It is a management technique based on comparison, which can be defined as the systematic process of searching for and introducing best business practices in an organization.
It was traditionally used to compare the results or performance of a company against the leaders in that field, and promote improvements, without having to go through the exhausting trial and error exercises that the leader has already gone through.
It is also valid for the public sector in support of the steps that are being taken lately for the reform of the State. You have to face a very strong "inertia" of a way of doing things that is already out (here and everywhere in the world) and adapt to the new theories that are showing to be successful.
It should be noted that these techniques are not an end in themselves; rather, they are a set of tools that allow comparison to be used as a “driver” that turns the company or organization, private or public, into an organization with permanent learning capacity. It is used to anticipate problems and overcome obstacles by identifying solutions.
The benchmarking decision is a very high-level decision that must maintain alignment with the strategy, the vision, the mission and, in general, with the Strategic North. Performance (and its measurement) must be aligned with the criterion of having the client as the final beneficiary; Well, if it is only face-to-face and does not reveal an impact on customers, it is more about efficiency than effectiveness.
The impact levels for effective measurement and evaluation, at all levels, are: the industry, the company, the department or management and the individuals, taking into account each particular case: who, what and why.
It can work both by type of process and by type of business. A bank could perfectly compare its box office service with a fast food business, and its telephone banking with the information service of the local telephone company. You have to feed on the experiences of others. Whether it's the same type of business as one or not; either from the same country or from abroad. And what is seen outside will not necessarily be the truth; but at least it will be the basis for further discussion of one's own case, "looking in the mirror of another." And there is not a single mirror in which to look. There are as many as processes or products you want to improve.
It must be more results-oriented than process-oriented. There is no more compelling measure of performance than a satisfied customer who comes back for more. And that is valid both in the soft drinks and telecommunications business, as well as in the government and in management consulting, which is what I do.
To start a benchmarking process, you must have a solid knowledge of the company itself, which in turn will be stimulated during development, giving it greater depth. Generating new ideas as a result of exposure to other experiences and approaches makes it attractive, as it enables managers to look inward, while embracing innovative ideas and practices from abroad. This is important because comparison with others can lead to unattainable goals that demoralize rather than help.
In general, the best results of an exploration (broad or focused), are achieved when the own situation is recognized and when it comes to searching outside the country and with a paradigm shift. It is advisable to rely on management consulting firms, which, due to their extensive exposure to the market, are valuable in designing and implementing these projects.
The company or organization that applies it must be open to entering a culture in which they feel comfortable and comfortable with the notion of being compared. Recognizing the possibility of comparison is for management to accept new elements of pressure regarding the evaluation of its results. You must have a culture capable of continuously receiving fresh information about how things are done elsewhere, and being able to do something with that information. Without a doubt, organizations capable of doing so are more mature and end up being more resistant to the onslaught of bad times; in addition to competing better.
It is recommended that the management levels of the company be the promoters at the beginning and the supporters afterwards. They are the ones who must find the advantages of practicing it, and those responsible for its calibration. I don't think it should be a one-time effort. This really pays when it is a continuous effort that ends up positively shaping a company and taking it to the place where the successful organizations of the future are: Where the most important asset is the ability to learn to learn from the experiences of others, as well as from the that you yourself have been developing. Comparison against others and comparison against oneself.
I suggest working in small and multidisciplinary teams, with the ability to move between the concrete and the abstract, managing multiple scenarios simultaneously and with the ability to act in different dimensions of paradigms. They must align with the Strategic North to ensure they do not displace strategic objectives, even if they do with tactical ones. It is important to assign young people with good growth potential.
From a practical point of view, when an organization adopts comparison as a permanent management technique, it is recommended that it rely on information technology so that it can be intelligently integrated into its business process. It is my recommendation to prepare an intelligent encyclopedia (supported by software) capable of storing and searching for the different ideas and experiences that are incorporated as a product of the comparison strategy.
We have already gone far enough in this matter of comparisons and measurements to wonder if we are doing well and if there are others who are doing better. Currently, there is enough experience in these techniques to feel comfortable with the concept; although not yet with the results. Benchmarking benchmarking is an option that will allow you to learn how to improve the technique and apply the results.
Usage examples
- Observe markets that have already gone through stages that ours did not pass Evaluate results of decisions that have just been taken, considering companies that have already made them before Review organizational models to evaluate restructuring Measure impact of new game rules and indicators Establish quantity references of people in companies and public and private institutions Compare regulatory frameworks and anticipate impacts Qualitatively review the result of making certain decisions New product development Strategic planning Business integration / disintegration due to the purchase / sale of new companies or activities Vertical / horizontal integration Changes statutory and role of boards in decision-making process Organizational climate in the face of conflict stimuli
