Skip to main content

Project Follow-Up by Benchmarking

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Statistical Tools for Program Evaluation

Abstract

Benchmarking is a follow-up evaluation tool that compares the cost structure of facilities with that of a given reference, the benchmark or yardstick. What is assessed is not a policy per se, but the facilities in charge of implementing it (Sect. 12.1). The method is applicable to any public service operating within a multiple-input multiple-output setting and equipped with a cost accounting system (Sect. 12.2). As the demand for a set of services plays a determinant role in explaining the average cost of a facility, the first step is to delineate the effects of the demand structure on cost (Sect. 12.3). Benchmarking also assesses whether an extra cost observed in one facility is due to price effects or to the allocation of inputs among services (Sect. 12.4). The stakeholders of the public project may also wish to get alternative or complementary information on the role each input plays within the production structure. A simple reorganization of the data allows it (Sect. 12.5). Last, the method can be used to motivate operations improvement or to help a decision-maker understand where the performance falls in comparison to others (Sect. 12.6).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agarwal, R., Green, R., Agarwal, N., & Randhawa, K. (2016). Benchmarking management practices in Australian public healthcare. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 30, 31ā€“56.

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Hansen, K., & Zwanziger, J. (1996). Marginal costs in general acute care hospitals: A comparison among California, New York and Canada. Health Economics, 5, 195ā€“216.

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Llewellyn, S., & Northcott, D. (2005). The average hospital. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30, 555ā€“583.

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • OECD. (1997). International benchmarking. Experiences from OECD countries.

    Google ScholarĀ 

  • OECD. (2013). International benchmarking for school improvement. OECD tests for schools (based on PISA).

    Google ScholarĀ 

  • Veillard, J., Champagne, F., Klazinga, N., Kazandjian, V., Arah, O., & Guisset, A. (2005). A performance assessment framework for hospitals: The WHO regional office for Europe PATH project. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 17, 487ā€“496.

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Veillard, J., Schiotz, M., Guisset, A., Brown, A., & Klazinga, N. (2013). The PATH project in eight European countries: An evaluation. International Journal of Health Care Quality Insurance, 26, 703ā€“713.

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

Ā© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Josselin, JM., Le Maux, B. (2017). Project Follow-Up by Benchmarking. In: Statistical Tools for Program Evaluation . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52827-4_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics