Strategic Performance Indicator Management for Enhancing Organizational Performance: A Case Study of Prince of Songkla University, Phuket Campus
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research investigated the strategic management of performance indicators to enhance organizational excellence, focusing on Prince of Songkla University, Phuket Campus. The study’s objectives were threefold: 1) to analyze internal and external factors influencing performance indicator management via SWOT analysis; 2) to synthesize strategic development initiatives using the TOWS Matrix; and 3) to formulate a strategic performance indicator management framework tailored for higher education institutions. Employing a qualitative research design, data were elicited through semi-structured in-depth interviews with 16 purposively selected executives responsible for strategic oversight. The analytical process integrated Thematic Analysis with environmental scanning and strategic synthesis to ensure methodological rigor. The findings elucidated five pivotal dimensions underpinning effective indicator management: (1) Strategic Alignment, (2) Data Governance, (3) Leadership and Oversight, (4) Organizational Learning, and (5) External Stakeholder Accountability. Based on these insights, four strategic archetypes— proactive, developmental, preventive, and corrective—were synthesized to optimize the management system. Furthermore, the study culminated in the "Strategic Performance Indicator Management Framework," which harmonizes contextual analysis, strategy formulation, and indicator administration into a unified system. This framework provides a robust model for higher education institutions and public sector entities to bridge the gap between strategic planning and performance execution, ultimately fostering sustainable high-performance outcomes.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Any views and comments in the Journal of Social Innovation and Lifelong Learning are the authors’ views. The editorial staff have not to agree with those views and it is not considered as the editorial’s responsibility.
2. The responsibility of content and draft check of each article belongs to each author. In case, there is any lawsuit about copyright infringement. It is considered as the authors’ sole responsibility.
3. The article copyright belonging to the authors and The Far Eastern University are copyrighted legally. Republication must be received direct permission from the authors and The Far Eastern University in written form.
References
เนารุ่ง วิชาราช. (2562). การศึกษาความสัมพันธ์ของแหล่งข้อมูลขนาดใหญ่ และการจัดการข้อมูล ที่มีต่อความสำเร็จของธุรกิจ. วารสารวิชาการการจัดการเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและนวัตกรรม คณะเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศมหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏมหาสารคาม, 6(2), 38-46. https://ph02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/itm-journal/article/view/198805/157466
บุญชม ศรีสะอาด. (2560). การวิจัยเบื้องต้น. (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 10). สำนักพิมพ์สุวีริยาสาส์น.
พรศรี เหล่ารุจิสวัสดิ์ และ ถาวร สมบูรณ์สุวรรณ. (2568). ส่งเสริมการประยุกต์ใช้เครื่องมือ SWOT Analysis และ TOWS Matrix ในธุรกิจ SMEs เพื่อยกระดับประสิทธิผลในการบริหารจัดการได้อย่างไร?. วารสารมหาวิทยาลัยคริสเตียน, 31(3), 157–168. https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/CUTJ/article/view/279775/188794
รัตติกาล โสวะภาส, อโณทัย ดวงดารา, รพรชัย อุทยารักษ์, ทานตะวัน บุญเล็ก และ อนันต์ ธรรมชาลัย. (2563). การพัฒนาองค์การให้มีศักยภาพการทำงานสูง ในศตวรรษที่ 21. วารสารวไลยอลงกรณ์ปริทัศน์, 10(2), 229-239. https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/var/article/view/242292/165595
วัชรพจน์ ทรัพย์สงวนบุญ, เวทยา ใฝ่ใจดี และ ปรียากมล เอื้องอ้าย. (2563). การเปลี่ยนผ่านทางดิจิทัลเพื่อยกระดับความสามารถทางการแข่งขันองค์กร กรณีศึกษา ธุรกิจอาหารและเครื่องดื่ม. วารสารเกษตรศาสตร์ธุรกิจประยุกต์, 14(20), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.14456/kab.2020.2
วาสนา เลิศมะเลา และ เทพศักดิ์ บุณยรัตพันธุ์. (2561). การพัฒนาองค์การสู่ความเป็นเลิศของมหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏในเขตพื้นที่ภาคตะวันออกเฉียงเหนือ. วารสารรัฐศาสตร์และรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์, 9(2), 209-248. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/polscicmujournal/article/view/112710/118382
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Datta, K. (2020). Application of SWOT-TOWS matrix and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in the formulation of geoconservation and geotourism development strategies for Mama Bhagne Pahar: An important geomorphosite in West Bengal, India. Geoheritage, 12, 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00467-2
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Dyson, R. G. (2004). Strategic development and SWOT analysis at the University of Warwick. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 631–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00062-6
Gomes, C. F. (2020). Organizational performance management: Trends, challenges, and solutions. In Emerging topics in management studies (pp. 167–188). Coimbra University Press. https://doi.org/10.14195/978-989-26-1990-3. https://estudogeral.sib.uc.pt/handle/10316/94063
Grossi, G., Dobija, D., & Strzelczyk, W. (2020). The Impact of Competing Institutional Pressures and Logics on the Use of Performance Measurement in Hybrid Universities. Public Performance & Management Review, 43(4), 818–844. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2019.1684328 https://scispace.com/papers/the-impact-of-competing-institutional-pressures-and-logics-4isy9sgci6
Guthrie, J., Manes-Rossi, F., Orelli, RL., & Sforza, V. (2024). Performance management and measurement impacts on universities: (re)viewing the past, present and future. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 36(6), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-10-2023-0176
Harris, W. E., Langan, A. M., Barrett, N., Jack, K., Wibberley, C., & Hamshire, C. (2019). A case for using both direct and indirect benchmarking to compare university performance metrics. Studies in Higher Education, 44(11), 2281–2292. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1490893
Helms, M. M., & Nixon, J. (2010). Exploring SWOT analysis – where are we now?: A review of academic research from the last decade. Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 215–251. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554251011064837
Hill, T., & Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis: It's time for a product recall. Long Range Planning, 30(1), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(96)00095-7
Khan, M. S. U. (2024). Performance Measurement in the Digital Era: Review Literature at the Intersection of Management Accounting, Big Data Analytics and Emerging Technologies' Impact on Performance Evaluation. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), 11(8), 94-101. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.1108009
Khatri, V., & Brown, C. V., (2010). Designing data governance. Communications of the ACM, 53(1), 148–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/1629175.1629210
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
Mtau, T. T., & Rahul, N. A. (2024). Optimizing Business Performance through KPI Alignment: A Comprehensive Analysis of Key Performance Indicators and Strategic Objectives. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 14(1), 66–82.https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2024.141003
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Sari, T. D., Susilawati, N., Wahyudi, T., & Hayati, M. N. (2023). Mapping the Budget Plan Towards the Key Performance Indicators. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities. (pp. 1237-1244). Universitas Negeri Surabaya Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-008-4_132
Sarrico, C. S. (2022). Quality management, performance measurement and indicators in higher education institutions: between burden, inspiration and innovation. Quality in Higher Education, 28(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1951445
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Sage Publications. https://www.scribd.com/document/402367919/Institutions-and-Organizations-Ideas-Interests-and-Identities-pdf
Walsh, M. J., McAvoy, J., & Sammon, D. (2025). The Data Governance Journey in Practice: Insights from Case Study Research. Information Systems Management, 42(3), 471- 488. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2025.2477459 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/10580530.2025.2477459?needAccess=true
Weihrich, H. (1982). The TOWS matrix—A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0
