Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Metachoice for benchmarking: a case study

View through CrossRef
Purpose – In a previous paper the authors emphasized the advantages of multicriteria methodologies to evaluate business performance. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the metachoice problem that always arises in a benchmark multicriteria analysis that can be synthesized as follows: “how to choose an algorithm to choose?” Design/methodology/approach – In order to perform a benchmark analysis, a set of criteria must be chosen. In the Balanced Scorecard approach, for example, key performance indicators (KPIs) are grouped in four different perspectives: financial, customer, internal processes and learning and growth. In this paper, the authors focus on multicriteria benchmark analysis applied to KPIs of the financial perspective. The paper considers a set of criteria used in financial statement analysis based on balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement. A case study is described. Findings – The main findings of the paper are when the evaluation of a firm is based on different genuine criteria, a metachoice problem arises: multicriteria ranking algorithms cannot be selected using a multicriteria algorithm; the choice of an algorithm ultimately depends on the subjective preference of the policy maker; and the authors metachoice solution to the benchmarking problem is in accordance with Simon’s satisfacing solution, describing a non-maximizing performance measurement methodology. Practical implications – The paper provides several practical implications in all cases in which a ranking has to be assigned to a group of firms based on financial performances. More in general the problem is very relevant when a ranking has to be carried out with respect to a set of projects, a set of strategies, a set of organizational units, etc. Originality/value – The adoption of a set of criteria is certainly an advantage to avoid uni-criterial myopic evaluation. However, this also creates some methodological problems. The paper demonstrates the “relativity” (subjectivity) of results of the evaluation process when there are many evaluation criteria, as in a benchmark context. This is a metachoice problem that cannot be solved by using another multicriteria algorithm.
Title: Metachoice for benchmarking: a case study
Description:
Purpose – In a previous paper the authors emphasized the advantages of multicriteria methodologies to evaluate business performance.
The purpose of this paper is to highlight the metachoice problem that always arises in a benchmark multicriteria analysis that can be synthesized as follows: “how to choose an algorithm to choose?” Design/methodology/approach – In order to perform a benchmark analysis, a set of criteria must be chosen.
In the Balanced Scorecard approach, for example, key performance indicators (KPIs) are grouped in four different perspectives: financial, customer, internal processes and learning and growth.
In this paper, the authors focus on multicriteria benchmark analysis applied to KPIs of the financial perspective.
The paper considers a set of criteria used in financial statement analysis based on balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement.
A case study is described.
Findings – The main findings of the paper are when the evaluation of a firm is based on different genuine criteria, a metachoice problem arises: multicriteria ranking algorithms cannot be selected using a multicriteria algorithm; the choice of an algorithm ultimately depends on the subjective preference of the policy maker; and the authors metachoice solution to the benchmarking problem is in accordance with Simon’s satisfacing solution, describing a non-maximizing performance measurement methodology.
Practical implications – The paper provides several practical implications in all cases in which a ranking has to be assigned to a group of firms based on financial performances.
More in general the problem is very relevant when a ranking has to be carried out with respect to a set of projects, a set of strategies, a set of organizational units, etc.
Originality/value – The adoption of a set of criteria is certainly an advantage to avoid uni-criterial myopic evaluation.
However, this also creates some methodological problems.
The paper demonstrates the “relativity” (subjectivity) of results of the evaluation process when there are many evaluation criteria, as in a benchmark context.
This is a metachoice problem that cannot be solved by using another multicriteria algorithm.

Related Results

Evolving benchmarking practices: a review for research perspectives
Evolving benchmarking practices: a review for research perspectives
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to review a major section of the literature on benchmarking practices in order to achieve better perspectives for emerging benchmarking research...
Hydatid Disease of The Brain Parenchyma: A Systematic Review
Hydatid Disease of The Brain Parenchyma: A Systematic Review
Abstarct Introduction Isolated brain hydatid disease (BHD) is an extremely rare form of echinococcosis. A prompt and timely diagnosis is a crucial step in disease management. This ...
Perceptions about benchmarking best practices among French managers: an exploratory survey
Perceptions about benchmarking best practices among French managers: an exploratory survey
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to present a discussion on the most commonly accepted benchmarking norms in the USA, the lessons learned from benchmarking experiences and see h...
Improving SME logistics performance through benchmarking
Improving SME logistics performance through benchmarking
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the applicability of current benchmarking proposals for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to suggest a condensed process...
Barriers to internal benchmarking initiatives: an empirical investigation
Barriers to internal benchmarking initiatives: an empirical investigation
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to focus on the identification of barriers to the implementation of benchmarking initiatives. Managers have little guidance on strategies for su...
An optimisational model of benchmarking
An optimisational model of benchmarking
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to develop a quantitative methodology for benchmarking process which is simple, effective and efficient as a rejoinder to benchmarking detractor...
A review on benchmarking of supply chain performance measures
A review on benchmarking of supply chain performance measures
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to redress the imbalances in the past literature of supply chain benchmarking and enhance data envelopment analysis (DEA) modeling approach in s...
The need for adaptive processes of benchmarking in small business‐to‐business services
The need for adaptive processes of benchmarking in small business‐to‐business services
PurposeThis paper aims to explore current management attitudes towards benchmarking and its implementation within small business‐to‐business service firms in order to enhance a dee...

Back to Top