Deng, F (2015) Performance measurement system: attributes, effects and context in UK construction firms. PhD thesis, University College London, UK.
Abstract
Many organisations have adopted Performance Measurement Systems (PMS) to monitor their performance, assess the success of strategies, and/or assist the implementation of change programmes for continuous improvement. Performance measurement research has significantly evolved from developing conceptual frameworks (e.g. balanced scorecard) to rethinking and verifying the effects of PMS that is contextualised within the organisation. Inspite of significant evolution, PMS remains contentious conceptually and challenging for practitioners, especially in construction where theory and practice face contextual opportunities and constraints. While the approaches of key performance indicators (KPIs) and project performance benchmarks are predominating in construction research and practice, a systematic investigation of the conceptual basis of PMS is lacking in the construction context. This research examines the challenges for PMS theory and practice. Specifically, it aims to provide theoretical verification and convincing evidence pertaining to the extent to which key attributes of PMS lead to any positive effects in the construction context. By conducting a mixed methods research (i.e. a questionnaire survey and three case studies in UK construction firms), this study finds: three attributes are crucial for explicitly anatomising PMS - the nature, process quality and the use; all of them can separately lead to positive effects on sustaining project management and financial performance of construction firms, whereas PMS process quality plays a predominant role; both the nature of PMS and PMS process quality are the prerequisites of the extant use of PMS, which further improves system users' perceived effectiveness of PMS; and finally, both institutional and organisational contexts largely shape and affect the adoption of PMS (the nature and process quality in particular). This study primarily contributes to systematically explicating the conceptual basis and effectiveness of PMS in the construction context and thereby uncovering the black box of how PMS affects organisational performance in general.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Smyth, H and Anvuur, A |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | key performance indicators; measurement; project performance; questionnaire survey; UK |
| Index terms: | project management, implementation, effectiveness, project performance, investigation, organizational performance, continuous improvement, case study, key performance indicator, mixed method, balanced scorecard, performance measurement, conceptual framework, practitioner, evidence, questionnaire, evolution, financial performance, construction firm, survey, programme, face, strategy, key attribute |
| Subjects: | business analysis, theoretical framing, practitioner, organization, evaluation and assessment methods, contractual arrangements, environmental science, psychology, project management theory and practice, performance management, management, performance measurement, project controls, data collection methods, risk assessment, project delivery |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Time Control, Procurement, Sustainability, Risk Management, Project Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here