An evaluation framework for outcome and impact measures

Abstract

Competitive intelligence (CI) measurement practices within organizations remain fragmentary and elusive, although prescriptive CI performance and impact measures have been proposed in the literature. This study responds to calls for research into CI measurement in order to examine why organizations fail to measure CI, and to develop an evaluation framework for prescriptive measures that would support the evolution of best practices in measurement. A qualitative study (the ‘users study') consisting of interviews and shared negotiated texts with 12 users of CI was conducted. Study participants were senior managers and executives who use CI in the course of their work responsibilities at their respective individual organizations. Participants indicated that measurement cost, confused conceptualizations of CI measurement, and skepticism regarding the informativeness of measurement were obstacles to the implementation of CI measurement within their organizations. Although few participants conduct measurement activities, participants were all able to describe the ideal characteristics of CI outcome and impact measures. That list is here combined with the findings of an earlier study (the ‘experts study') conducted by the authors (Gainor & Bouthillier, 2014), in order to develop the evaluation framework provided here. This study provides a rare account of CI user perspectives on the rationale behind the lack of CI measurement within organizations, and a unique tool, the evaluation framework, which may be used to support both research and training within the field of CI.