ISO 24523:2017 飲料水供給システムと廃水システムに関連するサービス活動—水道事業のベンチマークのためのガイドライン | ページ 6

3.1

aggregated performance indicator

performance indicator (3.13) at superior level, which represents one or more levels of detail

Note 1 to entry: A highly aggregated performance indicator gathers information at utility level with a low level of detail (e.g. operating costs of water supply per cubic metre of water delivered). Lower levels of aggregation require more detailed performance indicators (e.g. time commitment per metre of sewer cleaning). This applies also synonymously to data variables (3.8) .

Note 2 to entry: A synonymous term is"aggregation level". In this context, aggregation level means the consolidated status of a performance indicator or a data variable relating to the information about the benchmarking object (3.4) .

3.2

benchmark

single value representing an accepted reference value derived either from comparisons among participants or from literature, used for orientation

Note 1 to entry: The benchmark may be determined collaboratively or individually.

Note 2 to entry: By clustering (3.6) , different benchmarks can occur for different peer groups.

3.3

benchmarking

systematic process for the identification of, becoming acquainted with and for adoption of successful practices of benchmarking partners (3.5)

Note 1 to entry: Typically, benchmarking is a continual process.

Note 2 to entry: Benchmarking at process level means that the object of benchmarking is a process, e.g. operation of sewers, billing or material purchasing.

Note 3 to entry: Benchmarking at utility level means that the object of benchmarking is the water utility and the main tasks, e.g. drinking water and wastewater services.

3.4

benchmarking object

water utilities managed by a public or private entity, utility sectors, functions, processes, tasks, services or other products, which are the subject of benchmarking (3.3) and, with clear-cut interfaces, are dissociated from each other and from non-investigated objects

3.5

benchmarking partner

participant in a benchmarking (3.3) project

3.6

clustering

grouping of benchmarking objects (3.4) according to different kind of criteria [ context information (3.7) or explanatory factors (3.10) ] in order to create rather homogenous sets of peers

Note 1 to entry: For different performance indicators (3.13) , different clustering might be appropriate; by clustering, specific benchmarks can/will occur for each peer group.

Note 2 to entry: The result of clustering is a comparison of performance indicators less influenced by the clustering criteria.

3.7

context information

information on characteristics and framework of drinking water and wastewater services

3.8

data variable

technical or economic parameter for the description of benchmarking objects (3.4) as basis for the calculation of performance indicators (3.13)

Note 1 to entry: The basis for resilient performance indicators is a clear definition of the parameters within a structured data model taking into account the data confidence (e.g. reliability, accuracy).

3.9

deviation from benchmark

result of the comparison of performance indicators (3.13) , as the difference of an observed value, from the benchmark applied

Note 1 to entry: See Figure 1.

3.10

explanatory factor

reason for deviations of performance indicators (3.13) of various benchmarking partners (3.5)

Note 1 to entry: Explanatory factors can be differentiated into modifiable components (e.g. energy consumption) and non or only long-term modifiable components (e.g. water source). Non- or only long-term modifiable components result from the context information (3.7) of the water utilities. For the interpretation of performance indicator results, explanatory factors are essential. They can be derived from the context information. Under certain circumstances, a standardization is possible and sensible for the establishing of comparability, e.g. standardization of different depreciation rates.

3.11

improvement potential

deviation of a performance indicator (3.13) from the benchmark

Note 1 to entry: The deviation can be reduced through improvement actions.

3.12

performance category

classification of the general objectives of drinking water and wastewater services

Note 1 to entry: Main categories comprise reliability, quality, customer service, sustainability and economic efficiency.

Note 2 to entry: Assessment criteria can be grouped by performance categories.

3.13

performance indicator

parameter, or a value derived from parameters, which provides information about performance

Note 1 to entry: Performance indicators are typically expressed as ratios between variables. These ratios may be commensurate (e.g. %) or non-commensurate (e.g. $/m³).

Note 2 to entry: Performance indicators are means to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of a water utility in achieving its objectives.

3.14

performance indicator comparison

comparison of values of performance indicators (3.13) against values of the same indicator from other utilities, previous values of the same indicator or the benchmark

3.15

performance indicator system

controlled compilation of performance indicators (3.13) , which are related to each other either logically or mathematically and which, overall, are aimed at a common, superior objective or benchmarking object (3.4)

3.16

process

set of interrelated or interacting activities that use inputs to deliver an intended result

Note 1 to entry: In benchmarking (3.3) , organizational and technical processes and combinations of both of them are considered. A process within the meaning of benchmarking comprises a combination of one task with one plant/one object (e.g. operate sewer network, treat wastewater, treat water, provide domestic connection, further train staff, purchase material).

3.17

reference parameter

data variable (3.8) used in the denominator of a performance indicator (3.13)

Note 1 to entry: The reference parameter is aligned with the specific benchmarking object (3.4) described by the specific performance indicator [e.g. treated (waste) water quantity, influent loading, influent or connected inhabitants plus population equivalents].

Note 2 to entry: In case of benchmarking (3.3) of the whole drinking water or wastewater service, the denominator should represent one dimension of the system (e.g. number of service connections, total water main length, annual costs). This allows for comparisons through time, or between systems.