© Logica 2009. All rights reserved

A Capability Maturity Model for Corporate Performance Management – An Empirical Study in Large Finnish Manufacturing Companies

24.09.2009

Mika Aho, Consultant (BI/DW/CPM), PhD-student

mika.aho@logica.com / mika.p.aho@tut.fi

Outline

• Background, motivation, research problem

• Definitions:

– Performance Management, Business Intelligence, Corporate Performance Management, Capability Maturity Model

• Accelerators and drivers of CPM

• A Capabilitity Maturity Model for Corporate Performance Management

– Dimensions / components

– Levels / stages

• Conclusions, suggestions for further research

Background, motivation, research problem

• CPM is (still) the highest priority in BI in Europe (Gartner, 2008)

• Through 2011, at least 50 percent of companies implementing CPM systems will not realized the benefits of CPM (Gartner, 2008)

• This study:– Presents a Capability Maturity Model (CMM) for assessing the maturity of Corporate Performance Management

(CPM)

– The CPM maturity development process was studies in five case companies

– Through a literature study and the development process in each company, the author made observations, and identified the key components, factors, and levels of a CPM maturity

– Research strategy and methods:

◦ Qualitative multiple case study

◦ action-oriented, constructive research, conceptual research

– Main purpose to understand, interpret and explain CPM maturity development process, and to develop such a capability model

• Results:– The findings further extend the CPM research providing a deeper understanding of the process, components, and

levels of CPM maturity

– Provides organizations an understanding about CPM and its potential value

– Provides a quick way for organizations to gauge where their CPM initiative is now and where it needs to go next

Definitions

• Performance Management (PM)– Systematic generation and control of organization’s performance (Melchert et al, 2004)– Planning, taking action to control performance, measuring, rewarding (Spangenberg, 1994)

• Business Intelligence (BI)– “A set of methodologies, processes, architectures, and technologies that transform raw data into meaningful and useful

information used to enable more effective strategic, tactical, and operational insights and decision-making” (Forrester)– Offers the tools necessary to improve decision-making within organizations– No systematic means of planning, monitoring, controlling and managing the implementation of strategic business

objectives (Frolick et al., 2006)

• Corporate Performance Management (CPM)– “Methodologies, metrics, processes and systems used to monitor and manage the business performance of an

enterprise” (Gartner)– Brings in new methodologies such as Balanced Scorecards (BSC), Activity-Based Costing (ABC) and value-based

management – Also… Planning, budgeting, financial consolidation, reporting and strategy planning (Walker, 1996)– Corporate-level, strategic deployment of BI solutions– Especially from the IT perspective, CPM represents an advancement of the BI

• Capability Maturity Model (CMM)– While maturity models are used to support organizational improvement, capability maturity models are focused on the

improvement of organizational processes (SEI 2002)– Describes an evolutionary improvement path from ad hoc, immature processes to disciplined, mature processes with

improved quality and effectiveness – Provides the key practices for activities in selected areas that enhance the process capability in the topic area (Paulk et

al., 1993)

BI vs. PM / BI vs. CPM

• CPM is more targeted to support process-oriented organizations than BI• CPM aims at providing a closed-loop support that interlinks strategy formulation, process design and execution with BI (Melchert et al., 2004)• BI (as a technological solution) provides the IT infrastructure and applications to implement CPM, CPM includes a business process that leverages BI (Miranda, 2004)

Accelerators and drivers of CPM

• Heavily driven by business objectives – often by corporate level objectives and metrics

• Organizational:

– It is vital to have a C-level sponsor

– A partnership between IT, finance and business users needed

• Competitive business markets

• External pressure by new accounting and regulatory standards

• Internal need:

– Consolidation of dispersed silos of data

– ”a single version of the truth”

• Focus not only on the needs of finance, but encourage finance users to support PM requirements of other functions and business units

Existing studies on CMM & CPM

• CMM has been previously used for example to assess the maturity of IT and Business Alignment, Enterprise Architecture, IT Governance, Service Oriented Architecture

• Some existing research on the topic area:

– The Data Warehouse Institute’s Maturity Model

– Logica’s Maturity Model

– Gartner’s Business Intelligence and Performance Management Maturity Model

– Davenport’s Maturity of Analytical Capability by Stage

A Capability Maturity Model for CPM – dimensions/components

Proce

sses

- Sco

pe

- Met

hodo

logies

- Pro

cess

def

initio

ns

- Per

form

ance

mea

sure

men

t

People & Culture

- People

- Competencies

- Comm

unication

- Culture

Managem

ent & Organization

- Strategy & Objectives

- Organization

- Governance

- Business value

Technolo

gy

- Inf

rastr

uctu

re

- IT-B

usine

ss a

lignm

ent

- Dat

a

- Dat

a go

vern

ance

CPM Maturity

A Capabiltity Maturity Model for CPM – levels / stages

0 - Unaware 1 – Ac-hoc 2 - Repeatable 3 - Defined 4 - Managed 5 - Optimized

CP

MM

atur

ity

Support business Improve business Drive the business Drive the market

PredictabilityEffectiveness

Process controlBusiness Value

How are we doing? What should we be doing? Why?

Functional level Business unit level Corporate level

Example of the levels

0 – Unaware 1 – Initial 2 – Repeatable 3 – Defined 4 – Managed 5 – Optimized

Technology Infrastructure Traditional management reporting and spreadsheets distributed without discrimination for actual needs. Inflexible and hard to modify.

Ad-hoc solutions to CPM, different applications across the organization. Individual, disconnected spreadsheets and desktop solutions with their own set of data.

No standards.

Primitive techniques.

Functional area applications and disparate DW activities.

Data is shared and standardized at the departmental level (on cross-functional projects).

Data marts.

Organizational standards for licensing and support.

Tools aligned with user role.

Queries crosses functional boundaries.

Data warehouses.

Enterprise-wide meta/master data repository established

More timely loading of DW.

Standard tools become favored.

Enterprise data warehouses.

Existing DW efforts are improving in data quality and value to the business.

Some BI integration with applications.

Enterprise applications, EDW, analytical services.

Predictive analytics.

Analytical data and BI functionality can be turned into web services in order to leverage the data.

DW and analytical server fades in the background.

Conclusions / suggestions for further research

• The findings of this study further extend the CPM research providing a deeper understanding of the process, components, and levels of CPM maturity

• The paper also provides organizations with an understanding about CPM and its potential value

• The model provides a quick way for organizations to gauge where their CPM initiative is now and where it needs to go next

• Validation needed

• An extensive question pattern / a series of questions is needed for the quantitative study

• A quantitative research with a larger sample is needed to validate the model in practice

© Logica 2009. All rights reserved

Thank you!mika.aho@logica.com

mika.p.aho@tut.fi