Content area
Full Text
Introduction
In the not too distant past not distant past manufacturing organizations viewed themselves as closed systems. Under the closed system orientation, these organizations emphasized an internal-focus, where organizational efficiency shaped organizational performance effectiveness. However, recent market, technology and customer-related changes have necessitated a more open system orientation to manufacturing strategy and operations. The open system orientation emphasizes a broader view of manufacturing organizational performance effectiveness. This broader view is based on the integration of critical organizational performance success factors. As such customer, employees and product/market-related performance aspects are integrated with operational efficiency measures to provide a true overall indicator of organizational performance effectiveness.
The objective of this research is to investigate the differences between high and low-performing manufacturing organizations in relation to performance measures and their organizational utilization. In the process, the dimensionality of manufacturing performance is assessed, and the patterns of utilization of critical performance dimensions are contrasted for high and low-performing manufacturing organizations.
Background
Before the 1980s, the performance measurement process was consistent with a cost accounting approach, which emphasized selective financial indicators, such as profit and return on investment. This approach received considerable criticism due to solely focusing on financial indicators. Critics argued that focusing only on financial indicators could encourage organizational short-term thinking ([6] Banks and Wheelwright, 1979; [39] Hayes and Garvin, 1982; [42] Kaplan, 1983).
In the late 1980s, some frameworks that attempted to present a broader view of performance measurement begin to appear in the literature ([48] Khadem, 1988; [15] Cross and Lynch, 1989). Meanwhile, criticisms of the traditional performance measurement approach continued to mount ([52] Lemak et al. , 1996; [13] Clinton and Hsu, 1997; [72] Upton, 1998).
Reviewing the recent literature concerning manufacturing performance measurement, measures, and related implementation issues, two distinct themes emerge. The first theme may be labeled as the "universal" theme. The second theme, on the other hand, may be labeled as the "contingency" theme. While these two themes are not intended to be definitive in nature, nevertheless, they provide contexts in which one can begin to attempt to understand the current stake of relevant literature.
The first theme includes approaches to performance measurement and implementation methodologies, which advocate transferability across organizational context and operating environments. The second theme includes approaches, which stress...