|
|
Balanced Scorecard |
|
Clarifying and communicating vision and strategy into action. Explanation of Balanced Scorecard of Kaplan and Norton. ('92) |
History of the Balanced ScorecardIn 1992, an article by Robert Kaplan and David Norton entitled "The Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive Performance" in the Harvard Business Review caused a lot of attention for their method, and led to their business bestseller, "The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action", published in 1996.
The financial performance of an organization is essential for its success. Even non-profit organizations must deal in a sensible way with funds they receive. However, a pure financial approach for managing organizations suffers from two drawbacks:
The 4 perspectives of the Balanced ScorecardThe Balanced Scorecard method of Kaplan and Norton is a strategic approach, and performance management system, that enables organizations to translate a company's vision and strategy into implementation, working from 4 perspectives:
This allows the monitoring of present performance, but the method also
tries to capture information about how well the organization is positioned
to perform in the future. Benefits of the Balanced ScorecardKaplan and Norton cite the following benefits of the usage of the Balanced Scorecard:
1. The Financial PerspectiveKaplan and Norton do not disregard the traditional need for financial data. Timely and accurate funding data will always be a priority, and managers will make sure to provide it. In fact, there is often more than sufficient handling and processing of financial data. With the implementation of a corporate database, it is hoped that more of the processing can be centralized and automated. But the point is that the current emphasis on financial issues leads to an unbalanced situation with regard to other perspectives. There is perhaps a need to include additional financial related data, such as risk assessment and cost-benefit data, in this category.
2. The customer perspectiveRecent management philosophy has shown an increasing realization of the importance of customer focus and customer satisfaction in any company. These are called leading indicators: if customers are not satisfied, they will eventually find other suppliers that will meet their needs. Poor performance from this perspective is thus a leading indicator of future decline. Even though the current financial picture may seem (still) good. In developing metrics for satisfaction, customers should be analyzed. In terms of kinds of customers, and of the kinds of processes for which we are providing a product or service to those customer groups.
3. The Business Process perspective
4. Learning and Growth perspectiveThis perspective includes employee training and corporate cultural attitudes related to both individual and corporate self-improvement. In a knowledge worker organization, people are the main resource. In the current climate of rapid technological change, it is becoming necessary for knowledge workers to learn continuously. Government agencies often find themselves unable to hire new technical workers and at the same time is showing a decline in training of existing employees. Kaplan and Norton emphasize that 'learning' is something more than 'training'; it also includes things like mentors and tutors within the organization, as well as that ease of communication among workers that allows them to readily get help on a problem when it is needed. It also includes technological tools such as an Intranet.
The integration of these four perspectives into a one graphical appealing picture, has made the Balanced Scorecard method very successful as a management methodology.
Objectives, Measures, Targets, and InitiativesFor each perspective of the Balanced Scorecard four things are monitored (scored):
Double-Loop FeedbackIn traditional industrial activity, "quality control" and "zero defects"
were important words. To shield the customer from receiving poor quality products,
aggressive efforts were focused on inspection and testing at the end of the
production line. A problem with these approaches - as pointed out by Deming
- is that the true causes of defects could never be identified, and there
would always be inefficiencies because products with a defect are rejected.
Deming understood that variation is created at every step in a production
process, and the causes of variation need to be identified and repaired. If
this can be done, then there is a way to reduce the defects and improve product
quality indefinitely. To establish such a process, Deming emphasized that
all business processes should be part of a system, with feedback loops. The
feedback data should be examined by managers to determine the causes of variation,
and what are the processes with significant problems. Then they can focus
their attention on repairing that subset of processes.
Outcome MetricsYou can't improve what you can't measure. Therefore metrics must be developed
based on the priorities of the strategic plan, which provides the key business
drivers and criteria for metrics managers most desire to watch. Processes
are then designed to collect information relevant to these metrics and reduce
it to numerical form for storage, display, and analysis. Decision makers examine
the outcomes of various measured processes and strategies and track the results
to guide the company and provide feedback.
Management by FactThe goal of measuring is to permit managers to see their company more clearly
- from many perspectives - and hence to make wiser long-term decisions. A
1997 booklet on the Baldrige Criteria
summarizes this concept of fact-based management: Cautionary note on using the Balanced ScorecardYou tend to get what you measure. People will work to achieve the explicit
targets which are set. For example, emphasizing traditional financial measures
may encourage short-term thinking. The
Core Group Theory by Kleiner
provides further clues on the mechanisms behind this. Kaplan and Norton recognize
this, and urge for a more balanced set of measurements. But still, people
will work to achieve their scorecard goals, and may ignore important things
which have no place on their scorecard. Evolution of the Balanced ScorecardIn 2002, Cobbold and Lawrie developed a classification of Balanced Scorecard designs based upon the intended method of use within an organization. They describe how the Balanced Scorecard can be used to support three distinct management activities, the first two being management control and strategic control. They assert that due to differences in the performance data requirements of these applications, planned use should influence the type of BSC design adopted. Later that year the same authors reviewed the evolution of the Balanced Scorecard as shown through the use of Strategy Maps as a strategic management tool, recognizing three distinct generations of Balanced Scorecard design.
Book: Robert S.
Kaplan, David P. Norton - The BSC: Translating Strategy into Action -
Book: Paul R. Niven
- BSC Step-by-Step: Maximizing Performance and Maintaining Results -
Book: Paul R. Niven
- BSC Step-by-Step for Government and Nonprofit Agencies -
Balanced Scorecard Forum
Balanced Scorecard Special Interest Group
Balanced Scorecard Education & Events
Add a link to this pageCopy and paste this code to your web page:
Compare with the Balanced Scorecard: Strategy Maps | Office of Strategy Management | Performance Prism | CSFs and KPIs | Hoshin Kanri - Policy Deployment | Intangible Assets Monitor | People CMM | MSP | Beyond Budgeting | Strategy Dynamics | IC Rating | TQM | Value Profit Chain | Scientific Management
Return to Management Hub: Change & Organization | Communication & Skills | Decision-making & Valuation | Finance & Investing | Human Resources | Knowledge & Intangibles | Strategy
|
12manage for:
|
|
|
|
|
Enter a new Tip, Idea, Comment or Question |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Alan (UK) | BSC best practice | "6. Don't over-measure (Use no more than 3 to 4 Critical Success Factors per strategic objective or goal; use only a manageable number of measures per Critical Success Factor)" | |
| § Paula (Italy) | Ownership & Accountability | "7. Every objective should be assigned to a specific member of the management team, who “owns” this objective, indicator or measure." | |
| § David (Iceland) | KISS | "8. Keep It Simple and Stupid. Simplicity is crucial, especially in the first period. Don't assume all employees will learn in one meeting what cost you six months to prepare with your consultant :-) Allow everybody to see the big picture first. So start very simple and let it grow slowly." | |
| § Mark Pym (UK) | My Balanced Scorecard advice | "8. Ensure that any measures built into a BSC are aligned and that their impact/effect on other measures is closely considered and thought through. 9. Get underneath the surface of the measures and ask youself what behaviour will these measures really drive. Discuss this with Focus Groups. 10. Ensure your underlying policies and procedures support and promote the measures, especially your reward, benefits and HR policies." |
|
| § Randy Retherford (USA) | Provide Support, Money, and People | "11. Leaders must provide the necessary support, money, and people to successfully implement a Balanced Scorecard process/system. Otherwise, this will become just another under-powered implementation, that will eventually be cancelled due to lack of seeing any real benefits." | |
| § Elia (Namibia) | BSC | "Perfect" |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Francois Aye (Switzerland) | Data generation | "By experience, financial / cost-related data are the easiest to generate ... although they are seldom readily available. Qualitative type of data - e.g. measuring customer satisfaction, process effectiveness, employee competencies or engagement - are even more complex and costly to generate for they frequently require to develop specific measurement tools. Such performance indicators however are critical to collect because they are lead indicators (financial ones generally are lag indicators. ie watching the past) and they provide input from the perspective of a wide variety of stakeholders. Considering one to two years to develop such indicators and their tools, plus two years to start to have an historical background and allow some fine-tuning of indicators/tools, it takes some three to five years to obtain something meaningful ! Top teams not ready to invest four years ahead should not start such a process - but their business will not be strategically driven." |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Editor (NL) | Add date field in comments? | "Thanks for this suggestion Eric. Note though that many / most of the comments and reactions on 12manage have a long term perspective and are seen by thousands of people. The precise date is not very relevant and will distract from the topic. Any reactions to comments will be useful not only for the person who created the comment, but also for anybody else in the world with an interest in the topic at hand. Thanks anyway for this suggestion!" |
Enter your Reaction. |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § lancy cyril dsouza (UAE) | Balanced Score Card | "Hi Can you share some of your experiences" | |
| § Amey Deshpande (India) | Implementation aspects of BSC | "I am doing my research on the Performance measurement systems with a focus on balanced scorecard. part of it necessitates doing it for some case study companies. could u share some of your thoughts on the implementation aspects." |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Danish Noor (USA) | Change Implementation | "Suggest to use the technique of "change implementation", the strategy based on Unfreeze, Intervene and Refreeze. You have to unfreeze the existing classical business process, plan for intervention, and Refreeze after implementation and validation. You must understand thoroughly the Ends that are required to achieve, the existing organizational and business structure and Means at your disposal. A good understanding and knowledge of what you are trying to ACHIEVE, what your are trying to AVOID, what you are trying to ELIMINATE & what you are trying to PRESERVE will aid in the intervention process." | |
| § Bernard Chakeredza (Zimbabwe) | Auditing Internal | "I am new to this measure how does it fit in Internal Auditing" |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Jesper (Danmark) | BSC Implementation Steps | "Suggested Balanced Scorecard Implementation steps: 1. Preparation (Create Strategy, Key Goals, For each goal 3 CSFs) 2. Decide what to measure in each of the 4 perspectives (max 20 in total !) 3. Create Implementation Plan 4. Implement the BSC system 5. Publicise the results 6. Use the results to improve performance 7. Review, revise or fine tune the system." |
Enter your Reaction. |
| § Richard (UK) | A 6-perspective BSC? | "I think what you have developed is a Performance Prism, which a BSC with stakeholder measures - good luck - it should work well" |
Enter your Reaction. |
Enter your Reaction. |