The Quest for Supreme Performance: Benchmarking to Save Lives
Darren Dalcher
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the verb benchmark implies âevaluating something by comparison with a standardâ. In practice, it often entails a direct assessment of business processes, procedures and performance metrics and outcomes against those applied by industry or sector leaders in order to understand why market leaders are successful, or against other organisations in a similar position or of a similar size and expertise, in order to provide a reading about the current performance level of the organisation.
Benchmarks emerge out of the pursuit of âbest practiceâ implying an intention to copy or replicate what is considered to be superior performance. Benchmarks provide a disciplined approach and a reference point for determining oneâs current position from which measurements could be made or a basic standard and reference point against which others could be compared.
Reference points have long been used to determine position or encourage performance improvement. Land surveyors might be familiar with the idea of a benchmark, a distinctive mark made on a wall, rock or building which serves as a reference point in determining the current position and altitude in topographical surveys and tidal observations (Bogan & English, 1994: 3). Reference points are used elsewhere: Following the mass production and standardisation of rifles and cartridges in the mid-1800s, the marksman became the uncertain variable. Gun factories would therefore fix the rifle in a bench, making it possible to fire the rifle multiple times and determine the spread, introducing the idea of benchmarking weapons as used in both the gun factory and the ammunition factory to find the best combination of rifle and ammunition, without necessarily accounting for the foibles of the rifleman.
McGrath and Bates suggest that Fredrick Taylor used the concept of a benchmark at the beginning of the 20th century to identify excellent performers in the factory by putting a chalk mark on their benches (2017: 192). Taylor had utilised time and motion studies to identify good performers (Dalcher, 2017: 3). The mark on the bench could thus identify staff whose output or working practices should merit emulating, and McGrath and Bates (2017) propose that this rather crude method has evolved into rather more sophisticated benchmarking tools and procedures.
In the 1970s benchmarking became a widely accepted term. However, companies such as XeroxÂŽ applied it in a narrow way that focused primarily on comparisons with oneâs main competition to assess performance against the best in class, invoking the practice of competitive benchmarking (Camp, 1989). Competitive benchmarking entails comparison of company standards with those of leading rivals (Hindle, 2008: 15).
Yet, benchmarking is not a panacea, and it needs to be applied with judicious intellect and some degree of caution:
All too often benchmarking is carried out by semi committed managers, without the use of predetermined measures, and without the proper tools for analysis and presentation. Unquestionably, many benchmarking projects end in dismay, a futile exercise often justifiably portrayed by onlookers as industrial tourism, comparing apples with pears. Even when performed in a structured way, the âtheyâre different from us syndromeâ prevents benchmarking from leading for changes for the better. Furthermore, competitive sensitivity can stifle the free fl ow of information, even within an organization (ten Have et al., 2003: p. 24).
Nonetheless, benchmarking has been utilised for a range of diverse and varied purposes, including (Bogan & English, 1994):
- Setting and refining strategy
- Reengineering work processes and business systems
- Continuous improvement of work processes and business systems
- Strategic planning and goal setting
- Problem solving
- Education and idea enrichment
- Market performance comparisons and evaluations
- Catalyst for change
- A utilitarian tool
The Power and Potential Impact of Benchmarking
For an early example of benchmarking, Bogan and English note that in the 1800s British textile mills were best in class. American mills, in contrast, were relatively immature. New England industrialist Francis Cabot Lowell wanted to improve and upgrade local capability and modernise business technology. International trade was severely impacted by the 1807 embargo, leading Lowell to the inevitable conclusion that the local manufacturing basis in the US needed to be strengthened. In June 1810 he embarked on a two-year visit to Scotland and England, paying particular attention to the spinning and weaving technologies that he was able to observe by travelling around Scotland and Lancashire.
Lowell travelled to England where he studied the manufacturing techniques and industrial design of the best British mill factories. He saw that the British plants had much more sophisticated equipment but the British plant layouts did not effectively utilize labor. In short there was room for improvement (Ibid.: 1).
Upon his return to the US, Francis Lowell proceeded to build his factory by replicating the use of technology that he observed in the British mills. However, it was designed to be significantly less labour intensive than the British facilities. In 1814 he established the Boston Manufacturing Company and built its first mill beside the Charles River in Waltham, Massachusetts. The plant housed an integrated set of technologies that could deal with the full life cycle of converting the raw cotton to the finished product in one place. Its success was immediate and enormous, but it rapidly depleted the waterpower of the Charles River. To expand the enterprise, the plant was moved north to the banks of the more powerful Merrimack River. Following Lowellâs death, this new mill centre became known as Lowell, Massachusetts. By 1840, this new industrial city had become the second largest city in America and was recognised as the largest manufacturing centre in the whole country.
The dynamic growth and impact on the wider industry is attributed to Lowellâs ability to creatively adapt and further improve practices observed in the worldâs leading mills. Lowell has been able to identify and copy patterns that were sufficient to transform mills in the US from small facilities to integrated production facilities. By upgrading and strengthening the identified gaps and shortfalls, he was further able to establish industrial manufacturing in the northeast region of the US.
From a Benchmark to Benchmarking for Further Development
Industry has clearly progressed from Taylorâs notion of marking a bench with a piece of chalk in order to identify a good performer that can pace others, towards recognition of effective practices that merit emulation and further improvement as exemplified by Lowell.
A key shift is in progressing from simple metrics and measures towards the observation of processes. This is perhaps best represented by the shift from a hand-written benchmark towards benchmarking, a more observational activity concerned not merely with gauging operating statistics, but also with identifying effective practices.
Benchmarking represents a positive, intentional and proactive process preoccupied with the search for improvement and superior performance. The Japanese have a special word dantotsu, which means striving to be the âbest of the bestâ. Being the best of the best incorporates the essence of what benchmarking is really aboutâa continuous search to become best of the best that is innovatively applied and can lead to a true focus on uncovering developmental insights and gaining and sustaining superiority.
Searching for dantotsu is innovatively applied as new approaches, perspectives and ideas are explored through a fresh pair of eyes. Such benchmarking can open up new possibilities for transformative innovation and the importation of good practices and methods to deliver new superior performance.
In 1912 Henry Ford observed men cutting up meat whilst on a tour of a Chicago slaughterhouse. The carcasses were hanging on hooks mounted on a monorail; after each worker performed his job, they would push the carcass to the next station, allowing the next bit of work to commence. Ford was inspired by the production-line dynamics and was interested to consider its potential application to his line of work.
Less than six months later, the worldâs first assembly line at the Ford Highland Park Plant started producing magnetos. The idea that would ultimately revolutionise car manufacturing was first observed in a completely different industry, in the meat packing warehouses in Chicago. Ford explained his vision in the following way:
The man who places the part will not fasten it. The man who puts in the bolt does not put in the nut, and the man who starts the nut will not tighten it. . . . We started assembling a motor car in a single factory (Ford, 1924: 27).
Looking Elsewhere: From Racing Cars to Saving Lives
Is it possible to learn from experts in other disciplines? Indeed, can we improve our own practices by watching other professionals ply their trade?
Racing and medicine are not normally reckoned to have a lot in common. Formula One racing offers many thrills to viewers and fans. But apparently it can also offer instructive lessons in process improvement.
Doctors in the UKâs Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trustâs Surgical and Intensive Care Unit have long realised that there was an urgent need to speed up the handover process of patients moving from the operating theatre to the intensive care unit (ICU) following heart surgery. A normal transfer could take about 30 minutes as wires and tubes are untangled and unplugged, while a number of handover conversations could be taking place before the patient is transferred to the care of the ICU.
Following a particularly demanding 12-hour emergency transplant, two exhausted senior surgeons were unwinding by watching a Formula One race in the staff common room. They were struck by the contrasts between the somewhat chaotic process of transferring patients and the highly coordinated activities of the 20-member crew of engineers and mechanics who change the car tyres, fill it with petrol, clear the air intakes and correct any flaws, allowing the car to clear the pit within seven seconds. Indeed, the mechanics appeared to be using a highly coordinated, efficient and disciplined process.
Intrigued by the need for a highly ordered and controlled handover process and the slick execution observed in real time on the television screens, they invited McLaren and Ferrari racing managers to benchmark processes. Hospital surgeons went to the pits in the British Grand Prix and met Ferrariâs technical managers in Italy. Ferrariâs technical managers agreed to come over to the hospital and observe and reflect on their handover procedures.
One of the key lessons was that the racing environment was actually more safety conscious and process oriented than the medical context. The fast and fiery world of Formula One had developed stringent procedures and lines of responsibility that simply did not exist in the medical equivalent. At the end of an operation, the patient is transferred from the safe surgical environment onto a trolley that is then taken down a cold corridor towards intensive care without the dedicated equipment and with little monitoring. Within the span of 15 minutes all the technology and support systems are transferred twice (Sower et al., 2008: 173). The transition is difficult and requires a large team engaged through multiple stages and steps, not unlike the racing maintenance team.
While doctors deal with a variety of emergencies, the bulk of the preparation comes from their original training and the experience they accumulate over time. Existing procedures had involved operating on a solid table, which included all the vital connections to equipment. Following the operation, all equipment would be unplugged and a hand-operated ventilator utilised for transferring the patient out of theatre, into the lift, and along the corridor towards intensive care.
Teamwork is essential to success. In racing, teams try to optimise activities and minimise the time wasted when a car is away from the racing track. Many procedures are carried out concurrently with different teams taking contro...
