The Adoption of Benchmarking Principles for Project Management Performance Improvement.

International Journal of Managing Public Sector Information and Communication Technologies (IJMPICT)
Vol. 1, No. 2, December 2010
1
The Adoption of Benchmarking Principles for
Project Management Performance Improvement.
Ifeoluwa Ajelabi and Yinshang Tang
Informatics Research Centre, Henley Business School,
University of Reading, United Kingdom.
i.k.ajelabi@reading.ac.uk, y.tang@henley.reading.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
Effective management of projects is increasingly becoming important for organisations to remain
competitive in today’s dynamic business environment. The use of benchmarking is widening as a
technique for supporting project management. Benchmarking is the search of best practices that will lead
to superior performance in some business activity. Benchmarking has been recognised as one of the most
responsive evaluation tool for performance improvement within organisations by creating a culture of
continuous improvement from learning best management practices. This paper presents how
benchmarking principles can be applied to improve project management process and performance. The
benefits and challenges of benchmarking management of projects are also discussed.
KEYWORDS
Project management, Benchmarking, Evaluation
1. Introduction
Project management over the years has been a successful tool for implementing change in
organisations. Organisations have reported the benefits derived from using project
management tools and methodologies to implement change. So much so, opportunities are
constantly being explored to make it a more effective tool [10]. One of such opportunities is the
ability to transform or improve project’s performance using the management lessons learnt
from project to project. Benchmarking has been argued to be an efficient tool which makes
significant improvement to performance. Past research, has shown the difference in
performance between leading organizations and average ones in performing particular activities
[11]. Benchmarking against leading companies has resulted in significant success for average
organizations in improving their performance [21]. This paper continues this inference and
suggests that similar improvements in performance of managing companies that occur from
benchmarking can also be achieved by benchmarking projects. This paper explores this in four
sections. First, existing definition of benchmarking and the general purpose of benchmarking
are reviewed, indicating benchmarking process. The second section of the paper, will explain
the different types of benchmarking and how it can be applied to the management of projects.
Next, will discuss what to benchmark and the competencies to look out for and how these
competences are measured and evaluated. Finally, the challenges of benchmarking management
of projects will be discussed.

2
2. What is Benchmarking?
Benchmarking is a technical core of Total Quality Management (TQM), a subject characterized
by the culture of continuous improvement. It is a process of identifying superior performance
or practices of other organizations or projects (to keep in the context of this paper) and to
internalize such knowledge for competitive advantages [1]. Benchmarking is a learning
process to find better ways of doing things. It is a management process that requires constant
updating whereby performance is regularly compared with the best performers that can be
found. The key philosophy of benchmarking is the ability to recognise one’s shortcomings and
acknowledge that someone is doing a better job, learn how is it being done and implement it in
one’s field of business[2]. Benchmarking is not about copying or imitating, rather it is about
adapting lessons learnt from the best for the development of an improved organizational or
project performance [5].
Benchmarking , has endued many different definitions since it was first pursued by Xerox
Corporation, the International Benchmarking Clearinghouse (IBC) Design Steering Committee
concluded and represented the consensus after consulting about 100 companies in 1992. They
defined benchmarking as: “A systematic and continuous measurement process; a process of
continuously measuring and comparing an organisation’s business processes against business
process leaders anywhere in the world to gain information which will help the organisation take
action to improve its performance [3].”
The definition of benchmarking reveals that benchmarking is not only a measurement process
that results in comparative performance measure, it also describes how exceptional
performance is attained. The exceptional performance is identified by measures of performance
indicators, which are called benchmarks and the activities that facilitate the exceptional
performance called enablers [4]. Enablers explain the reasons for the superior performance,
therefore benchmarking studies are conducted with the support of the two components when
they are practically connected. That is, benchmarks can be achieved by attaining enablers.
In order to transform benchmarking analysis requirement to the above two types of output,
many models and methods have been evolved from the original ten-step four-phase model
developed by Xerox, to explain and guide the benchmarking process. Most of the approaches
are valid and they all take their root in an iterative benchmarking process proposed by W.E
Deming. The model of benchmarking process is famously referred to as the “Deming cycle”
and it includes a minimum of four phases “Plan –Do-Action-Check” as illustrated in Figure 1
below.
Figure 1: Deming’s Benchmarking Cycle
PLAN
CHECK
ACT
DO
Planning the Study
I
Conducting the Research
II
Analyzing the Data
III
Adapting, Improving,
and Implementing
Findings
IV

3
3. Types of Benchmarking
Benchmarking is about comparing processes, practices or procedures. Processes may be
compared within an organisation against internal operation or with partners outside the
organisation. There are several ways to classify types of benchmarking, depending on the focus
of the benchmarking process. The types of benchmarking reflect “what is compared” and “what
the comparison is being made against”. The former involves comparisons of performance,
process and strategic benchmarking; while the latter involves internal, competitive, functional
and generic comparisons [5].
Type Definition
Performance
Benchmarking
It is the comparison of performance measures for the purpose of
determining how good an organisation is in comparison to others
Process Benchmarking It is the comparison of methods and processes in an effort to
improve the processes in an organization
Strategic Benchmarking It is the comparison of an organisation’s strategy with successful
strategies from other organisations to help improve capability to
deal with a changing external environment.
Internal Benchmarking It is the comparisons of performance made between department/
divisions of the same organisation solely to find and apply best
practice information.
Competitive Benchmarking This is the comparison made against the “best” competition in
the same market to compare performance and results.
Functional Benchmarking It is comparisons of a particular function in an industry. The
purpose of this type of benchmarking is to become the best in the
function.
Generic Benchmarking It is the comparison of processes against best process operators
regardless of industry.
Table 1: Types of Benchmarking
Types of benchmarking are rather complementary than being mutually exclusive. They can be
chosen and combined for a specific purpose [7]. Their combination is based on the relevance
of the type of benchmarking to a specific context. Table 2 below, shows the combination of the
types of benchmarking designed by Bhutta and Huq [7] to yield better results.
As can be seen from the combinations, some types of benchmarking are more relevant than
others in particular contexts. For instance, an internal benchmarking is given a low relevance
in relation to strategic benchmarking, as a comparison of strategy with oneself would give little
or no improvement. However, competitive benchmarking is given a high relevance in relation
to strategic benchmarking, as it would reveal a lot of information and provide many ways for
improvement.
What is
Benchmarked Against
Internal
what to benchmark
Competitive Functional Generic
Performance Medium High Medium Low
Process Medium Low High High
Strategic Low High Low Low
Table 2: The matrix of different forms of benchmarking [15]

4
Watson [9] also discusses benchmarking as a developing science [9]. Figure 2 shows how the
first generation of benchmarking evolved following from Camp [4]. This generation of
benchmarking called “Reverse Benchmarking” was product oriented, and focused solely on the
comparison of products characteristics, functionality and performance with similar products.
The second generation “Competitive Benchmarking” involved the comparisons of processes
with those of competitors. Third “Process Benchmarking” allowed for information sharing
from companies outside their industry. Evaluations targeted companies with recognised strong
practices independent of the industry and competitors. The fourth generation “Strategic
Benchmarking”, involves a systematic process of evaluating alternatives, implementing
strategies and improving performance by understanding and adapting successful strategies from
external partners who partners who participate in an ongoing business alliance. The fifth
generation “Global Benchmarking” is an emergence of a global application of benchmarking,
thus dealing with globalization of industries themselves [1]. Some extensions of the model are
beginning to emerge as Kyro [8] claims to foresee a sixth and seventh generation called
“benchlearning” and “network benchmarking” respectively.
Figure 2: Benchmarking as a developing evaluation tool [23].

5
4. Benchmarking in Project Management
The primary driver behind any benchmarking initiative including that of project management is
improvement. Maylor[12] described the process for project management as having four phases
as illustrated in Figure 3 below. The concept behind the “Develop the process” phase is of
continuous learning and improvement, by evaluating project progress, learning from its
experience and using the information to improve the management process of future projects.
The improvement process is divided into two parts 1) learn by doing and learn before doing.
Tools such audit reviews, lesson learnt and scorecards are used to evaluate the project progress.
Benchmarking on the other hand bridges “Learn by doing” and “Learn before doing” with the
objective of learning and improving the management process of future projects.
Figure 3: Four phases of project lifecycle [12].
4.1 What to Benchmark?
As mentioned earlier, benchmarking is a method of assessing the quality of a project’s
management and learning from it for the management of future projects. Based on literature,
the project manager is responsible for orchestrating the management progress of a project [5,
13]. The project manager therefore should posses certain skills and competency to achieve
excellence in managing projects. These excellence skills and competency are measured for
classification as best practice. Competence is defined as the knowledge, skills and personal
attributes that lead to superior results or meet performance standards [16].
The two well known project management bodies of knowledge (APM and PMI) identify the
primary competencies an effective project manager should possess. Although more explicitly
stated by PMI[22], the core competencies include, scope, schedule management, cost
management, human resources, communication management, risk management, quality and
contract management.

6
4.2 How is the competency measured?
The management of a project process is mostly measured by the success of the project. The
success criteria used to measure the management of a projects has been studied by various
researchers over the years. Primal success criteria have been an integrated part of project
management theory given that early definitions of project management includes the “Iron
triangle” success criteria- cost, time and quality [14]. Atkinson in his paper stated that “as a
discipline project management has not really changed or developed the success measurement
criteria for project management in almost 50 years”. He argues that the “Iron triangle” does not
indicate how excellent or otherwise the management of a project has been. He further argues,
the iron triangle is trying to match two best guesses (time and cost) and a phenomenon (quality)
correctly [14]. Therefore evaluating against these criteria is flawed. To meet the urgent need of
modernizing the out of date success criteria to measure project management success, Atkinson
suggested the “Square root”, which he believed would create a more realistic view of the
management of projects [5]. The square root is a combination of quantitative and qualitative
objectives. He combines the “Iron triangle” into one criterion and added three other criteria,
Information systems, Organisational Benefits and Stakeholders Benefits. Belout [20] in his
attempt to measure project management success suggested the achievement of project goals
(effectiveness) and the maximisation of output for a given output (efficiency) as the success
criteria to judge the management of a project.
5. Challenges of Benchmarking in Project Management.
Benchmarking the management of projects has its own challenges. First is, projects by
definition are unique entities with a stipulated lifecycle. Therefore, there is little commonality
between projects or the differences between projects are so great that separating between
differences from the similarities is almost impossible. The unique difference between projects
is reflected in the way they are managed, making it difficult to translate the best management
practices between one another.
Second, the lack of an objective way to measure the subjective metrics of project management
success. For example, Atkinson’s project management success criteria [14], the success
criterion “benefit to organisation” includes some subjective attributes, such as increased profits,
organisational learning, reduced waste and improved effectiveness. Logical as these success
criterion attributes are, the lack of an objective way to evaluate them remains a challenge.
Third, is the difficulty in determining the true causes of project performance. Even if successful
project managers are asked what they have learned, do we really believe that they can identify
what has worked and what has not, what works under what project conditions but not others.
Fourth, project success factors have a significant effect on the management of a project. These
project success factors have being researched and numerated by various authors [17, 18, 19].
These factors are critical to the success of a project and form the basis of the management
evaluation criteria. This poses a challenge for project management benchmarking as the
underlying influences of comparable projects must be similar.
Benchmarking of project management most times highlights the difference in performance
without giving the reasons for the difference. Barber [5] in her paper highlighted that the
difference in performance identified by benchmarking has more to do with the difference in
methods of measuring and tracking project performances, rather than the difference in
management of projects.
Furthermore, benchmarking is learning from external sources and then applying the knowledge
“before doing”. Benchmarking therefore, can only address problems that have previously been

7
encountered by the compared project partner. It is quite difficult for benchmarking to provide
feedback to assist current project experiencing difficult management problems because
benchmarking can be a time consuming effort and unlikely to provide any solution at the latter
stages of the project.
Despite these challenges, benchmarking management of project has its benefits. It is a
continuous process that allows for management of projects to measure their performance
against the best practice and identify areas for improvement.
6. Conclusion
This paper has examined how benchmarking principles can be applied to evaluate and improve
project management performance. Benchmarking an outward looking evaluation tool, compares
the performance of project management activities against the performance of project
management conducted by leading benchmark partners. By benchmarking projects, maximum
benefits are derived from projects. Not only from the outcome of the project but information
gained from measuring the effectiveness of the project management process against best
practice can be used to identify areas of improvement for managing future projects. In
addition, project management best practice across an organisation can be identified, providing
an opportunity for corporate learning.
REFERENCES
[1]Ramabadron R., James W. Dean Jr and James R.Evans.(1997), Benchmarking and Project
Management: a review and organizational model. Benchmarking: An international Journal, 4(1), 47-58.
[2]American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC) (1996), Emerging Best Practices in Knowledge
Management, American Productivity & Quality Centre, Houston, TX.
[3]American Productivity & Quality(APQC) (1992)Planning, Organizing, and Managing Benchmarking
Activities: A User’s Guide, APQC, Houston, TX.
[4]Camp, R.(1989) Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to superior
performance, ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee.
[5] Barber E. (2004) Benchmarking the management of projects: a review of current thinking.
International Journal of Project Management, 22(4), 301-307.
[6]Kerzner H. (2000) Applied project management: best practices on implementation. New York; John
Wiley
[7] Bhutta K.S Huq F. (1999) Benchmarking best practices: an integrated approach. Benchmarking: An
international Journal, 6 (3), 254-268.
[8] Kyro P.(2003) Revsing the concepts and forms of benchmarking. Benchmarking: An international
Journal , 10(3), 210-225.
[9] Watson GH. (1993) Strategic benchmarking: how to rate your company’s performance against the
world’s best. New York: John Wiley.
[10]Clarke A. A (1999) practical use of key success factors to improve the effectiveness of project
management. International Journal of Project Management, 17(3), 139-145

8
[11]Gattorna JL, Berger AJ. (2001)Supply chain cybermastery: building high performance supply chains
of the future. London Gower.
[12] Mayor H.(2005) Project management 3rd Ed.London: Finacial Times.
[13] Cook-Davies T. (2002)The real Success factors on projects. International Journal of project
Management, 20(3), 185-190
[14] Atkinson R. (1999) Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guess and a phenomenon,
it’s time to accept other success criteria. International Journal Project Management, 17(6), 337-42
[15] Leibfried and Mcnair (1992), Benchmarking ± A Tool for Continuous Improvement, Harper Collins
[16] Crawford,L.H .(2003). Assessing and developing the project management competence of
individuals. In J.R.Turner(Ed). People in Project Management. Aldershot,UK:Gower.
[17]Shenhar AJ, Levy O, Divir D. (1997) Mapping the dimensions of project success. Project
Management Journal, 28 (2), 5-13
[18]Pinto JK, Selvin DP. (1988) Critical success factors across the project lifecycle. Project Management
Journal, 19(3), 67-75.
[19]De Wit A. (1988) Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management
,16(3), 164-70.
[20]Belout A.(1998) Effects of human resources management on project effectiveness and success:
towards a new conceptual framework. International Journal of Project Management, 16,21-26
[21]Luu V.T, Kim S.Y and Huynh T.A (2008) Improving project management performance of large
contractors using benchmarking approach,. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 758-769.
[22]Project Management Institute (2004). Guide to project management body of knowledge 3rd
Ed.
ANSI.
[23] Ahmed, P.K. and Rafiq, M. (1998), Integrated benchmarking: a holistic examination of select
techniques for benchmarking analysis. Benchmarking for Quality Management and Technology, 5(3),
225-242.

The Adoption of Benchmarking Principles for Project Management Performance Improvement.

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to The Adoption of Benchmarking Principles for Project Management Performance Improvement. (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

The Adoption of Benchmarking Principles for Project Management Performance Improvement.