The HPO Framework was developed after a two-phased research project to examine the determinant factors of sustainable high performance. It consisted of a descriptive literature review (Phase 1) and an empirical study in the form of a worldwide implemented questionnaire (Phase 2). Phase 1 started with collecting the studies on high performance and excellence that were to be included in the literature review. The criteria used were:

1.  The study was aimed specifically at identifying HPO factors or best practices.
2. The study consisted of either a survey with a sufficient large number of respondents, allowing generalization of the results, or in-depth case studies of several companies, which meant the results were valid for more than one organization.
3. The study employed triangulation by using more than one research method.
4. The study included written documentation containing an account and justification of the research method, research approach and selection of the research population, a well-described analysis, and retraceable results and conclusions allowing assessment of the quality of the research method.

The literature review covered 290 studies which satisfied one or more of the four criteria. These studies formed the basis for identifying the potential HPO characteristics, which were required for developing the questionnaire in Phase 2. The studies were put in several study categories depending on the rigor with which the study had been conducted (e.g. from purely scientific to ‘based on my experience’). The identification process of the HPO characteristics consisted of a succession of steps. First, elements were extracted from each of the publications that the authors themselves regarded as essential for high performance. These elements were then entered in a matrix. Because different authors used different terminologies in their publications, similar elements were placed in groups under a factor and each group – later to be named ‘characteristic’ – was given an appropriate description. Subsequently, a matrix was constructed for each factor listing a number of characteristics. A total of 189 characteristics were identified. After that, the ‘weighted importance’, i.e. the number of times a characteristic occurred in the individual study categories, was calculated for each of the characteristics. Finally, the characteristics with a weighted importance of at least 9 percent were
designated characteristics that potentially make up an HPO. A cut-off percentage of 9 percent was chosen as there was a natural gap around this percentage: several characteristics scored considerably below 9 percent while the next closest scoring characteristics scored considerably higher than 9 percent. The cut-off resulted in a list of 53 potential HPO characteristics. The research in Phase 1 was partly replicated by Cranfield University, which confirmed the conclusion.

In Phase 2 of the HPO research the 53 potential HPO characteristics were included in a questionnaire which was presented to managers and employees during lectures and workshops all over the world. The respondents of the questionnaire – originating from profit, non-profit and governmental organizations from 50 countries –were asked to grade how well their organization performed on the various HPO characteristics on a scale of 1 (very poor) to 10 (excellent) and also how their organizational results were, compared to those of peer groups. The questionnaire yielded 2,515 responses. With a statistical analysis, 35 characteristics with both a significant and a strong correlation with organizational performance were extracted and identified as the HPO characteristics. The statistical analysis also revealed that these 35 characteristics could be categorized into five factors, the HPO factors. These are described in the section 2.2 of ‘What Makes A High Performance Organization’. The HPO research showed that there is a direct and positive relationship between the five HPO factors and competitive performance: the higher the scores on the HPO factors (HPO scores), the better the results of the organization, and the lower the HPO scores the lower the competitive performance. The research also showed that all HPO factors need to have equal scores. If for instance four HPO factors score an 8 (out of 10) and one factor a 5, the organization will not be able to function as an HPO because it is out of balance. An easy way to visualize this is to imagine a child’s propeller (see figure). When exposed to the wind, it spins around at a constant speed. However, if one of the strings breaks, the propeller will no longer turn around smoothly and will eventually break down. It illustrates that an organization should distribute its attention evenly across the five HPO factors to make sure none of these will be ‘broken’ and hold back the organization. Working on just one HPO factor, or only a few characteristics, without paying attention to the other HPO factors or characteristics in due course, will not help the organization in the long run.