Much progress has been made since the first cycle of the EPM
Index was carried out in early 2009. However, this progress seems
to be around awareness; actual implementation and integration of
the various underlying processes of EPM is still not widespread.
The overall EPM index for the geographies covered is
7.04 out of a maximum score of 10, compared with 5.13 in cycle
I: Whereas this leap in the overall index seems to
indicate a massive improvement, other findings show that this
is mainly around the understanding of what EPM is, and how it
can help, rather than in actual implementation of tools and
formal processes. Elsewhere, it can be seen how the various
processes that underpin and define effective EPM are still
being carried out in isolation.
There has been a major improvement in the belief that
the various EPM processes need to be consistently
interlinked: In cycle I, only one fifth of respondents
felt that the six core EPM processes needed to be regarded as
interlinked. In cycle II, this has improved to nearly one
third. Those believing that the processes can be regarded in
total isolation have dropped from over one quarter to less than
In cycle I, it was predicated that countries with "soft
touch" governance expectations would suffer in cycle
II: Italy, in particular, has fared badly in cycle II.
From being a top performing country in cycle I, it is now at
the bottom of the table in cycle II. The recession seems to
have uncovered basic failings in Italian organisations'
approach to EPM, and these organisations are now struggling to
come to terms with how this impacts their existing processes.
Inclusion of stakeholders in the EPM process chain
remains relatively poor: In cycle I, the lowest
sub-index score was for stakeholders at 4.77, against an
overall main index score of 5.13. In cycle II, the stakeholder
sub-index score stands at 6.44, against 7.04 overall.
Organisations are still not maximising the opportunities for
increased value through encouraging and using inputs from very
important constituents such as suppliers and customers, nor
from employees, shareholders and others.
New geographies or new channels still fare badly as
areas to exploit for growth: In cycle II, the emphasis
has firmly moved towards looking for new customers and keeping
existing customers. In cycle I, there was a focus on new
products and services: this has been pushed back as the
recession forces organisations to look at maximising the
revenues from existing lines, rather than taking the riskier
approach of investing in something completely new.
The view of Business intelligence (BI) has changed
markedly: In cycle I, only 12% saw BI as being an
important means of monitoring, measuring and reporting on the
overall health of a business. However, 40% were either unsure
as to what BI was, or saw it as an expensive waste of time.
Now, only 12% see BI as being a waste of time or are not sure,
whereas over 60% see it as being a major tool in running their
business. As in cycle I, those who see BI as a critical tool
scored better in the overall index than those who did not.
In just 10 months, the views of organisations on EPM have changed
markedly. However, the greater level of understanding and
acceptance of what EPM stands for has not, as yet, resulted in
hard improvements in implemented approaches. Quocirca expects
that organisations will spend the next 12 months building on
their new understandings, and that a more rigorous, connected and
integrated approach to EPM will be seen in the coming months.
Download Paper (Registered Members Only)
By downloading you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These include information regarding use of your personal data.
Register As New Member | Login as Registered Member