The Benchmarking Process

This section explores the process of steps to be followed when conducting a benchmarking exercise. A ten step process, which is split into four phases, is described by Camp (1995).

This is shown in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: The Formal, Ten-Step Benchmarking Process

Source: Camp (1995) The ten steps in Camp’s model can be summarised as follows:

Decide what to benchmark – identify the largest opportunity to improve performance by identifying the key work processes and prioritising them;

Identify whom to benchmark – determine which companies have superior work practices that can be adopted or adapted;

Plan and conduct the investigation – determine the data needed and how to conduct the investigation. Superior practices should be observed first hand and best practices documented;

Determine the current performance gap – decide how much better the observed work practices are than current practices;

Project future performance levels – determine the amount by which the performance gap will narrow or widen in the near future and the repercussions for the organisation;

Communicate benchmarking findings - to all those who have a need to know to gain acceptance and commitment;

Revise performance goals – convert findings into operational statements describing what is to be improved based on implementation of the best practices;

Develop action plans – develop implementation plans, measurements, assignments and timescales for acting on the best practices;

Implement specific actions and monitor progress – and report to key process owners and management;

Recalibrate the benchmarks – continue benchmarking and update work practices to remain up to date. Determine the organisations position in its quality pursuit and how this impacts on benchmarking activities.

Of the ten steps, Camp considers the first three to be the most important: identifying what to benchmark; who to benchmark, and; where to get the data and information. In order to identify what to benchmark and how to go about it an organisation must first have a detailed knowledge of their own processes and what they wish to achieve (Lee, 2004). Although the benchmarking exercise for this research is being conducted from an ‘outside perspective’, the work carried out at Heathrow and other airports has led to a detailed understanding of the issues surrounding employee car parking and the area to be focused on when benchmarking.

The final step of Camp’s process is ‘recalibrating’ which is important because over time the benchmark will change and organisations must adapt to this. Other benchmarking processes follow a similar pattern, but may not incorporate the 10 specific steps. The number of steps is not important as long as a simple, logical sequence of activity is followed, a heavy emphasis is placed on planning and organisation, the benchmarking is customer focused and it is consistent within an organisation (Spendolini, 1992, Bhutta and Huq, 1999).

In Spendolini’s (1992), 5-stage model, shown in Figure 4.2, he includes a step ‘form a benchmarking team’ to assign roles and responsibilities to team members so that each person is clear on the objectives and project milestones. While this is not a specific step in Camp’s process, it is important at a strategic level to ensure that everything is done to enable benchmarking to be pursued effectively. Members of the team should also ideally have benchmarking experience, as should members of the organisation being benchmarked (Holloway et al, 1998b). Vasilash (1994) conducted interviews in which it was revealed that two or three was the optimum number of people to conduct a benchmarking exercise.

Within this research it was not possible to have a whole team dedicated to planning, data collection and analysis. This does not mean that the benchmarking exercise is discredited but care must be taken to be open and perceptive when collecting information. Indeed, it may add consistency to the benchmarking exercise which could be lost by having a number of researchers.

Spendolini places more emphasis on the planning, collecting and analysing stages of benchmarking and his fifth stage “take action” encompasses all of Camp’s steps from 6 through to 10 at once. Both models emphasise that once the final stage is reached the benchmarking process begins again.

Figure 4.2: The Five Stage Benchmarking Process

5 Take action 1 Determine what to benchmark

4 Collect and analyse benchmarking

2 Form a benchmarking team 3 Identify

benchmarking partners

Source: Spendolini (1992, p. 48)

A large number of organisations have followed Camp’s 10 step model when carrying out benchmarking. Xerox (the company for which Camp was employed and which is recognised as the pioneer of benchmarking) and Kodak both used the same 10 step process as described by Camp. Many other examples including Post Office Counters Limited, the National Roads and Motorists Association, Royal Mail, Texas Instruments, IBM UK and BP Chemicals have used slight variations of Camp’s model (Zairi, 1996). In some cases, such as BP Chemicals, the order of the steps is a little different to that suggested by Camp and in others, such as Post Office Counters Limited and NRMA, more steps are allocated to the planning stages. Westland Helicopters used an eight step process when benchmarking which was a hybrid of both Camp and Spendolini’s models.

The process followed when conducting benchmarking is not as simple as copying what another company has done or adopting the same methodology. Despite the development of models such as Camp’s and Spendolini’s it is important to recognise that benchmarking involves a number of factors such as good interdisciplinary working, top management commitment and realistic resources, as detailed in section 4.7, rather than a rigid adherence to a list of ‘instructions’ (Francis and Holloway, 2006). The benchmarking process should be

adapted to each company’s style by considering circumstances specific to them (Bhutta and Huq, 1999). Some companies conducting benchmarking seem to place emphasis on following the correct steps according to the textbooks, when more consideration should be given to elements such as the organisational culture, communications, personalities and competing priorities (Francis et al, 1999).

Appendix 1 contains four example vignettes of benchmarking exercises all of which have been selected because they have relevance to this research. Examples are chosen from the service sector and in one case from the aviation industry. The examples help to highlight where organisations have adapted benchmarking models to best suit their own needs and where outside consultants or researchers have aided the benchmarking exercise.