Search results

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the comparative analysis of the Balanced Scorecards of four higher education institutions and aims to define the general framework of the Balanced Scorecard for the higher education institution which concerns: the structure and elements of the Balanced Scorecard; development of the Balanced Scorecards on the different levels of the management system of the higher education institution; definition of the main functions of the Balanced Scorecard which it performs in the process of the strategic management of the German higher education institutions. Balanced Scorecard is analyzed as a strategic management system that translates a higher education institution’s strategy into a comprehensive set of performance measures that provides a framework for a strategic measurement and management system.

The comparative content analysis of the Balanced Scorecards of one Austrian and three German higher education institutions – Johanes Gutenberg University Mainz, Münster University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule Münster), Cologne University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule Köln), Montan University Leoben.

Using a comparative analysis of the Balanced Scorecards of four higher education institutions this paper argues that Balanced Scorecard provides a systemic view of the strategy of a higher education institution. It ensures a full complex framework for implementation and controlling of the strategy and sets a basis for further learning in the process of the strategic management of the higher education institution according to the scheme “plan-do-check-act”.

This paper provides a basis for the substantial further work on the development of the general framework of the Balanced Scorecard for the higher education institution.

The framework presented in this paper can be used as the basis for the development of general framework of the Balanced Scorecard of the higher education institution.

The framework presented in this paper can be used as the basis for the development of general framework of the Balanced Scorecard of the higher education institution.

This paper indicates the particularities of the structure and elements of the Balanced Scorecard, its development in the different levels of the management system of the higher education institution.

This chapter considers the commitment of gender equality at universities and how it is expressed and measured via a gender equality scorecard. The Gender Equality Scorecard is seen as an accountability measure that seeks to build awareness of the magnitude of the problem (if it exists), interpret the meaning of the (in)equities, and move to action. It is regarded as a supportive mechanism to the development and implementation of a Gender Policy as articulated in The UWI Strategic Plan, 2012–2017. The development of a Scorecard is also seen as an example of collaborative governance in action that fosters engagement, commitment, and action across an institution. The proposed model draws upon the experiences of the Gender Equity Scorecards used by international development agencies and other higher educational institutions. The chapter proposes a framework and methodology using staff and student data from The University of the West Indies for the period 1990–1991 to 2011–2012 to build a Gender Scorecard. Finally, the Scorecard is seen as a tool to track performance related to the creation and enhancement of relevant structures and processes to institutionalize gender equality into the functions, operations, and governance of institutions.

This article looks at the alignment of performance management system with the strategy, structure, and organizational outcome in Canadian health care organizations. In this study, balanced scorecard is the framework adopted for assessing the health care organization's performance management system (PMS) and outcome. CEO and clinical unit managers were surveyed for their perceptions on their organization's strategy, autonomy structure, PMS, and organizational performance. Path analysis was the methodology used in examining the relationship about the above organizational variables. The results indicate that patient satisfaction is the primary and most significant perspective of the depicted balanced scorecard in organizational performance. Patient satisfaction and research criteria, on the other hand, are the significant perspectives of a balanced scorecard in an organization's PMS, which are linked to strategy, autonomy structure, and organizational performance. Moreover, the results show that the strategy/structure links operated as suggested. Surprisingly, strategy on service innovation has a negative impact on the organizational outcome of patient satisfaction. Uncertainty from continuous development and organizational change in pursuing service innovation and cost-cutting measures in response to fiscal constraints are plausible explanations of the adverse impact reported.

Models of value creation that have been proposed for supporting value-based management are described and analyzed, including the Balanced Scorecard, the Baldrige Quality Award Criteria, the Deming Management Method, the Service-Profit Chain, and the Skandia Intellectual Capital Model. These models are compared, their potential for guiding the identification of value drivers and performance measures for value-based management is assessed, and management issues that must be addressed if such models are to contribute to long-run value creation are explored. These issues include causally linking value drivers to each other and to financial outcomes, the extent to which the models take a dynamic, or whole-system, view of value creation, and whether multiple value drivers should be explicitly weighted and combined to form a “value index.” Finally, the substantial body of research evidence linking intangible value drivers to financial outcomes is reviewed, and some directions for further research are offered.

Technological advances and increasing competition are forcing organisations to monitor their performance ever more closely. The concept of the balanced scorecard offers a systematic and coherent method of performance measurement that in particular concentrates on assessing present performance in the light of an organisation’s strategy and takes into account the importance of the various policy aspects. In this paper we study the extent to which the concept contributes to the desired improvement of performance. To this end, we examine the motives for adopting the concept and the decision-making process around this adoption. We study the functioning of the balanced scorecard as a means to control performance, assuming that its functioning is linked to an organisation’s problems and is influenced by other control instruments used. This is why we have done case research.

Value-based management and the balanced scorecard are two of the most distinguished management concepts of the past decades. The main criticism levelled at value-based management is that it is rarely applied in business practice. By contrast, the balanced scorecard is mainly criticized for its insufficient integration into corporate strategy. The two concepts are occasionally described as competing business philosophies in management theory. This chapter offers an integrative view of value-based management and the balanced scorecard. The resulting ‘value-based scorecard’ incorporates the value-based business philosophy while creating a link between the scorecard and the ‘value–added’ corporate strategy. This minimizes a multitude of other critical aspects of both concepts. In light of this, it is recommended that both management theory and business practice further interpret or use the value-based scorecard presented in this study as a tool for value-based management.

This study explores how balanced scorecard format and reputation from environmental performances interact to influence performance evaluations.

Two general options exist for inserting environmental measures into a scorecard: embedded among the four traditional perspectives or grouped in a fifth perspective. Prior balanced scorecard research also assumes negative past environmental performances. In such settings, and when low management communication levels exist on the importance of environmental strategic objectives (a common practitioner scenario), environmental measures receive less decision weight when they are grouped in a fifth scorecard perspective. However, a positive environmental reputation would generate loss aversion concerns with reputation, leading to more decision weight given to environmental measures. Participants (N=138) evaluated performances with scorecards in an experimental design that manipulates scorecard format (four, five-perspectives) and past environmental performance operationalizing reputation (positive, negative).

The environmental reputation valence’s impact is more (less) pronounced when environmental measures are grouped (embedded) in a fifth perspective (among the four traditional perspectives), when the environmental feature of the measures is more (less) salient.

Findings provide the literature with original empirical results that support the popular, but often anecdotal, position of advocating a fifth perspective for environmental measures to help emphasize and promote environmental stewardship within an entity when common low management communication levels exist. Specifically, when positive past environmental performances exist, entities may choose to group environmental performance measures together in a fifth scorecard perspective without risking those measures receiving the discounted decision weight indicated in prior studies.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on one strategy known as “The Balanced Scorecard”, discussing the growing importance of balanced scorecard performance systems, exploring issues that organizations face in building and implementing scorecard systems, and sharing lessons learned from Australian organizations that have taken the balanced scorecard journey.

The approach taken is the case study methodology to depict the real world examples of organisations that have confidence in the “Balanced scorecard performance system“ so that other organisations can follow suit.

The paper concludes that the balanced scorecard approach may require some substantial changes in culture within the organization.. The balanced scorecard requires understanding, commitment and support from the very top of the business down. The balanced scorecard will evolve. As culture changes and develops to accept the new approach and members of the organisation mature within the new culture, the organisation will find new things to measure, new goals in different areas, to make the balanced scorecard even more balanced and effective in supporting a living, growing, viable organisation. Different organisations have quite different needs, market areas, people, products and services, and will end up with significantly different balanced scorecards.

The outcomes were based on two multinational corporations and may differ with small and medium enterprises.

The balanced scorecard is balanced in another dimension – not just a balance of measures of essential areas of the business, but also a balance of goals versus accountability. If people do not accept accountability for achievement of the balanced measures and goals of the balanced scorecard, there is no balanced scorecard. The people of the organisation are the key to the success of the balanced scorecard system.

The paper specifically looks at the implementation of the “Balanced Score Card Performance Management System” in Australian corporations.

Traditional performance measurement models and frameworks fail to take into account the intricacies and specificity of service businesses. The important characteristics of services, role of employees and partners, important of measures and concurrent production and delivery need to be incorporated into the framework. This paper seeks to address these issues.

The research followed a case‐based methodology using semi‐structured interviews. Literature review and case‐based methodology led to the conception of initial deployment framework.

Existing scorecards do not emphasize the deployment aspects of the scorecard and overlook trade‐offs and benchmarking decisions.

The scorecard provides guidance for successful deployment. The framework incorporates the importance of service innovation and role of employees and partners into the scorecard. Relative decision trade off and benchmarking are an integral part of the deployment process.

The two founding blocks of the scorecard are value maximization theory proposition and Six Sigma methodology. The service scorecard supports stakeholders that drive business performance thus ensuring accountability, innovation and collaboration. The scorecard offers a set of measures that builds upon existing measures.

The purpose of this paper is to question whether the balanced scorecard provides an appropriate control mechanism for management control of knowledge workers.

A case study approach is taken to explore the way in which management control of employees engaged in research and development is undertaken.

The key finding of this work is that the balanced scorecard is not in itself a useful approach to management control of knowledge workers but provides an important mechanism for ensuring that there is alignment between the strategic objectives of an organisation and the work being undertaken.

The inductive approach taken in a single-company case study has provided a rich data set for exploratory research, however, this research design limits the generalisability of the findings.

The work provides insights into how the balanced scorecard can be used in knowledge-worker environments.

The balanced scorecard is often reported as a tool that allows organisations to cascade strategic priorities down to the level of the individual though the use of measures. This research provides an alternative explanation of how the balanced scorecard can support knowledge worker control.