A Balanced Scorecard with 6 Perspectives

A 6-perspective BSC?
Richard
I think what you have developed is a Performance Prism, which is basically a BSC with stakeholder measures - good luck - it should work well

A 6-perspective BSC is OK!
Midas Sekgabo, Member
Hi Dawei, I tried to resort to the dictionary meaning of "perspective" and find it not very helpful.
In their book, "Translating Strategy into Action - the BSC", Kaplan and Norton indicate that:
"...the four perspectives should be considered a template, not a strait jacket. No mathematical theorem exist that four perspectives are both necessary and sufficient..."
This has left us in a compromising position as we now have to individually define the proper perspectives, hence the point as raised by Richard. Test the new perspectives for causal relationship with the rest and if you have alignment - you have another day. Thought provoking though.

A 6-perspective Balanced Scorecard is OK... But
Paul Maguire, Member
Dawei, my first reflection is that in implementing the Balanced Scorecard, we should develop a structure that has meaning and understanding amongst the management team. In other words, if this makes sense, go with it. Gain experience with it in the organization and then adjust it as the organization begins to make it work for them.
With that said, and not knowing the linkage between your perspectives, it seems to me that the “vendor” perspective is an aspect (theme? objective?) within the internal perspective (e.g., “innovative partnerships”, “effective channel strategy”, etc.) whereas the social-regulatory is more of a lens that the organization should consider in developing strategies and tactics against – either to take advantage or to overcome challenges that the organization finds itself in.
See the PESTEL framework as an analysis tool. Best of luck!