ABSTRACT
The design of a Performance Management (PM) control system is a complex process. As argued by Franco-Santos et al. (2014), performance is both multi-dimensional and ambiguous, resulting in challenges for the designer. PM control system design involves establishing operational processes to be linked directly to the organisation’s intended strategy. Designing a PM control system involves utilisation of Performance Measurement Systems (PMS), including benchmarking. However, there must be systems within the PMS to ensure targets/metrics or benchmarking processes are sufficiently flexible to accommodate change. To manage the complex processes within a PMS, the criticality of appropriate performance measurements for control systems, such as Total Quality Management (TQM), Six-Sigma and Just-In-Time (JIT), has long been recognised (Meybodi, 2015). In addition to appropriate measurements, it is noted that benchmarking can be used in many ways to achieve competitiveness, either to maintain continuous improvements or for process reengineering (Meybodi, 2015). Within the benchmarking literature, focus on the nature of the metrics has evolved over the three decades since research in this area emerged. While short-term targets were originally the common subjects of discussion when analysing financial and technical problems, these targets were frequently misaligned with the strategies of the organisation (Meybodi, 2015).
