Benchmarkings positive influence extends beyond improving a particular business process.

It also promotes the emergence and evolution of a learning culture throughout the organization. Discuss.

Introduction: The mind set of organizations has become competitive, comparative, and evaluative in nature. The goal of organisations is to be the best in class; hence, claiming the status and prestige that come along with the goal (Spendolini 1992; Zairi 1996; Alstete 1995; Bender& Schuh 2002). Indeed, the application of quality has led to the emergence of many successful organisations. One critical tool that businesses can take advantage of to improve quality, is benchmarking, a methodology that shows how to improve performance dramatically by comparing the performance of ones own organization with the best practices of others.

Benchmarking is rightly recognized as an essential tool for continuous improvement of quality. In the pursuit of status, prestige, and accreditation, most corporations employ the benchmarking process as the tool for pushing themselves towards the best standard (Zairi 1996; Coding 1993). There are various definitions of benchmarking, but essentially it is the process used in management by which organizations compare and evaluate various aspects of their processes and performances in relation to the best practices of leading organizations in same class. Indeed, it is the common-sense proposition to learn from others what they do right and then to imitate it. Why reinvent the wheel if I can learn from someone who has already done it? For decades, practitioners in the public and private sector have adopted the benchmarking approach as a useful tool for performance and quality assessments (Collins et al., 2006). Landmark benchmarking studies have been performed and the results widely publicized over the years (Camp, 1989; Kolarik, 1995; McNamee, 1994; Yasin, 2002). (Zairi, 2000) Let us not forget that in order to obtain certification, organizations need to demonstrate the following: An operational command of leadership through quality tools and processes; Good business results through continuous improvement; and Good prevention-based processes.

The American Productivity and Quality Center (ODell, 1994) defines benchmarking as the process of identifying, understanding and adapting outstanding practices and processes from organizations anywhere in the world to help other organizations to improve performances. Spendolini (1992) explains benchmarking as a continuous and systematic process for evaluating the products, services or work processes of organizations that are recognized as representing best practices for the purpose of organizational improvement.

Benchmarking is a multifaceted technique to identify operational and strategic gaps, and to search for best practices that can be applied to close any existing gaps (Yasin, 2002). The definitions emphasize the value of learning from best practices both internally and externally for the purpose of achieving superiority (Bessant et al., 2003). For the aim of our assignment benchmarking is defined in accordance with Massa and Testa (2004) as learning process that involves observation of external practices and performances, comparison with internal ones, identification of knowledge gaps and finally the decision: bridging the gaps acquiring new resources or leveraging on internal ones and investing in upgrading. The result of this learning process is something new; deriving both from the integration of external inputs with internal previous knowledge as well as from bridging knowledge gaps.

The goal of benchmarking is to provide key personnel, in charge of processes, with reputable standards for measuring the quality and cost of internal activities, and to help identify where opportunities for improvement may reside (Alstete, 1996).Benchmarking can be an effective diagnostic instrument and it may give rise to alternative solutions, but that the judgment about how far those solutions can be applied must remain in the hands of management. A central purpose of benchmarking is therefore to provide managers with an external point of reference or standard for evaluating the quality and cost of their organizations internal activities, practices, and processes (Alstete, 1995). Benchmarking will not be effective if it simply takes a snapshot of a comparative situation. It needs to be an on-going, systematic process. We need to remember that

invention is not the only way to express ingenuity. Building on or improving on the invention of another is also ingenious, as well as time saving and cost effective. When an organization learns from the experiences of others, it greatly reduces both the time required to move up the learning curve and the cost of improvement. As not only do organizations have to do the right thing, they have to do it right the first time by adopting the best practices and delivering defect free services. Peter Senge(1990) suggests in The fifth discipline that the most successful organizations are those that are constantly learning. In fact, the entire purpose of benchmarking is to learn. It is extremely important for an organization preparing to benchmark to educate itself about the benchmarking process. This learning experience helps to establish realistic expectations, allay fears and doubts, lay the groundwork for broad support, and position the organization for successful benchmarking. The issue is how the organization can leverage the investment to maximum advantage. The idea is that organizations are composed not of things but of people and that the people employed by an organization collectively represent an organisations intellectual capital, its intangible pool of skill, knowledge, and information. When knowledge is shared, the organization becomes a learning organization which is capable of creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge and of modifying behavior across divisional boundaries to reflect new knowledge and insight(Garvin,1993,pg 80-81) In its most basic sense benchmarking is a learning tool designed to reduce uncertainty in the organizational environment by reference to peer experience. Uncertainty results from lack of knowledge and is associated with discomfort. Consequently, benchmarking has both cognitive and affective functions. By identifying what are commonly called best practices in their industries, companies are creating knowledge but also, and simultaneously, comfort and discomfortcomfort from realizing that many of their fundamental challenges are commonly shared, discomfort from the performance gaps that become apparent in individual comparisons. Beyond learning, benchmarking renders other ancillary services to an organization. Benchmarking rekindles and focuses energy by promoting significant developmental goals and furnishing concrete evidence of the benefits they bring when accomplished. It generally sharpens awareness for aggressive performance standards throughout the organization and leads to the

discovery of immediate often incidental rather than systemic improvement opportunities. Its affective benefit lies in providing visual and salient examples of best practices that create enthusiasm, excitement, and commitment. Perhaps most significantly, however, benchmarking promotes broad dialogue at all levels of the organization about its identity, mission, values, beliefs, and practices. The benchmark is then both a window and a mirror.

Organisations engaging in benchmarking hope to obtain valuable direct knowledge about significant organizational processes and structures in their own related industry. Let us call this adaptive benchmarking. Knowledge garnered in adaptive benchmarking is expected to drive immediate change in the benchmarking company, as observations and data lead to the introduction of homologous or analogous practices. Adaptive benchmarking creates similarity in an industry and, over time, levels competitiveness without enhancing collaboration. On the other hand, benchmarking companies may seek to establish a more general and permanent knowledge baseline for performance comparisons. They use these criteria to chart their own, independent strategic progress toward the kind of standards that produce outstanding results for their competitors. Comparative benchmarking seeks broader information about another companys performance and often allows the expression of the discovered differential in figures. This in turn facilitates the formulation of strategic goals and learning programs to close that gap. The companys performance then continues to be measured against the established benchmark to ensure that after the introduction of innovations the improvements are actually sustained. Finally, the company will develop its next generation of benchmarks to reflect not only its new level of performance, but also the growing learning capability it has developed from meeting its original objectives. Benchmarking should not be considered a one-off exercise. To be effective, it must become an ongoing integral part of an ongoing improvement process with the goal of keeping abreast of ever-improving best practice. We will now illustrate how benchmarking promotes the emergence and evolution of a learning culture throughout the organization through the different types and the classic five phases of benchmarking.

How do types of benchmarking create a learning culture in the organisation at large? ."Benchmarking can be closely linked also to the concept of the learning organisation. It implies the need to learn by experiences, better known as a concept learning by doing or learning by (own) experience."( Knez-Riedl :2007). Indeed benchmarking stems out of learning as without trying to know about other best practices and comparing it is not conceivable that benchmarking will even take place. To achieve the principles of "Business Excellence" or the " Outstanding practices in managing the organisation and achieving results", as described by the European foundation for quality Management(EFMQM) one of the eight fundamental concepts is crucial to achieving best practices is the "continuous learning" .The other seven being: results orientation; customer focus; leadership and constancy of purpose; management by processes and facts; people development and involvement; innovation and improvement; partnership development; and public responsibility(BPIR.com). This factor seems to be the most predominant advantage of benchmarking. The various business excellence models of benchmarking around the globe be it Europe, Canada, Australia, Singapore or the US have a key concept within their description that is " Organizational and personal learning" or "Continuous Learning, Innovation and Improvement", or " Knowledge driven system" or " Continuous learning and people involvement"(Ibid). These references target one same idea which is the learning culture that benchmarking aims at over and above "the act of improving particular business process." Within this process, above aiming at trying to cut on costs, to improve on areas which need to be seen into or to improve on credibility of the organisation or to acquire new skills or even to survive in a competitive business environment, benchmarking aims more precisely at creating a learning environment within the organisation. If organisation do not invest time and finance in the creation of a learning culture the motivation to adopt the change from status quo to a new state of being through benchmarking will remain a myth for the top management and this will lead to the death of the organisational goal of survival.

Therefore it can be assumed that benchmarking is "continuous learning"; "the more it is practiced, the more can be applied from what has been learned"(Dragolea:2009). This also goes in line with the Total Quality Management principles: people involvement by having theme sharing their knowledge and experiencing change via team work; benchmarking being conducted in a systematic approach whereby efficient and effective the process is understood and gaps are identified and the system is improved as a result of the investigation carried out; the whole process of the organisation is constantly improved as benchmarking is not carried in a vacuum, it ought to be constantly investigated and re-calibrated. Zairi (2000) echoes the same argument where he states that benchmarking is a performance analysis which promotes continuous improvement by "making the organisation grow and develop through a process of continuous learning at all levels...levels of synergy is measured by assessing learning at management level, employee level and finally at the organisational level...".Learning can be defined as continuously seeking and acquiring new skills, behavior, knowledge or information. A learning environment is one where everyone in your firm is committed, on an ongoing basis, to gaining new skills, exploring new behaviors and furthering your collective understanding of the issues facing your firm."( American Institute of Certified Public Accountants- aicpa.org). " Although experts break benchmarking into several types, there exist two main types; "Informal" and "Formal" Benchmarking." (bpir.com) . Knez-Riedl (2007)echoes the same idea that benchmarking takes form in two ways either formally or informally and encourages a learning culture, a desire to acquire new knowledge and to build over it so as to reinvent the process and to achieve the major goals of the organisation. l

According to bpir.com & Knez-Riedl(2007) , we are constantly and unconsciously "comparing and learning from the behavior and practices of others" during coffee breaks, team meetings, or while "networking with other people from other organisations at conferences, seminars and internet forums or in our discussion with experts having a greater knowledge of the implementation of a particular process or activity in a business environment" or scouring " online " On-line databases/web sites, such as

the BPIR, and publications that share benchmarking information provide quick and easy ways to learn of best practices and benchmarks". This form of knowledge sharing is labeled as the tacit knowledge which is "carried and transmitted by individuals and organizations and which can be captured within a region"(Luis:2010). Knowledge management is done almost at an informal level creating opportunities to benchmark output, performance or strategies at an informal level. The aim is to share information and adopt very easy ways "to learn best practices and benchmarks". The learning culture or learning taking place in the work environment of employees is a most sought out advantage of benchmarking above the other many advantages that it brings to the whole business structure. The focus is on "learning from others, who know better some procedures, solutions of a definite problem, etc. than we do"(Knez-Riedl:2007). Knowledge management is not limited to regionalised levels but also to global level where continual learning is shaped by "explicit or codified knowledge that which is written down. and which has been transmitted by communications media and which is not limited within a region a region only." This can be labeled as being a formal type of knowledge management. BPIR(Business Performance Improvement Resource) calls for two major formal types of benchmarking namely: Performance Benchmarking which aims at comparing the performance levels of organisations and Best Practice Benchmarking which compares the organisation with the best one in practice. This idea is reflected in Camp(1989) description of benchmarking which emphasises the quest of "the best industry practices which will lead to exceptional performance through the implementation of these best practices. In Kelly ( 2001),Auluck ( 2002), Watson(1993), Andersen (1996) and Zairi(1992) amongst others propose different types of benchmarking. Among these references and taking into account a common definition of benchmarking, Andersen(1996) provides a clearer picture of the logic which defines the different types of benchmarking; he argues that "different types of benchmarking can be defined based on what is being compared and whom it is comparing against".

The group of types of benchmarking which relates to what is being compared to is listed and defined as follows: 1. Performance Benchmarking Anderson(1996) stipulates that it is "a comparison of performance measures (often financial, but also operational) for the purpose of determining how good one's own company is compared to others". Fong et al. (1998) states that it is concerned with the "outcome characteristics, quantifiable in terms of price, speed, reliability, etc...". The main purpose of this type of benchmarking is to allow the comparison of the way the organisation is performing in terms of finance but also in terms of its effectiveness. Thus the level of achieved performance becomes measurable in contrast to other organisations. 2. Process Benchmarking Andersen(1996) describes this type as being " a comparison of methods and practices for performing business processes for the purpose of learning from the best to improve one's own process".Fong et al (1998) defines this as a means of comparison "pertaining to discreet work processes and operating system".The emphasis here is laid on raising the standards on " critical processes and operations" (beginnersguide.com),

3. Strategic Benchmarking Andersen (1996) claims that it is "mostly comparison of the strategic choices and dispositions made by other companies, for the purpose of collecting information to improve one's own strategic planning and positioning".Fong et al (1998) defines this as "involving assessment of strategic rather than operational matters." Whilst the group which aims at comparing an organisation to another regroups the following: 1. Internal Benchmarking

Andersen (1996) claims that it is a "comparison between departments, units, subsidiaries or countries within the same company or organisation..."Fong et al (1998) defines it as being the "comparison within one organisation about the performance of similar business units or processes." 2.Competitive Benchmarking Andersen(1996)stipulates that it is "direct comparison of own performance/results against the best real competitors i.e. that manufacture the same product or deliver the same service...the focus is on best competitors."Fong et al (1998) defines it as being "comparison for gaining superiority over others". 3. Functional Benchmarking Andersen (1996) claims that it is "comparison of processes or functions against noncompetitor companies within the same industry or technical areas...i.e. problems faced by such companies are similar."Fong et al (1998) defines it as being "application of the process benchmarking that compares particular business functions at two or more organizations". 4. Generic Benchmarking. Andersen(1996)stipulates that it is " a comparison of own process against the best processes around, regardless of industry.."Fong et al (1998) defines it as being the act of "comparing with an organization which extends beyond industry boundaries".

In nearly all types of benchmarking, knowledge is the key to the setting of both long term and short term goals and objectives(Dragolea&Cotirlea:2009). Knowledge management becomes the top most priority in the aim to "meet or exceed customer expectations"(Zairi:2000).The top management will have to diagnose what is to be benchmarked, with whom it would be most apt to be benchmarked, how to collect data, how to implement these change....

Benchmarking is the continuous search for the best practices that lead to superior performance. It is a systematic way to measure performance capabilities of competitors or recognized leaders and then develop plans to meet or exceed these levels (Steeples, 1993, 268). In layman terms, it is the process of continuously measuring an organization's processes and methodologies against those of other organizations, with the challenge of improving its own performance. This includes identification and possible adoption of "best practices"-both within and outside the organization's industry. This leads to benefits such as increased customer satisfaction, enhanced business performance, strengthened goal-setting, quality improvements, streamlining the business, and a stronger organizational culture. It provides an organization with a measurement system that fosters improvement. Those of us in the quality profession recognize that our quality initiatives should spur the organization to a higher level of performance. We must set our sights on goals that stretch beyond the typical achievement and always strive for continuous improvement. Benchmarking can lead to dramatic gains (by helping an organization move beyond the traditional incremental improvements) and stimulate innovative thinking. In our present era of re-engineering, the emphasis must shift away from just cost reductions and move toward evaluating organizational processes; this involves identifying and enhancing those processes that work and eliminating those that do not. Peter Senge says that "learning organizations" (such as Xerox) are doing more than just copying practices used by others (Senge 1990, l l ) . Merely learning from the best practices does not necessarily institute learning as an event inside the organization. There must also be stimulation for those within the organization who are unable to see that there might be a different, better way of doing business. The first step in this process is accepting that change is needed and that benchmarking might possibly be a tool to assist an organization in achieving that goal. But, there is more to it than just the tool-it must go beyond information exchange to include effective change management. It goes deeply into the organization and the employees and helps create the motivation for change that then delivers the dramatic improvement the organization is seeking. It

must drive the organization toward improvement because the current processes are not good enough. Constant change is now regarded in the marketplace as stimulation for the continuous improvement necessary for our organizations and, indeed, our economy, to endure and succeed in the coming century. Benchmarking can introduce a healthy uncertainty into the organization about the wisdom of sticking with the status quo, and can help the organization set the stretch goals that will lead it into the next century. Benchmarking is continuous learning; the more is practised, the more can then be applied next time. Ths makes it potentially very powerful. Critical success factors, processes and roles represents targets of banchmarking. Critical success factors can be defined as those things which must go right for the organization to achieve its mission; processes are a collection of related, structured activities or tasks that consume a companys resources, while roles are what define the function or job that a person fulfills. Benchmarking focuses on these things in order to point out inefficiencies and potential areas for improvement.

Regarding the benefits of Benchmarking, we can mention that: By using Benchmarking, we create a culture that values continuous improvement to achieve excellence; Benchmarking improves the knowledge of costs and performance of the products and services comparing to those of the concurrent companies; It constitutes an efficient instrument for team work and it brings together all the divisions and helps creating a common front to keep up with the competition; it also shares the best practices between benchmarking partners; It emphasizes the importance of the personnels implication and in consequence it encourages the recognition of the individual and of the team merits.

At the same time, the process should be flexible to any innovative ways to obtain new information. Typically, there are four phases of the benchmarking process; planning, analysis, integration and action. Phases of Benchmarking: *Planning Phase Being the first phase, this phase has to be completely error free. Any mistakes in this phase will mean further phases would be affected, and efficiency and effectiveness may not be up to the mark. This phase involves the identification of the benchmark itself. It means that top management has to decide which processes are relevant - from the point of view of customer requirements. The critical to quality (CTQs) requirements have to be studied properly to prioritize the relevant processes. These have to be benchmarked to an organization. Communicating company objectives and goals throughout the organization in a trustworthy way is considered to be a remedy for both collective and personal (management) uncertainty. Information is transferred and interpreted within the organization to create learning. Collective learning then enhances organizational and personal flexibility and responsiveness and in this way it leads to corporate reassurance. Orgnizations find themselves in a competitive environment characterized by rapid change. Any competitive edge depends on its ability to deal with change more effectively and more rapidly than its competitors. It is no longer appropriate for managers to take all the responsibility for implementing organizational change in response to rapid and complex changes within the environment. Each individual within the organization needs to be accountable and take responsibility for making the necessary changes within their individual work areas. They also need to share their knowledge with others in the organization thus emphasizing the notion of teams and teamwork. These are ideals typical of an organization aspiring to develop a learning organization.

It also focuses the learning process on the desired future position that the organization would like to be in. Rather than focusing on only one aspect of organizational change, the company should try to develop a dynamic and iterative process aimed at providing the organization with a builtin capacity to change and redesign (itself) continually as the circumstances demand. This has involved transformational change of the organizational structure, human resource practices, and technology. This means that at all levels of the organization, employees have been, and are, involved in the processes of transformation improvement. The concept of planning as a learning process is emphasized by Arie de Geus. He refers t . He refers to the way one of the world's most successful companies, Shell, used the corporate planning processes as a constructive and significant way to promote learning at the strategic and operational levels. The companys vision is central to defining and developing the organization. It is an articulation of the core competence of the organization. It should be strongly driven by its vision and mission. The importance of the vision is strongly emphasized in team meetings, regular feedback sessions to staff and other types of communications. The vision and mission should be developed after extensive consultation with employees, including a competition within the company to find the best mission statement. There is particular emphasis on the organizations values. *Analysis Phase This phase involves analyzing the information collected in the planning phase. An analysis of the reasons for the better outcomes of the benchmarked processes has to be done based on the data collected. Based on this analysis, a better process has to be developed. The next step is to set goals for developing an improved process for your organization. This goal for the process should be to make as good a process - or an even better one - than the other organization. Learning is strongly related to empowerment and most of the best performers encourage employees to make their own decisions regarding their work and be active and proactive. Moreover, such an approach needs employees who are willing to continuously develop their skills in

creating new insights as well as their ability to work together as a team. Willingness to develop and learn as an organization is further highlighted by enabling structures and loosely structured roles which create opportunities for individual and business development. A proper study of which one suits your goals the most should be selected. In terms of developing a learning culture, learning can be defined as continuously seeking and acquiring new skills, behavior, knowledge or information. A learning environment is one where everyone in your firm is committed, on an on going basis, to gaining new skills, exploring new behaviors and furthering your collective understanding of the issues facing your firm. The Learning Culture explores the impact that a learning environment can have on the employer, the employees, the clients and the firm. In addition, it will identify the diverse learning styles and interests of the team members. It will also enable employer to implement a systemized approach to providing the people with the training and development they need. This would develop a culture of ``learning'' and a workforce that was ``change skilled'', both being critical to the future success of the business. The process had five key steps. First, best practices has to be researched and catalogued for future reference. Second, to bring about change required an intense ``consultative'' approach in the branch but due to economic constraints a selective process is required to identify branches where the greatest improvement could be made. Third, best practitioner managers are to be selected, trained and seconded to another branch for a period of time during which they would assist in bringing about the change. Fourth, training and on going support for the consultants is necessary to maximise the benefits to be gained. Finally, measures of performance have to be tracked to quantify the benefits gained from the process.

*Integration Phase

This phase takes the planning and analysis done in the earlier steps to further levels only after being accepted by senior management and department heads. Proper communication of the findings in the earlier stages has to be conducted and their commitment established. When the revisions are accepted, the acceptance of the goals is the next important step. Employees must be attracted, motivated and developed into talented people who are committed to the organisations values and vision. The working environment must be attractive to employees; and take action to enable the employees to develop their full potential; and the commitment to developing effective leadership. Progress in this area can be positive by fostering Senges self-mastery, and as a launching point for team development. It helps people to cope with significant organizational changes that have been implemented. For managers, a coaching skills program can be introduced to build on the learning, using a management for performance program. The mission award process that recognizes individual and team performance can be an incentive. The development of team purposes (mission statements) is useful to obtain greater involvement of all employees in continuous improvement, and to achieve a shared vision. A culture of continuous learning and improvement must be entrenched. The identification of improvement opportunities can be measured and analysed thus enabling all employees to play an effective role in continuous improvement. Team work encourages people from different departments to work together to solve specific problems. Teams are encouraged to take a systems approach to problem solving and to use collective thinking skills to build on the experience and creativity of individuals. There are a number of cases. Various initiatives can be essential such as encouraging employees participation in the building of a shared vision, mission and value statement. Organizational culture is based on a form of communication that leads to a process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding. It contributes to the development of a learning organization skilled at creating, acquiring and transferring

knowledge and at modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights. It is through open communication and the sharing of adequate and relevant information that companies develop organizational knowledge in order to change and improve themselves continuously. Open communication achieves a basis for learning, i.e. favorable conditions and a positive attitude towards personal and company development and the adoption of new behaviors. Individuals learn how to learn as they know where to acquire the necessary information and how to disseminate it. Only after learning how to learn can the employees participate in the goal-setting process as well as in the building of strategies by the company. By doing so, all the members of the company can then finally commit to building a future together. Activities such as internal inter-departmental benchmarking and mystery guests performed by employees themselves promote company learning by engaging in a number of mutually-advantageous learning activities. *Action Phase The last phase is the most important phase. It involves developing a plan for implementation with all the factors involved such as the time line, responsible owners and targets being planned properly. It is necessary that senior management also be responsible for the coordination of various activities, monitoring the progress of the plans and removing any barriers in the implementation process. When the revised process is in place, a report stating the benefits of the new revised process has to be developed. The project completion should be the milestone- the benchmark - for any further projects. The process has to be a continuous one so that the initiative does not fail due to neglect. The last phase in the process has three steps. This phase is where the improvement parts have been taken into consideration. Ultimate benefit to a company from benchmarking is judged by how well this particular phase has been carried out. The last step of this phase, Keep the Process Continuous, implies this. Develop Action Plan for Implementation After the improved process is accepted by all concerned or likely to be affected by it, a detailed action plan is drawn with all key

activities taken as inputs. The detailed action plan should carry the important things like a time line, individuals responsible for carrying out the tasks, any short-fall in the completion of tasks and what stretch targets are taken to compensate the short-falls. Those responsible should be committed enough to ensure that the tasks and assignments are completed on time. Implement Specific Actions and Monitor Progress While those who must complete assignments on schedule have a responsibility, so does senior management. They must be committed enough to ensure proper coordination of various activities, monitor the progress of implementation of the plan and work as a barrier-remover in the implementation process. When the revised process is in place, a complete report has to be prepared, showing the benefits of the revised process compared with the expectations at the time of approval of the proposed revision of the process. Keep the Process Continuous The successful completion of one project can lead to an important milestone for the organization. The next step would be bringing in additional and more ambitious projects and benchmarking with the best approach. While carrying out the total activities, a mechanism or a system has to be built in to review the performance of the improved process periodically to ensure that the benefits are retained. The process has to be a continuous one and should move at a constant speed and should never be neglected.

The review points for this phase are: One of the biggest advantages of benchmarking is the extent of improvements the organization makes by learning from the processes of others. A better and proven process can be adapted, with suitable modifications for company requirements, with less time invested for inventing new methodologies. Benchmarking also uncovers new ways of improving a companys own processes by motivating actions learned from studying and experiencing those organizations with best-in-class processes.

Benchmarking is definitely advantageous, as it involves learning from others to make suitable changes to suit your company's requirements and goals.

BENCHMARKING PHASES Phase I Plannning the benchmarking process and characterization of the item (s)

BENCHMARKING ACTIVITIES 1. Identify what to benchmark 2. Obtain top management support 3. Develop the measurement plan 4. Develop the data collection plan 5. Review plan with location experts 6. Characterize your benchmark item

Phase II External data collection and analysis

7. Collect and analyse internal published information 8. Select potential internal benchmarking sites 9. Collect internal original research information 10. Conduct interviews and survey 11. Form an internal benchmarking committee 12. Conduct internal site visits

Phase III External data collection and analysis

13. Collect external published research information 14. Collect external original research information

Phase IV Improvement of the items performance

15. Identify corrective actions 16. Develop an implementation plan 17. Gain top management approval of the FSS 18. Implement the FSS and measure impact

Phase V Continuous improvement

19. Maintain the benchmarking database 20. Implement continuous performance improvement

Hi carole plzz insert from where u got the table if u took it from somewhere biensure...

Other than aiming at "financial benefits" of the orgnisation, by comparing the organisation with other best in practice, a culture of learning is infused in the mindset of those who have to collect the data and undergo the five phases of benchmarking. It basically adheres to the "organisational learning" and "the learning oragnisation"(Auluck:2002). i add my comments in red dnt mind?

Conclusion and Limitations of benchmarking as being a tool of creating a learning culture in the organisation Any organization has its strengths and weaknesses. As it has already been stated earlier, benchmarking is a tough process that needs a lot of commitment to succeed. It has its benefits in order for a company to improve by learning from the best. However, there are also some limitations in considering benchmarking only in terms of a tool for creating a learning culture. A first step towards a better understanding of the implementation of benchmarking exercises is to identify and discuss the barriers that typically arise during this process (Camp, 1989).

Limitations can be defined as barriers that arise when things are not moving correctly and this depends on many factors. Some of the major pitfalls identified with benchmarking include that it is not always pragmatic and realistic, the cost associated with its implementation is very demanding associated with a limited resources, the difficulty in obtaining information for which to benchmark against, a significant lag time between implementation and results. Benchmarking is also time- consuming, there is also in some case an unavailability of data. Other disadvantages associated to benchmarking are employee resistance, employees fear of exclusion, unwillingness to change and a lack of training. 1. Not always pragmatic/ realistic: Compared with other types of analysis techniques, benchmarking does not have any predictive power to anticipate future performance, results or benefits (Halloway, Lewis and Mallony 1995). Although great care may have been taken in the analysis of other companies and the activities they developed to reach certain performance levels, there is no guarantee that those same activities will yield the same results in another organization. The differences may be due to a number of reasons, including a perceived cause and effect between performance and the activities that really do not exist. 2. Cost associated; limited resources: Costs have also been identified as a potential problem with benchmarking. (Alstrom et al., 1998; Bhutta and Huq, 1999; Biesada, 1991) When done properly, the benchmarking process requires a substantial amount of time and resources analyzing other companies data and activities, developing and implementing new activities in the workplace, and improving continually the process of data collection, analysis and modification.This implies that top management needs to be totally committed to the benchmarking exercise or else the learning fragemnt will be wasted. 3. Unavailability of data: A third area that can become a problem for benchmarking is the availability of valid data from other organizations. In order to establish effective benchmarks, one must know the

performance levels of other organizations. It may be difficult due to differences in measurements used across industries. This aspect is a real challenge to employees involved in the learning process as lack of data may create a disinterest in the project and lead to abandonment. Or to a certain extent, benchmarking team may have to conduct a benchmarking activity with a competitive firm that will not be willing to share certain crucial information pertaining to the "heart and soul" of the success of their business. Under the edge of such cut-throat benchmarking may sound less of a challenge and more of a frustrating activity. 4. Time consuming and expensive Benchmarking is said to be too expensive. Benchmarking does come at a price, but costs vary considerably. The benchmarking process requires a considerable amount of time from when the decision is made to benchmark to when measurable results are realized.But with careful planning, benchmarking costs can be kept to a minimum. Overindulging time over a benchmark and knowledge becoming obsolete the very next minute is another challenge to the learning organism which is at the heartthrob of benchmarking.

5. Employee resistance& 6.Employees fear of exclusion/redundancy &7....:i feel these three have to be merged? what do u say??they all fall under the banner of change.

One obstacle is resistance on the part of some employees. With new changes, there will always be some employees reluctant to get involved and cooperate with new policies. Staff resistance can be problematic at various stages from beginning to acting on the results of benchmarking. (Elmuti and Kathawala 1997,) and Hinton et al.2000). Moreover ....point 6... ADKAR ( )model of change might be a real asset in monitoring change in such a

circumstance though it should not be forgotten that learning takes place by using the "brains" of the employees. So prior to implementing any kind of "change", workers have

to lead to accept the fact, else data or the learning process might be "tampered with" fouling the whole process. 6. Employees fear of exclusion/redundancy: Benchmarking will shake people if they think that this is a device to get rid of them (Fong et al.1998). If the objectives of the organization are not clear, that is there are misunderstandings on the reasons why benchmarking is crucial for the organization, employees may fear of being excluded and may thus not cooperate and show any commitment in the workplace.

7. Unwillingness to change: Many people resist change because they have been in their jobs for years and are not willing to face the challenge of learning new skills or they feel stressed when required to move out of established comfort zones (Macadam, 1996) they are resistant to change of any kind due to comfort with status quo, fear of the unknown, or regulations that impede change.

8. Lack of training: Training is a key requirement for the success of a benchmarking team. Without training in the process, tools, techniques, and philosophy of best practices, benchmarking teams are severely handicapped (Bogan and English ,1994). And this will likely hinder the learning process. The ultimate goal of benchmarking is to bring new and relevant "competitive" ideas into the blood of the organisation in order to revive it. Thus should the team members not be prepared for the critical treatment of knowledge the purpose of benchmarking and it creating a learning culture in the organisation will be defeated.

9. Lacking proper implementation: Another problem with benchmarking occurs if an organization fails to properly implement the process. One example of this is not involving employees during the process. Ultimately, these employees will need the information to improve the process.

Therefore, lacking proper implementation can be considered as a problem in benchmarking. 10. Implications on management and employees: Lack of leadership enthusiasm for benchmarking is also a barrier in benchmarking. Benchmarking requires feedback and participation from all levels of an organization. Managers implement the process and train employees to know and understand the process. In order to benchmark effectively, a company needs a strong strategic focus and some flexibility to achieve the goals set forth by management. Perhaps the most important aspects of effective implementation are adequate planning, training, and interdepartmental communication. (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999; Hoag et al., 2002; Jick, 1993; Macadam, 1996); Mistakes can be avoided by setting goals and following the rules to achieve them. Companies that benchmark identify specific areas of weakness, and find solutions to turn them into strengths. But for the benchmarking process to be successful, an organization needs these general requirements:

Senior management interest and support: A solid understanding of the organization's operations and requirements for improvement: Openness to change and to new ideas; Willingness to share information with benchmarking partners; and Dedication to ongoing benchmarking efforts.

Benchmarking is an improvement tool. For it to show its effectiveness, the organization should use it properly. Benchmarking isnt very helpful if it is used for processes that dont offer much opportunity for improvement. It is of the management role and commitment to accept changes that may occur at any time for example some processes may have to be benchmarked repeatedly. Benchmarking is not also a substitute for innovation; however it is a source of ideas from outside the organization. Business success depends on the goals and objectives set, based on external reality. So far, it has been seen that benchmarking creates a learning culture through the phases. It brings people to learn through analysis but it is difficult to find company equal with cross industry. As already stated, we should also consider the fact that it brings also changes; for instance, unwillingness of staff. However, we cannot rely solely on learning culture for establishing benchmarking. The learning culture is one part of it. Benchmarking makes it easy to identify the gap between where the organization would like to be and where it actually is. This gap provides a measure of the improvements an organization needs to make. Ignoring this gap and refusing changes decreases the long term survival opportunities of the organization