Comparative evaluation of practices: lessons from R&D organizations

Comparative evaluation of practices: lessons from R&D organizations Purpose – To highlight a few critical issues related to indicators that are used to compare organizational practices. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is as follows: to compare the efficacy of qualitative and quantitative indicators; objectivity in identification of processes and practices; and make a distinction between essence and logistics of benchmarking. Findings – For any benchmarking exercise the most important job is objectivity in identification of processes and practices. The distinction between the two is not always apparent. Qualitative evaluation of practices is as important as quantitative evaluation. The quantitative performance indicators for evaluation of best practices come only at the end of a series of critical qualitative analysis of the organizational processes and practices. Research limitations/implications – The subject of the paper has been the enhancement of the effectiveness of R&D organizations. Such organizations form an important part of the innovation system of a nation, generally known as national innovation system (NIS). NISs of more successful countries are being continuously evaluated and emulated by other countries for attaining respective technological aspirations. This leaves a wide scope for application of benchmarking methodology. The dynamics of networks like NIS being different from that of a business organization, the methodology for best practices has to be refined. The present paper has addressed only the R&D organization part of NIS. Much of the validity of the conclusions will depend upon studies on NIS in particular and organizations not driven by profit motive in general. Practical implications – The exact definition of the organization in terms of its mandate, long‐term vision and source of competence is the critical task. This is an important lesson for extending benchmarking exercise beyond business enterprises. The study envisages that the methodology would have wide scope of application for organizational restructuring of R&D organizations. However, methodology has to be refined depending on the specificity of the problem of R&D organizations. Originality/value – It is in presenting the comparative efficacy of qualitative and quantitative indicators for R&D organizations and also in highlighting the importance of benchmarking, the essence of organizational practices, to arrive at the logistics. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Benchmarking: An International Journal Emerald Publishing

Comparative evaluation of practices: lessons from R&D organizations

Benchmarking: An International Journal, Volume 13 (1/2): 10 – Jan 1, 2006

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/comparative-evaluation-of-practices-lessons-from-r-d-organizations-0z4sbAxH9s
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1463-5771
DOI
10.1108/14635770610644691
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – To highlight a few critical issues related to indicators that are used to compare organizational practices. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is as follows: to compare the efficacy of qualitative and quantitative indicators; objectivity in identification of processes and practices; and make a distinction between essence and logistics of benchmarking. Findings – For any benchmarking exercise the most important job is objectivity in identification of processes and practices. The distinction between the two is not always apparent. Qualitative evaluation of practices is as important as quantitative evaluation. The quantitative performance indicators for evaluation of best practices come only at the end of a series of critical qualitative analysis of the organizational processes and practices. Research limitations/implications – The subject of the paper has been the enhancement of the effectiveness of R&D organizations. Such organizations form an important part of the innovation system of a nation, generally known as national innovation system (NIS). NISs of more successful countries are being continuously evaluated and emulated by other countries for attaining respective technological aspirations. This leaves a wide scope for application of benchmarking methodology. The dynamics of networks like NIS being different from that of a business organization, the methodology for best practices has to be refined. The present paper has addressed only the R&D organization part of NIS. Much of the validity of the conclusions will depend upon studies on NIS in particular and organizations not driven by profit motive in general. Practical implications – The exact definition of the organization in terms of its mandate, long‐term vision and source of competence is the critical task. This is an important lesson for extending benchmarking exercise beyond business enterprises. The study envisages that the methodology would have wide scope of application for organizational restructuring of R&D organizations. However, methodology has to be refined depending on the specificity of the problem of R&D organizations. Originality/value – It is in presenting the comparative efficacy of qualitative and quantitative indicators for R&D organizations and also in highlighting the importance of benchmarking, the essence of organizational practices, to arrive at the logistics.

Journal

Benchmarking: An International JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Jan 1, 2006

Keywords: Performance measures; Benchmarking; Research and development; Quality indicators; Quantitative methods

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off