indicators are defined
as Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and represent
measures that reflect the company's performance based on
quantified objectives.
KPIs are used in intelligent business to assess the real
situation in the company and determine the basic
directions of management in the future. In addition to
numerical, they include "difficult to measure" quantities
such as the benefits of marketing, development and other
functions or parameters that measure the characteristics of
employees - innovation, charisma, commitment,
helpfulness, satisfaction...
The original application of KPIs is in determining an
organization’s strategy and measuring progress in
achieving goals (for example, when using appropriate
management techniques such as the Balanced Scorecard).
The essential application of KPIs is reflected in the
establishment of criteria for their own supervision over the
characteristics - performance of the company. However, in
the case when, in a certain field of activity, these indicators
are brought to the level of standardization, then they
determine the market position - rating and basis for
comparison with competing companies.
II. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
- A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The January 2004 edition of Industry Week [1, 2]
includes two articles on manufacturing that include “Key
performance indicators”. Both articles deal with the
measurement and rank measures of manufacturing
industrial areas, whereby standardized measures (KPIs)
and comparison criteria in the form of 3 categories have
been established:
Low performance, the company is in the "last 25%",
Average performance as a "mediocre position", and
High performance, the company is in the "top 25%".
Performance data and specific criteria for assessing the
degree of goodness of the company are given in Tables I -
VI and are recommended as an opportunity to establish
"good practice in production" to assess their own results
and compare with leaders in the field.
TABLE I SUPPLY CHAIN PLANNING
Key Performance
Indicators
Bottom
25% Median
Top
25%
Cash-to-cash cycle time
(days) 90 56 30
Total inventory turn rate 3.2 6.0 10.0
Production schedule
attainment 77% 90% 97%
Cost of Quality - percent
of annual revenues 3.1% 0.7% 0.1%
TABLE III NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
Key Performance
Indicators
Bottom
25% Median
Top
25%
Percent of sales pf
previous year products 10% 15% 25%
Time to market (days) 258 150 60
Products launched on
budget 50% 75% 90%
Products launched on
time 30% 60% 86%
Percent R&D cost for
new products 3% 25% 50%
2
TABLE IIIII PROCUREMENT
Key Performance
Indicators
Bottom
25%
Median Top
25%
Supplier lead time
(days) 28 14 7
On-time delivery 80% 90% 95%
Purchases from certified
vendors (% of total
spend)
40% 75% 90%
Direct materials sourced
outside the country 2% 10% 25%
TABLE IVV CUSTOMER ORDER MANAGEMENT
Key Performance
Indicators
Bottom
25% Median
Top
25%
Percent of total sales
orders without
intervention
0.0% 15.0% 30.0%
Total annual sales orders
delivered on time 85.0% 93.0% 97.5%
Percent of annual sales
orders not fulfilled on
tim
5.0% 2.0% 0.0%
Customer retention rate
over the past three years 80.0% 90.0% 95.8%
TABLE V LOGISTICS
Key Performance
Indicators
Bottom
25% Median
Top
25%
Customer order-to-
delivery time (days) 14 7 3
Supplier delivery dock-to-
stock cycle time (hours) 12 4 2
Customer order pick-to-
ship cycle time (hours) 10 4 2
Order fill rate 90.3% 97.7% 99.0%
Total logistics costs as a
percentage of sales 10% 4.3% 2.0%
TABLE VI MANUFACTURING
Key Performance Indicators Median Top 25%
Average wage for production
employees ($/hour) $13.00 $15.50
Annual sales per employee $ 150,000 $ 220,000
Raw material turns
(COGS/Average raw material) 11.6 22.0
Work-in-Progress turns
(COGS/Average value WIP) 16.0 38.2
Finished Goods Turns (COGS/
Average Value Finished Goods) 12.0 25.0
Total Inventory Turns (COGS/
Av. Value of Total Inventory) 8.0 13.0
Asset Turn Ratio
(COGS/Average Assets) 2.5 4.0
Return on Invested Capital 13.5 25.0
The previous tables indicate the effort made to
establish comparison and ranking criteria, but also the
absence of a systematic approach in establishing generally
applicable benchmarking rules.
As evidence of insufficient systematicity in
considering key performance through standardized
indicators - KPIs, Figures 1-4 show original examples of
reports in the production and distribution of oil and gas [3],
and Figures 5-7 in the field of education [4].
Fig. 1 KPI: COD (chemical oxigen demend)
Fig. 2 KPI: Water
Fig. 3 KPI: Energy
Fig. 4 KPI: CO2 from energy
3
Fig. 5 KPI: Total Enrollment
Fig. 6 KPI: Undergraduate 6-Year Graduation Rate
Fig. 7 KPI: Degrees and Certificates Awarded
Table 9 contains the "pioneering" proposal of the KPI
for technical faculties in Serbia, created as a result of
research on the student and teacher population [5].
TABLE VIII KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY (KPIS PROPOSAL FOR TECHNICAL FACULTIES IN SERBIA)
No
Common indicators
KPI
Code Indicator name Rank S Rank N
1 C07 Laboratory capacities 1 1
2 C23 Availability of information on the Website 2 19
3 F03 Networking with foreign faculties 14 2
4 C17 Professional practice 3 12
5 C19 Organization of teaching 4 3
6 E01 Scope of cooperation with the economy 4 23
7 C11 Computer equipment capacities 5 8
8 D01 The volume of investment in scientific research 11 6
9 C20 Interpersonal relations 7 13
10 E02 Joint research projects with the economy 21 7
11 C18 Student research work 24 9
12 C13 Classroom capacity and equipment 12 18
13 C16 Availability of teaching staff 10 20
14 F01 Possibility of student exchange with foreign faculties 25 10
15 C22 Capacity of student services 13 15
16 C12 Library capacity 15 24
17 F02 Joint study programs with foreign faculties 18 16
No
Students Teachers
KPI
Code Indicator name
Rank
S
Rank
N
KPI
Code Indicator name
Rank
N
Rank
S
1 F10 Employment in international companies 6 30 F06 International projects with foreign faculties
5 29
2 G10 Employment in regional companies 8 35 F09 Scientific papers in international
journals 11 56
3 C05 The amount of funds for teaching 9 28 F04 Foreign students' interest in enrollment 14 32
4 G09 Professional practice in regional companies
16 39 F07 Visiting professors from abroad 17 31
5 E03 Trainings and courses for companies 17 31 G07 Interest in enrollment 21 30
6 C06 Possibility to use the Internet 19 26 C21 Scope of student exchange 22 28
7 C02 Possibility of employment 20 54 C09 Teaching group size 23 45
8 E04 Teacher's experience in economics 22 33 F05 Earnings from international research projects
25 54
4
The practice of establishing a system for monitoring
the parameters that reflect the quality of business
operations of the company is widely accepted. The main
motive of the company for the establishment of such a
system is the need for management structures to have and
timely use data on all relevant characteristics (parameters)
of individual processes and systems - the company as a
whole in decision making. The term can be understood in
a timely manner in terms of the need for management
action online, ie in real-time, but also in terms of making
decisions whose effect is long-term, such as decisions on
strategy selection, work program changes, investment and
other similar decisions.
The process of establishing a system for monitoring the
parameters of the quality of business operations of the
company runs separately and almost independently in
different areas of activity. Despite the obvious contribution
to managerial practice, it can be stated that this approach
is characterized by:
isolated comparisons of the quality of the company's
business with itself in different periods, based on
their own, most often subjective criteria,
elaboration of branch criteria for a certain area of
activity for the purpose of comparison with oneself
in time and comparison with the average in the
region, country and with the leader, based on criteria
that are important for that activity,
elaboration of systemic, general criteria for
determining the competitive ability of a company.
One of the contributions is the adoption of generally
valid international standards in the field of quality - ISO
9000 series standards. These standards require
organizations of all types to establish and implement their
approaches to measuring and continuously improving
process performance. Unfortunately, attention is focused
on the quality of individual processes, ie on measures of
the quality of parts of the system, and not the whole.
The theoretical basis is insufficient - there are no
models for monitoring the parameters of business quality
of the company which would establish a standardized
System for providing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
The Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) system should,
with its continuity of application and up-to-dateness of
data, improve the approach to enterprise management,
replacing the approach in which occasional "campaigns"
of data collection, processing and analysis using
appropriate methods and techniques provide the basis for
decision making.
III. BALANCED SCORECARD
- A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The lack of integrativity of the process model of
measuring the performance of the company as well as its
limitation to predominantly measurable process
parameters has caused saturation - a relatively limited
range in improving the business characteristics of the
company.
In the era of industrialization, companies created value
by using physically tangible assets (land, buildings,
equipment and supplies), that is, by transforming it into
products. Research shows that today the book value of
tangible assets is at the level of 10-15% of the market value
of the company.
Today, the value of physically intangible resources is
growing significantly and intangible assets are becoming
the main source of competitive advantage. The most
valuable intangible assets relate to consumer relations,
employee skills and their knowledge and organizational
culture focused on innovation, problem-solving and
general business improvement [6].
The decline in the relative importance of tangible assets
has led to a decline in the importance of technical and
financial measures of company quality and business
success. The synthesized technical and financial indicators
do not include intangible assets and do not have the role of
targeting profitable areas.
The system, which complements conventional
technical and financial reporting and appropriate
benchmarks as drivers of future performance, was created
under the name Balanced Scorecard (BSC) [7]. The results
of successful global companies show that the Balanced
Scorecard approach is a framework that allows the strategy
to be operational - to become a day-to-day business and an
ongoing process in the enterprise.
Performance measures, according to the Balanced
Scorecard concept, are derived from the company's vision
and strategy. Target performance and its criteria are
defined from four perspectives (Fig. 8):
1. Financial perspective,
2. Customer perspective,
3. Perspective of internal processes and
4. Learning and development perspective.
5
Fig. 8 Perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard concept
The Balanced Scorecard concept, viewed as a tool to
ensure the necessary and sufficient performance of the
company, contains, as shown in Figure 6, the following
basic elements:
a) BASIS, which comes down to strategic planning for
the future of the company, is determined by its mission.
The mission and basic values that the company's
employees believe in are information that describes the
projected position of the company in the future - the
vision.
Vision is the basis for formulating a company's
strategy. Clearly set target performance and their
benchmarks (via BSC) are the basis for identifying
strategic initiatives and decisions that translate into
business plans. In this way, the translation of the
mission into concrete, projected outcomes are ensured:
satisfied owners and consumers, effective processes,
trained and motivated employees. The process is
shown in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9 The basis of the Balanced Scorecard concept
b) PERSPECTIVES, which should provide the
management structure (company management) with
data and information on the following elements:
b.1) FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE
Creating value for owners is an outcome that any
business strategy should achieve. A comprehensive, long-
term indicator of success, such as Economic Value Added
- EVA, is usually chosen. This is followed by cash return
on investments, various variations of discounted cash
flow, etc. However, regardless of the measure of financial
success, companies increase their economic value through
two approaches: revenue growth and increased
productivity, which opens a very wide space for choosing
the right financial parameters - performance and measures
- criteria for success.
Note: It is necessary to emphasize, however, that the
"financial perspective" of business can be viewed more
broadly, not only from the point of view of business
owners, especially when the BSC approach is used in the
analysis of the business of special types - public, state and
similar. Then, other indicators of success can be included
in this perspective - oriented to knowledge about the
general benefit of the company for the wider environment
- society. In that sense, the perspective marked as
"financial", in the analysis of the quality of the company's
performance, is extended to a set of general business
indicators (success) of the company for which Top
Management is in charge.
b.2) CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE
It consists of evaluating the relationship between
companies and customers/users of products and services,
which is a first-class task of marketing and commercial
functions.
Success indicators in these areas are reflected in the
quality of market-related elements of the strategy in
general terms - market participation and feedback related
to orientations in terms of quality and volume of exchange,
development of work programs and/or entry into new
markets, as well as operational relations - measured by the
current volume and value of exchange and, in particular,
the satisfaction of customers (users, consumers) of
products and services.
"Customer perspective" is built into many approaches
that deal with the problem of company success - marketing
mix, leadership, "differentiation", cost leadership and
others, and is certainly in the first place in the process
model of measuring company performance.
In that sense, the "customer perspective", in the
analysis of the quality of the company's performance,
refers to the set of business (success) indicators for which
the functions of marketing and commercial business are in
charge.
Note: It is necessary to note, however, that the "consumer
perspective", although one of the most important sets of
information about the company, in the concept of BSC
unjustifiably stands out from the other side of the market
6
relationship - and that is the supplier market. It must be
borne in mind that the enterprise-environment relationship
is integral and that relations with suppliers of materials
and services must be placed on the same level of
importance as relations with customers/users/consumers.
B.3) PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNAL PROCESSES
This perspective, in the original form of the BSC
concept, is defined in a simplified way - as a common way
of controlling the parameters of individual processes,
primarily referring to operational processes. In some, less
economically based interpretations, this perspective
extends to notions of the type:
Innovation processes (invention, product
development, speed of delivery to the market),
Consumer management processes (solution
development, customer service, customer
relationship management, advisory services),
Operational processes (supply chain management,
production efficiency, cost reduction, quality
improvement, reduction of production cycle time,
better capacity management),
Processes related to the regulatory environment
(health, safety, ecology and society).
Note: It is obvious that many "interpreters" of the BSC
concept intend to "bypass the problem" of the quality of
internal processes in the company instead of solving it!!!
It is clear that the aforementioned set of enterprise quality
parameters cannot be interpreted as dependent and less
significant, and especially not as a non-systemically
determined structure of "process characteristics" which is
beyond the basic idea of "balance of parameters and
indicators" of an enterprise. Therefore, the parameters of
individual processes - far more broadly defined in the
process approach to measuring the performance of the
company, are the basis for integration into the general
model of this type.
b.4) LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT
PERSPECTIVE
Theoretically, the least processed, and therefore the
especially challenging area of the BSC concept is the
stated perspective. This perspective, in the original sense,
defines the following three categories of intangible assets
that are necessary for the implementation of the company's
strategy:
Strategic competencies: skills and knowledge - the
ability of employees to support strategy,
Strategic technologies: information system,
databases - necessary to support the strategy,
Organizational climate: cultural changes that will
provide motivation and authority to employees to
implement the strategy.
Note: Considerations regarding the perspective of the quality of
the company's internal processes have indicated the unsystematic
interpretation of the original BSC concept. Strategic
technologies, information systems, databases and support
technologies are additionally and completely unjustifiably
included in the perspective of "learning and development". It is
necessary, in order to create a real innovative climate in the
company, to isolate these concepts of a technical nature from the
approach to knowledge management and the parameters of
organizational and cultural behavior of employees in the
company.
c) APPLICATION OF BSC MODEL
Practical implementation of the Balanced Scorecard
concept, suggests the need to adjust to the nature and
characteristics of the case (the area of business, size of the
company, etc.), as shown in Fig. 10.
In the practical implementation of the application of
the Balanced Scorecard concept is necessary to identify
key performance indicators for companies in all four areas
of observation, with the clearly outlined need that
measures of these areas of observation are standardized to
a level that ensures the needs of the company - without
"burdening" with the concepts of financial, technical or
nonfinancial.
Fig. 10 Development of the Balanced Scorecard concept - adapted [7]
IV. PROCESS MODEL OF ENTERPRISE'S PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT
The quality management system, according to the
requirements of international standards in the field of
quality - ISO 9000, is based on a process approach in
management, which requires:
identification of all processes that have an impact on
the quality of products and business as a whole,
determining the necessary documented information
for the functioning of the process,
determining the objectives of the process and the
limits of tolerances,
determining the necessary resources for the
functioning of the process - documentation, human
and infrastructural,
7
defining process performance - as a basis for
monitoring the functioning of the process and
defining measured values (criteria) - the limit of
permissible deviations as a basis for evaluating the
quality of the process.
The process analysis methodology is based on the
definition that a process is a set of interrelated activities
that convert input elements into outputs using appropriate
resources (Fig. 11).
Fig. 11 Basic process definition
Different techniques can be used for a detailed analysis
of process performance. A suitable tool is the "process
map" which contains basic information about the process
necessary for a later detailed elaboration of the rules of
process implementation according to the ISO 9001
standard.
V. CASE STUDY - APPLICATION OF KEY PERFORMANCE
MODEL IN AN INDUSTRIAL COMPANY
Model for the measurement of key performance
indicators is applied on the real example of a complex
industrial company with different areas of activity for a
period of one year [8].
The structure of the identified processes in the analysed
complex industrial company is shown in Table IX.
TABLE IX PROCESSES IN A GIVEN COMPLEX COMPANY
Process of Planning and analysis
Process of Human Resource Management
Process of business legal regulation
Process of quality insurance
Process of marketing
Process of sales
Process of supply
Process of finance and accounting
Process of developing products and services
Process of applying IT
Process of production of bauxite
Process of production of non-metals
Process of production of construction materials
Process of machine production
Process of processing of agricultural products
Process of freight traffic
Process of long-distance traffic
Process of passenger traffic
Process of construction services
Process of catering services
Process of storing
Process of maintenance
Process of managing measuring equipment
Process of employees safety
Process of securing buildings and property
A. The process model of performance measurement
In this Case Study is applied the highly accepted in the
literature, technique - „mapping process“. In this sense,
the map of key performances of the process was used for
conducting the process analysis, checking the developed
model for measuring the key performance indicators of the
company, in this case, for all internal processes. In
continuation presented are developed a map of the key
performances for the supply process selected as an
example, shown at Figure 12. For the selected process in
the company the following key performance indicators of
the processes were defined:
IQN - Index of quality of supply;
IZP - Index of submission of requests for the offer;
IPO - Index of submission of supplier’s offer;
IZN - Index of supply delays.
8
Fig. 12 Map of key performance of supply process
The information system provides an overview of the
process KPI´s in a defined time period (month, quarter,
year), including the possibility of obtaining a review of the
process, organizational units, employee and business
partner. The system limit the reviewing of information in
accordance with the authorization of a system user,
through the personalization of content.
The user accesses the system, the system performs its
identification, records the user’s activity, and then takes
the appropriate data from the business processes records
based on them calculates KPI´s for the corresponding
processes. Finally, the system displays the process
performance to the user.
In figures 13-18 are shown the obtained key
performance indicators of supply and selling processes for
the observed company, the sample in the year 2014 [9].
Fig. 13 Valuation of the supply process for the year 2014
9
Fig. 14 Valuation of the selling process for the year 2014
Fig. 15 Data of KPI´s supply process for the year 2014
Fig. 16 Data of KPI´s selling process for the year 2014
Analyses of the presented results of measuring the
supply and selling processes goals in the sample industrial
company indicate the state of performances of individual
processes, and they are used as input for the process of
reviewing the company effectiveness by the management,
which secures information for improving the performances
of the company as a whole. Practically, the analysis of
measurement the process goals allows the identification of
"critical points" in each process based on lower of key
performance indicators of the process, and then it allows
comparing to the planned and the performance of
competing companies, so as to thereby identify areas for
process improvement. Analysis of the results provides a
possibility to establish the root causes of existing or
potential problems, and thus represents a source for
initiating corrective and preventive measures.
Fig. 17 Valuation of the supply process for period Jan. - Dec. 2014
Fig. 18 Valuation of the selling process for period Jan. - Dec. 2014
Availability of information indicating the status of the
process directly or indirectly, as already noted, is the
requirement for taking action to improve process
performance.
B. Balance Scorecard in a real industrial enterprise
In this industrial company a system of managing
performance and goals is established, i.e. a system for
making, measuring and control of achieving the goals.
Access to the concretization of key performances of the
process in the case of a joint-stock company (Fig. 19) [8], is based on experiences in the application of process
approach according to ISO 9000 standards.
10
Fig. 19 The balanced scorecard concept adapted to the joint-stock
company
C. A new view at the "learning and development
perspective"
There are different interpretations of the "learning and
development perspective" in the application of the BSC
approach to balanced monitoring of key indicators of
enterprise quality: from simple considerations related to
the number and structure of employees in the company and
the related problem of "degree of utilization - burden" of
employees, to the analysis of data and information related
to innovation, intellectual capital and other, significant
indicators, which are indicators of the quality of "internal
processes" in the company.
Given the marked inconsistency in literature sources
and in practical applications, the approach was accepted
that "learning and development perspectives" essentially
signify the quality of a company's human resources.
In this sense, the defined performance of the company
seen from the "perspective of learning and development"
shown in Figure 14, harmonized with the eleven-year
research of the so-called cultural dimensions carried out
within the world-renowned "GLOBE PROJECT" [10, 11],
and based on previous research by G. Hofstede, given in
[12].
The basic hypothesis set in the mentioned research is
that the organizational culture in the company is connected
with a group of special and in a special way measurable
parameters. Simply put, we want to prove that different
cultures do not have the same standards in the way they
lead and manage, but that people are greatly influenced by
the culture of the environment in which they live.
For the sake of comparability of results, a research
method was adopted with an elaborated "tool" for research,
which included determining the characteristics that
"measure" the cultural dimensions and organizational
behaviors of employees in the company. This tool includes
nine so-called "cultural dimensions" of employees, shown
in table X.
TABLE X NINE "CULTURAL DIMENSIONS" OF EMPLOYEES
1.
Power distance
4.
Collectivism
(institutional)
7.
Gender
egalitarianism
2.
Uncertainty
avoidance
5.
Collectivism (in
group)
8.
Future
orientation
3.
Humane
orientation
6.
Assertiveness
9.
Performance
orientation
The first thing to notice is that the tool for measuring
the characteristics of organizational culture has been
expanded in relation to some earlier research (for example
Geert Hofstede's 4 cultural dimensions), and that is
because it was necessary to investigate the overall
organizational culture, ie the behavior of all employees.
Secondly, it can be seen that all 9 mentioned measures are
descriptive - qualitative, ie non-numerical, and that was a
special problem for the research procedure. A special
problem is the interpretation of the mentioned terms due to
the possibility of comparing the obtained results.
In order to establish an "independent tool for
measuring" the dimensions of organizational behavior, a
unique scale was introduced (Fig. 20) which translates the
different responses related to each individual dimension
into numerical data. This scale includes the translation of
descriptive performance into numerical - from 1 to 7, but
each number of this scale is assigned an interpretation of
the respondent's answer, and this interpretation represents
the degree of explicit acceptance of a particular answer -
from 1 - Greatly Non-Assertive (not) to 7 - Greatly
Assertive (yes). In between are the answers: 2 - Somewhat
Non-Assertive, 3 - Sightly Non-Assertive, 4 - Neither
Assertive nor Non-Assertive, 5 - Sightly Assertive, 6 -
Somewhat Assertive.
Fig. 20 Scale for translating quality employee performance into a
numerical expression
The described new view on the “learning and
development perspective” was applied to the same
company observed in the case study in this chapter. In the
11
research, all employees in the company were surveyed,
650 of them.
A summary of all dimensions of organizational
behavior for the observed company is shown in Fig. 21.
Fig. 21 Summary overview of the organizational behavior dimension in the observed company
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The survey, whose results are presented in this paper,
represents a concrete contribution to the application of
management methods intended for measuring the business
success of the complex industrial enterprise. An important
component of the developed model, which measures the
success of the business by reaching the strategic goals, are
the quality characteristics of processes and key
performance indicators of process, which are again the
base for an industrial company to learn and implement
changes according to the experience from the past.
Starting from the findings that have been reached in
this study, it is possible to draw conclusions that point to
such a solution which should ensure a way of settling
problems that occur in the system of establishing and
managing key performance indicators used to measure,
monitor and manage business performance in the
industrial company, in other words, determining the actual
level of interdependence between the achieved quality of
individual processes and indicators of the effectiveness of
the entire business enterprise. Achieving the integrity of
certain perspectives or areas of the model of the key
performance of the industrial enterprise processes makes it
possible to get insight into the important indicators of
actual business results of the enterprise, and determine
which business processes should be improved and how to
impact on their future design.
Also, research in the framework of this study has
shown that it is possible to establish a standardized system
of criteria - parameters (performance) of the process,
which in required and sufficient measure reflects the
process effectiveness and the overall success of the
industrial enterprise. A general model of key process
performance is developed as a suitable tool for measuring
and analysis of key performance indicators of work
processes in industrial enterprises.
Automating the collection and processing of necessary
data and information in the company provides more
accurate, more complete and more up to date information
related to the manner of keeping records on the processes
implementation, especially when these records are
governed by appropriate procedures.
Thus, the performance measurement process focuses
on a short period, it enables analysis on time and efficient
way to resolve inconsistencies with the goals of process
improvement, products/services and overall company
results.
Applied solutions presented in this paper directly link
IT resources with business goals of the organization,
helping the organization to build connections with
customers and suppliers, and internal links of
organizational units, allowing more accurate, more
complete and more accurate information, crucial for
making quality decisions, and at the same time supporting
key business processes through the increased availability
of information which significantly influences increasing
the total effectiveness of the company.
REFERENCES
[1] Drickmamer, D., TIES THAT BIND: IndustryWeekValue Chain
Study revelas manufacturers' struggle to add value from product
development to delivery, Industry Week, January 2004, p. 49.
[2] Drickmamer, D., TICK TOCK IW/MPI Census of Manufacturers shows challenges, reality and, yes, even optimism, Industry Week,
January 2004, p. 20.
[3] 2005 Unilever Environmental and Social Report, Unilever US, Inc,
USA, 2005.
[4] Missouri Department of Higher Education (MDHE),
https://mis.missouristate.edu/KeyPerformanceIndicators/ (19. 10.
2020)
[5] Tasic, N., Delic, M., Maksimovic, R., Lalic, B., Cukusic, M.,
Selecting Key Performance Indicators in Universities – Academic perspective, Proceedings of XVII International Scientific
Conference on Industrial Systems (IS'17), Novi Sad, Serbia,
October 4–6, 2017, pp. 518-521.
[6] Kaličanin, Đ.: Balanced Scorecard i strategijski fokusirana organizacija - okvir za uspešnu operacionalizaciju strategije i
njenu implementaciju u informatičkoj eri, Economic Annals No
158, pp. 169-187, July 2003 - September 2003.
[7] Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P.P.: The Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive performance, Harvard Business Review -
HBR January-February 1992, 71-80, 1999.
[8] Djuric, Z., M., Maksimovic, R., Measuring and Analysis of the
Key Performance Indicators in an Industrial Enterprise Applying Information System, Proceedings of BALCOR 2013, Belgrade &
Zlatibor, 7-11 Septe., 2013, pp. 69-78.
[9] Tasic N., Djuric Z., Malesevic D., Maksimovic R., Radakovic N.:
Automation of Process Performance Management in a Company, Technical Gazette, 2018, Vol. 25, No 2, pp. 565-572.
[10] Cornelius, N. G. G: Leadership Style Variations Across Cultures,
GroveWel Global Leadership Solutions LCC, Pensylvania, USA,
2007.
[11] Cornelius, N. G. G: Worldwide Differences in Business Values and Practices, GroveWel Global Leadership Solutions LCC,
Pensylvania, USA, 2007.
[12] Hofstede, G.: Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind,
McGraw Hil, London, 1991