Abstract:
- Having a set of Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) is now acknowledged as a promising tool that
facilitates a decision-making process. Yet, the potential
advantages associated with using KPIs are heavily
contingent upon the trade-offs between the ‘financial’
and ‘non-financial’ measurements in use, especially in
the case of performance management of research and
development (R&D). Ambiguously defined KPIs in
excess number may cause data in KPIs to overburden
the entire decision-making process and discourage the
entire organization structure from using it. On this
understanding, this study aimed to scrutinize the
practices of leaders in charge of performance
management in leading research institutes working on
commercial agriculture in Sri Lanka. A systematic
process of reviewing the literature was carried out to
identify, collate, and summarize performance
management aspects on a global scale (Phase-I),
followed by in-depth personnel interviews (n=32),
aided by an interview guide comprised of 15 probing
questions, with the leaders affiliated with research
institutes (Phase II) to identify and compare such
aspects in developing country context. The Thematic
Qualitative Models produced by MAXQDA software
were employed to assess those respondents'
perspectives. The results emphasized the organizational
benefits arising from a well-planned performance
management system (PMS) comprising sensible KPIs
based on balanced measurements. The outputs from the
analysis and the five themes generated by it further
helped to synthesize a well-balanced set of Key
Performance Drivers (KPDs). Software tools (eg:
Code-Maps) were utilized to recognize the KPI-KPD
relationships and highlight important aspects of
leadership that were required in implementing datadriven PMS.
