Oracle Enterprise Performance Management - The CIO's Guide to Oracle Products and Solutions - page 99

TABLE 3.2
Benchmarking vs. Not Benchmarking
Without Benchmarking With Benchmarking

Defining customer
requirements

Based on history/gut feel
Acting on perception

Based on market reality
Acting on objective
evaluation

Establishing effective goals Lack external focus

Reactive
Lagging industry

Credible, customer-focused
Proactive
Industry leadership

Developing true measures
of productivity

Pursuing pet projects
Strengths and weaknesses
not understood

Solving real problems
Performance outputs
known, based on best in
class

Becoming competitive Internally focused

Evolutionary change
Low commitment

Understand the competition
Revolutionary ideas with
proven performance
High commitment

Industry practices Not invented here

Few solutions

Proactive search for change
Many options
Breakthroughs

Table 3.2 describes the ramifications of not using benchmarking
(Kendall 1999):
Obviously, benchmarking is critical to your organization. However,
benchmarking needs to be done with great care. There are actually times
when you shouldn't benchmark:

1. You are targeting a process that is not critical to the organization.

2. You don't know what your customers require from your process.

3. Key stakeholders aren't involved in the benchmarking process.

4. Inadequate resources, including budgetary, have been committed.

5. You're benchmarking an organization rather than a process.

6. There is strong resistance to change.

7. You are expecting results instantaneously.

Most organizations use a four-phase model to implement benchmarking:

1. Plan

2. Collect

3. Analyze

4. Adapt