 |
 |
|
| Resource Library | ||
GSMI offers a comprehensive library of blogs, Articles and White Papers, discussing today's hottest and leading management methodologies and strategies. Use the navigation to scroll through and find the information that pertains to you and your performance management needs.
GSMI is always looking for the most up to date case studies and effective information to provide executive leaders today. If you have an interesting article to publish fill the form out below and contact us.
By GSMIweb on 22-Apr-10 02:00.
During this past year, business performance management (BPM) became a core offering of the world's largest software vendors. IBM, Oracle, and SAP all now have market-leading products in this area. These solutions are not primarily homegrown but instead are the result of prior acquisitions. This group of companies, along with Infor, SAS, and several others, essentially form the top tier of BPM vendors. Their offerings tend to be comprehensive, combining BPM with business intelligence (BI) and in some cases ERP. The next group of solution providers is focused on what we define as financial performance management suites. This consists of budgeting, planning, forecasting, consolidation, and reporting, as well as scorecards and dashboards. While this group has been shrinking over the years due to acquisitions by BI or ERP vendors, it is now rebounding and is more robust than ever. Some vendors that had been overshadowed in the past, such as Longview and Clarity, are now coming into their own. In addition, some products developed outside of the U.S. have recently been added to the mix as companies such as Tagetik and Carpio have entered the U.S. market. This group is also the home of some of the most successful vendors targeting the midmarket. Adaptive Planning, with its SaaS offerings, and Prophix are two leading choices in this segment.
A New Brand of Value: Integrating Branding into Corporate Performance Management By James Gregory, Bob Paladino, and Jill Akman | Apr 22, 2009 Performance management activities do not generally focus on the performance of the corporate brand. But adding measures of brand familiarity, favorability, and loyalty to corporate performance management processes sets the stage for better corporate strategy execution. Every business has a corporate brand that requires attentive management. Brands have an innate power to either hurt or help a company; the organization determines which of these two possibilities becomes reality through the ways in which it leverages the brand. Sometimes the corporate brand is thought of as a cost center, but organizations are better served by viewing it as a business asset. A company needs to understand its brand, gauge its effectiveness and potential, and manage the brand as it would any other asset. This is a challenging proposition. A corporate brand affects multiple audiences, both internal and external. Internally, a brand touches employees, management, shareholders, partners, and vendors. Externally, the brand can reach the media, prospective investors, customers, and everyone else who interacts with the organization.
The Balanced Scorecard: An Approach for Linking Strategy to Action ...or is it?© by Arthur M. Schneiderman An edited version of this essay appears at Optima Media Group's Scorecard strategy website Introduction Visit most any mid- to large-size organization and they will proudly describe their balanced scorecard (BSC). Ask them what they use it for and you will get a response (uncomfortably reminiscent of the drone from brainwashed characters in the 1950s movie The Manchurian Candidate): "We use it to link strategy to action." Dig a little deeper and they will tell you that they read a business article, attended a conference, or hired a consultant and that's where they learned about this great new business tool. But don't stop there. Ask them how they went about creating that scorecard and how they use it in their day-to-day management and the picture will start to become fuzzy. Probe even further and ask to see their BSC process flow diagram and you're likely to get nothing more than a blank stare.
Must Your Scorecard be Balanced?© by Arthur M. Schneiderman An edited version of this article appears in strategy + business Background Conventional wisdom mandates that a scorecard contain a balance of: financial and non-financial, lagging (results or retrospective) and leading (process or predictive), externally (customer) and internally (processes) focused, and short-term and long-term metrics. It also demands representation within a prescriptive framework; most often financial, customer, internal, and learning and growth. But is this really necessary? Let's first look at the origins of the "balanced" part of the scorecard.
Showing 11 - 15 of 18 Articles