Discussion Board Reply


DiscussionBoard Reply

DiscussionBoard Reply

Inthe discussion, the student has attempted to provide a detailed andunderstandable definition of benchmarking. Compared to otherdiscussions that I have seen students post, MN has explored whatbenchmarking entails and the benefits that accrue when companiesadopt this concept. It is true that benchmarking has to do with thebest practice, which is imported from what other companies are doingand applied in a different organization. As highlighted by thestudent, it is apparent that resources and time are saved whencompanies engage in activities that relate to benchmarking. Thestudent has conducted adequate research about the impact ofbenchmarking within an organization. I agree with the fact thatperformance of an organization can be improved through benchmarking.This is because measuring the performance in relation to otherbusinesses helps an organization to learn useful lessons (Presley&amp Meade, 2010).

Ifound the discussion interesting since it has provided a comparisonof how benchmarking can be used in various industries and sectors.The argument by the student is broad and covers all the sectors ofthe economy where benchmarking is applicable. For example, some ofthe areas where this concept can be applied include the healthcare,baking, transport, as well as communication sectors. Moreover, I likehow the student has analyzed the best methods to use benchmarkingproperly. When properly used, benchmarking tends to yield goodresults and enhances the performance within an organization. Thediscussion is relevant since it has highlighted some of the processesin an organization that can be improved through benchmarking. Forexample, benchmarking is essential in improving activities such aschange management, team work, as well as the reengineering ofbusiness processes in an organization (Jain,Chandrasekaran &amp Gunasekaran, 2010).

Thestudent’s description of the usefulness of adopting new methods ofproduction is essential and contributes to the reader’sunderstanding of the discussion. The explanations are organized in alogical manner. Moreover, the student does not use jargon in theexplanations and this makes it possible to understand the terms inthe reading. Throughout the discussion, the role of benchmarkingtakes center stage and all the discussions revolve around itsimportance. Emphasis on what benchmarking entails enhances thereader’s understanding of the concept and its contribution tosuccess and performance within an organization. I agree with theargument that benchmarking has emanated as a result of thecompetition witnessed in various sectors of the economy. As marketleaders embrace this essential component, other organizations in thesame sector are forced to follow suit (Presley&amp Meade, 2010).

Thediscussion by the student has focused on diverse and unique aspectsof the concept of benchmarking. For instance, there is an emphasis onhow the issue can be interpreted in biblical terms. From my analysis,the company being copied tends to be better placed than the companycopying it. Based on the discussion, it is possible to understand theconcept of best practice in business. This implies that organizationsshould strive towards ensuring that they provide information aboutnew processes and products to other business. The discussion isstrong since it addresses the various ways in which benchmarking canbe applied in an organization. Moreover, there is a focus onbusinesses that have leaped benefits from benchmarking and how theperformance of such organizations has been enhanced. Although thediscussion is relevant to the course contents, the student has failedto identify some of the negative aspects associated with benchmarking(Jain,Chandrasekaran &amp Gunasekaran, 2010).


Jain,R., Chandrasekaran, A. &amp Gunasekaran, A. (2010). Benchmarking theredesign of &quotbusiness process reengineering&quotcurriculum.&nbspBenchmarking,&nbsp17(1),77-94.

Presley,A., &amp Meade, L. (2010). Benchmarking for sustainability: Anapplication to the sustainable construction industry.Benchmarking,&nbsp17(3),435-451.