Organizational Benchmarking Task
An Organizational Benchmarking Task is a benchmarking task whose inputs are organizations and organizational performance metrics.
- Context:
- Input: an Organizational Performance Metric.
- output: an Organizational Benchmark Report.
- It can be include an Organizational Benchmark Dataset.
- It can range from being a Real-World Organizational Benchmark Task to being a Synthetic Organizational Benchmark Task.
- It can range from being a For-Profit Organizational Benchmarking Task to being a Not-for-Profit Organizational Benchmarking Task.
- …
- Example(s):
- Municipal Government Benchmarking, such as: benchmarking the City of Palo Alto in 2016.
- Hospital Benchmarking.
- Organizational Capability Benchmarking, such as: ML Engineering Capability Benchmarking.
- …
- Counter-Example(s):
- See: Performance Metric, Performance Indicator, Strategic Management, Best Practice.
References
2021
- (Wikipedia, 2021) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/benchmarking Retrieved:2021-1-8.
- Benchmarking is the practice of comparing business processes and performance metrics to industry bests and best practices from other companies. Dimensions typically measured are quality, time and cost.
Benchmarking is used to measure performance using a specific indicator (cost per unit of measure, productivity per unit of measure, cycle time of x per unit of measure or defects per unit of measure) resulting in a metric of performance that is then compared to others. [1] Also referred to as "best practice benchmarking" or "process benchmarking", this process is used in management in which organizations evaluate various aspects of their processes in relation to best-practice companies' processes, usually within a peer group defined for the purposes of comparison. This then allows organizations to develop plans on how to make improvements or adapt specific best practices, usually with the aim of increasing some aspect of performance. Benchmarking may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which organizations continually seek to improve their practices. In project management benchmarking can also support the selection, planning and delivery of projects. In the process of best practice benchmarking, management identifies the best firms in their industry, or in another industry where similar processes exist, and compares the results and processes of those studied (the "targets") to one's own results and processes. In this way, they learn how well the targets perform and, more importantly, the business processes that explain why these firms are successful. According to National Council on Measurement in Education, benchmark assessments [2] are short assessments used by teachers at various times throughout the school year to monitor student progress in some area of the school curriculum. These also are known as interim government.
In 1994, one of the first technical journals named Benchmarking: An International Journal was published.
- Benchmarking is the practice of comparing business processes and performance metrics to industry bests and best practices from other companies. Dimensions typically measured are quality, time and cost.
- ↑ Fifer, R. M. (1989). Cost benchmarking functions in the value chain. Strategy & Leadership, 17(3), 18-19.
- ↑ National Council on Measurement in Education (USA) http://www.ncme.org/ncme/NCME/Resource_Center/Glossary/NCME/Resource_Center/Glossary1.aspx?hkey=4bb87415-44dc-4088-9ed9-e8515326a061#anchorB
2015
- (Valdes-Perez, 2015) ⇒ Raul Valdes-Perez. (2015). “Smart Benchmarking Starts with Knowing Whom to Compare Yourself To.” In: Harvard Business Review Journal, OCTOBER 30, 2015.
- QUOTE: Comparing your organization to peers - also known as benchmarking - lets you understand how you're doing, identify performance gaps and opportunities to improve, and highlight peer achievements that you could emulate, or your own achievements to be celebrated. The problem is that peer comparison as generally practiced suffers from tunnel vision and so misses critical insights, to everyone's detriment.
It's almost universal practice that the benchmarker chooses one or two organizational goals, then picks a few key metrics (key performance indicators) relevant to those goals, and finally selects several peer groups from a limited set. The outputs are then the mean, median, distribution, or high-percentile values for those peer groups on those metrics. The conclusion is that the organization may or may not have a problem, which may or may not be addressable.
The selection of peer groups is crucial to insightful benchmarking. For example, suppose you want to compare the U.S. against other nations. What would be the right peer group? Here are some that make sense: democracies; the Anglosphere; constitutional republics; large countries; developed countries; OECD or NATO members; the western hemisphere; non-tropical countries; largely monolingual countries; business-friendly economies; and even baseball-playing nations.
- QUOTE: Comparing your organization to peers - also known as benchmarking - lets you understand how you're doing, identify performance gaps and opportunities to improve, and highlight peer achievements that you could emulate, or your own achievements to be celebrated. The problem is that peer comparison as generally practiced suffers from tunnel vision and so misses critical insights, to everyone's detriment.
2001
- (Lokan et al., 2001) ⇒ Chris Lokan, Terry Wright, Peter R. Hill, and Michael Stringer. (2001). “Organizational Benchmarking Using the ISBSG Data Repository." IEEE Software 18, no. 5
- QUOTE: … The contributing organization received an individual benchmark report for each project, comparing it to the most relevant projects in the repository. The ISBSG also performed an organizational benchmarking exercise that compared the organizations set of 60 projects as a...