Strategic Management Report: Balanced Scorecards

The current report is aimed at suggesting new implementation strategy of balanced scorecard to NOVATIS PM that is a traditional company and aims at making changes in strategic perspective to gain competitive advantage. The report has been divided into four sections. Firstly, the current literature on balanced scorecard is being synthesised to highlight current thinking on balanced scorecard. Moreover, the companies which are using balanced scorecard are highlighted as well. Secondly, the potential changes are detailed which are expected after implementation of balanced scorecard in NOVATIS PM. Followed by this, the implementation strategy has been suggested to the company by highlighting the core perspectives of balanced scorecard in context of given company. Finally, the potential risks are detailed and mitigation approaches are mentioned.

1.Synthesis of Literature

2.1 Balanced scorecard

The balanced scorecard is the frame work for managing performance strategically and it assists the organisations in measurement and management of key strategic objectives (Kaplan and Norton, 2001). Initially, the concept of balanced scorecard was brought by Robert Kaplan and David Norton in 1992. The main idea of initial balanced scorecard was based on designing strategic initiatives, setting targets and the evaluating performance in four perspectives. These perspectives encompass; financial perspective, customer perspective, internal process perspective and learning and growth perspective (Banker, Chang and Pizzini, 2004; Eilat, Golany and Shtub, 2008). The financial perspective is aimed at tracking the performance of financial objectives of the organisation helps measuring the value of shareholders. The customer perspective measures the gaols of organisation regarding market shares and also captures levels of customer satisfaction (Braam and Nijssen, 2004; Hill, Jones and Schilling, 2014). Likewise, the internal operational goals are being covered by internal process perspective and aspects of human capital, leadership, culture and other intangible drivers of success are evaluated through learning and growth perspective.

2.2 Changing Face of Balanced Scorecard

The concept of balanced scorecard has experienced substantial changes that it was initially regarded are balanced performance measurement tool and later in 1996 it was presented as a tool for turning strategy into action (Kaplan and Norton, 1996). Later on in 2008, the balanced scorecard has considered as significant tool that could help in linking strategy with operations of organisation. The four perspectives of balanced scorecard have also gone under changes and the recent version of balanced scorecard presented by Kaplan and Norton has encompassed principal components of learning and growth naming; human capital, information capital and organisation capital.

It has been highlighted by the critics that balanced scorecard approach is lacking few aspects which could keep the focus of organisation away from suppliers and environmental perspectives (Karathanos and Karathanos, 2005). Given this view, different organisations have adopted the approach of adding their own perspective as per their unique strategic needs, such as the StatoiHydro that is integrated Gas and Oil Company has supplemented the basic four perspectives with “health, environment and safety” perspective which was targeting its strategic requirements (Kaplan and Norton, 1998).

2.3 Core Benefits and Challenges of Balanced Scorecard

The balanced scorecard provides strategic approach of planning and building communication strategy. The model under of balanced scorecard can promote managers to think on cause and effect and then assists them in communication and execution of improved strategy (Arora, 2002). Likewise, it offers an opportunity to integrate management information with number of strategic objectives and also offer ways of effective reporting of performance within organisation (Bhagwat and Sharma, 2007). The balance scorecard assists the organisations to successfully align businesses and support units with strategy of organisation. The significance of alignment lies in the fact that strategic objectives can be achieved in timely manner with greater effectiveness (Epstein and Wisner, 2001). Finally, the business process can be integrated such that risks can be managed and operational activities can be carried out in better way.

Although the benefits of balanced scorecard are outweighing its drawbacks, yet there are few challenges that are needed to be considered while its implementation. The metrics could be poorly defined and vague which could cause trouble in understanding (Atkinson, 2006; Brander Brown and McDonnell, 1995). Likewise, the organisations can offer too much focus on internal operations and they can neglect external factors affecting performance of organisation. Finally, the organisations who lack effective process improvement strategy can face problems in diagnosis and addressing of causes behind poor strategy execution (Bieker, 2003).

2.4 Contemporary BSCs- Management not Measurement

At the time of launch, balanced scorecard was considered as a measurement tool and it has evolved into a tool responsible for strategic management. The balanced scorecard relies on four principles for managing strategic operations of the organisation (Gumbus and Lussier, 2006; Hitt, Ireland and Hoskisson, 2012). The four processes which can be introduced through balance scorecard include; translating the vision, communicating and linking, business planning and feedback and learning (Freeman, 2010). The first step allows the management to translate vision and mission into operational measures and objectives which serve as the means of achieving goals of an organisation. The second step of strategic management process pertains to communication of strategies in entire organisation and the purpose is to link strategy with the objectives of individuals and departments within organisation (Amaratunga et al., 2002; Ittner, Larcker and Meyer, 2003). The communication and linking process further achieves goal congruence by goal setting and integrating rewards with performance. Further the goals and performance oriented rewards are linked with the strategy of organisation. Furthermore, the process of business planning which is carried out through balanced scorecard holds significant importance as it integrates strategic planning with budgeting (Kaplan and Norton, 1995). The strategic planning is carried out to ensure the sufficiency of budget for supporting the strategy of organisation. Finally, the feedback and learning is substantial process of balanced scorecard which helps in evaluation of performance related to strategy.

2.5 Companies Using BSCs

The balanced scorecard is being implied by organisations worldwide and in all sectors of company including; health care, banking, energy, electronics, shipping and telecommunications (Anand, Sahay and Saha, 2005). The research conducted by Gartner group suggests that around 50% of large organisations in US have adopted balanced scorecard during 2000. Along with this, the figure has been stated upto 26% in Germany, Switzerland and Austria (Brewer and Speh, 2000). According to a report of Kaplan and Norton, the major organisations which have implied balanced scorecard are; Wells Fargo (banking industry), Philips Electronics, Thomson Reuters (Financial), Sunny brook Health Sciences Centre and Verizon (telecommunications) (Bremser and Barsky, 2004).

2.Business Strategy Considerations        

The pace of change is continuously accelerating and with emergence of new technology, the flexibility requirements of organisations are greater than ever (BurgeSmani and Wheelwright, 2004). Therefore, it is evident that organisations who lack agility and innovativeness may fall short to fulfil the requirements of clients and they may be considered as less preferable by the workforce. The same issue has been faced by NOVATIS PM, where lack of openness and innovativeness is making its difficult for the company to compete and to retain its workforce. The problem of brain drain is likely to occur and in order to prevent this, the company has considered to adopt balanced scorecard into their management system. The benefits of balanced scorecard can be reaped by NOVATIS PM through achieving support and attention of internal management during the implementation process and for motivation of employees during post implementation period.

3.1 Organisational Processes and Areas for implementing BSC

The NOVATIS PM needs to understand that mainly there are four areas of operations which can be linked through balanced scorecard including; finance, customers, internal business processes and learning and growth of company (Figge, Hahn, Schaltegger and Wagner, 2002).

3.2 Financial Requirements for new BSC

The NOVATIS PM, may adopt professional quality balanced scorecard which usually cost US $ 275 for normal pro version. The mentioned price is for 15 users who can rigorously use the software and in this manner the per user cost of $ 18 (Cebeci, 2009). In case of NOVATIS PM, there are 356, therefore, the application of per user cost indicates the total cost of $ 6400. The current financial requirements of installing the balanced scorecard are easily affordable by the company. Along with this, the cost of facilitator, cost of installing and testing the software and cost of training the employees will supplement the total cost as well (Chavan, 2009). Finally, the 2% of initial cost will be applied annually for maintenance and upgradation of balanced scorecard.

3.3 Skills Requirements

The implementation of balanced scorecard requires NOVATIS PM to develop the set of key performance indicators that should be applicable at organisational level. Likewise, the analysis of operations of organisation is necessary to analyse the skills gap within workforce and to set the required training levels for skills enhancement. The strategy for measuring key performance indicators needed to be devised and procedures need to set for identification and mitigation of risk (Kim, Suh and Hwang, 2003). Moreover, the implementation team of NOVATIS PM needs to develop skills for analysing the data and then finding solution for problems associated with implementation of balanced scorecard (Davis and Albright, 2004). The skills for obtaining support from organisation wide departments and members is also crucial for defining the success of newly implemented balanced scorecard.  Similarly, the negotiation with customers, suppliers and other key stake holders is also the responsibility of implementation team and they should have the skills for communicating with people of different organisational areas with different levels of literacy and understanding (Kaplan and Norton, 2006). Therefore, by developing these key skills, the NOVATIS PM can successfully implement balanced scorecard into their system.

3.4 Change Areas for Implementing BSC

The implementation of balance scorecard will more likely require a different approach of leadership. More specifically, the transformational leader will be required to formulate and implement strategy fostering the visions of agility and innovativeness in new balanced scorecard of NOVATIS PM (Norreklit, H., 2000). Along with this, the current culture of the NOVATIS PM will also be affected and the more openness will be required for realization of new vision of the company. It has been highlighted by the scholars that changes in culture and leadership of the company are not easy to make and the conflict of interest could arise (Nørreklit, 2003; Libby, Salterio and Webb, 2004). Therefore, the new strategic considerations for balanced scorecard in NOVATIS PM, hold significant importance of open communication. The new strategy and vision are needed to be communicated in open and honest manner, so that trust of work force can be enhanced and change can be managed smoothly.

Likewise, the changes are needed to transfer production driven operations of organisation in customer driven practices for setting grounds of successful balanced scorecard strategy. Likewise, the NOVATIS PM needs to focus on value of its intangible assets (Möller and Schaltegger, 2005). The company needs to move from incremental change model to transformational change model with an aim of developing huge level of compliance with new strategy that will be implemented through balanced scorecard (Niven, 2011). The current strategic aspects of company will undergo a significant process of change and support from all units and members is crucial for reducing the levels of conflict.

3.New implementation Strategy

The implementation of balanced scorecard is carried out mainly by defining the metrics on dashboard which are usually comprised of four perspectives (Milis and Mercken, 2004). The metrics of balanced score strategy and their chosen key performance indicators can be seen in the table 1.

Table 1. Key performance indicators of balanced scorecard of NOVATIS PM

Finance

Customers

Internal Business Processes

Learning and Growth

  • Enhanced competitiveness
  • Improved cost control
  • Increased Net income
  • Enhanced customer satisfaction
  • Innovative products
  • Better market shares

 

  • Enhanced innovation
  • Improved working conditions
  • Operational management
  • Customer relationship management (CRM)

 

  • Leadership
  • Culture
  • Team work
  • Customer’s knowledge

 The selection of key performance indicators is based on the scenario of the company and assistance of literature has also been taken. It has been highlighted by the Kaplan and Norton that choosing too less of too many performance indicators can lead to failing strategy implementation through balanced scorecard (Maiga and Jacobs, 2003). Therefore, the way of successful implementation lies in optimal selection of key performance indicators. There should be greater level of flexibility in key performance indicators, so that adjustments could be made for achieving gaols in effective manner (Maltz, Shenhar and Reilly, 2003; Meyer, 2003).

Moreover, the framework of balanced scorecard can be seen in figure 1 mentioned below. The framework is indicating the vision holds core importance in the context of balanced scorecard and all of key perspectives are revolving around the core vision of the organisation (Töpfer, Lindstädt and Förster, 2002; Van Grembergen and Timmerman, 1997). The vision of NOVATIS PM is based on making the organisation fragile and innovative with an aim of improving effectiveness and ensuring retention of staff. In order to achieve this vision, the company needs to develop strategy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                       

 

Figure 1. NOVATIS PM’s framework of balanced scorecard

 

 

3.1Strategy Map of NOVATIS PM

Table 2. Strategy map

Perspectives

 

Customers

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Innovative products

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Enhanced customer satisfaction 

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Enhanced competitiveness	 

                                                                                              

Finance

Text Box:                                      Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Enhanced competitiveness

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Improved cost controlRectangle: Rounded Corners: Better market shares

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Increased net income

Internal business processes

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Customer relationship management 

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Project Management

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Enhanced innovation                            

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Improved working conditions

                                             

Learning and growth

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Customer’s knowledge

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Team work

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Leadership

Rectangle: Rounded Corners: Culture

4.2 Implementation stages and milestones for BSC

There are various stages of implementing a new strategy by adopting balanced scorecard.

Strategy clarification and planning for implementation: In the first step, the NOVATIS PM needs to clarify the impact of strategy on different aspects of organisation including people, processes, customers’ management, management of operations and approaches of performance measurement (Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 1997; Thompson and Strickland, 2001). In this aspect, the balanced scorecard of NOVATIS PM will likely have an impact on all areas of organisation. This step should not take more than a month and involvement of all key parties is crucial.

Formulating communication plan for strategy: The timely and open communication needed to be carried out with all internal stake holders of the NOVATIS PM (Ravi, Shankar and Tiwari, 2005). They should be communicated about the changes which will be fostered through implementation of new strategy. The communication should take place throughout the implementation period.

Integrating potential metrics and measurement criteria: The selection of right key performance indicators is necessary. The key performance indicators needed to be chosen at initial time, however, they should have flexibility and can be changed over time (Punniyamoorthy and Murali, 2008).

Determining change agents: The coalitions are needed to be developed and change agents are identified to maintain higher level of support for implementation of balanced scorecard.

Redesigning processes: The processes are set for redesigning with an aim of aligning them with the strategy (Wheelen and Hunger, 2011; Pandey, 2005). The current processes of NOVATIS PM are having lower flexibility and they need modification for realising the vision to establish innovative organisation.

Aligning leadership approaches and culture with strategy: In order to implement any new strategy the huge support from leaders and culture is required (Ward and Peppard, 2016). The NOVATIS PM require transformational style of leaders with an aim of motivating the members of organisation to support new strategy (Wongrassamee, Simmons and Gardiner, 2003). Along with this, the transformational leader can inspire people to lower the level of conflict of interest. The change in leadership is crucial at early stages to support the process of balanced scorecard implementation. Along with this, the open culture is required to support strategy of innovation and changes in culture and leadership will work side by side.

Evaluating strategy implementation: The evaluation process should be carried out throughout the implementation process of balanced scorecard (Zelman, Pink and Matthias, 2003).

Taking corrective actions: Finally, the important step in implementation of new balanced scorecard is taking corrective actions. This last step is mainly aligned with the evaluation process.

Table 3. Milestones of BSC

Activities

Milestones

2 months

6 months

1 year

Finance perspective

 

 

 

Enhanced competitiveness

Up to 2%

Up to 5%

Up to 10%

Improved cost control

4%

10%

20%

Increased Net income

10%

25%

40%

Customer perspective

 

 

 

Enhanced customer satisfaction

satisfied

satisfied

Highly satisfied

Innovative products

15%

35%

75%

Better market shares

10%

25%

40%

Internal business processes

 

 

 

Enhanced innovation

15%

35%

75%

Improved working conditions

Slightly good

better

favorable

Operational management

Slightly good

better

favorable

Customer relationship management (CRM)

Slightly good

favorable

favorable

Learning and growth

 

 

 

Leadership

satisfactory

transformational

charismatic

Culture

Open

Highly flexible

creative

Team work

Supervised teams

Self-managed

innovative

Customer’s knowledge

20%

50%

90%

4.Risk Management

The implementation of new approach can be exposed to fewer risks which need effective mitigation approaches to be adopted in timely manner. The potential risks to balanced scorecard of NOVATIS PM and its likely mitigation strategies are detailed in table 1 below.

Table 4. Risk register for mitigating risks in NOVATIS PM balanced scorecard

Risk ID

Risk

Probability

P=1-3

Impact/ severity

 S=1-3

Risk

score

P×S

Mitigation action

CMR

Change management risk (Change can be resisted by members of organisation)

3

3

9

  • Engaging key stakeholders and leaders to develop capabilities for implementing balanced scorecard
  • Engaging all layers of organisation through a transformation process ranging from planning of strategy to execution of strategy
  • Cascading change throughout organisation
  • Obtaining employee buy-in and agreement so that they can accept change with greater ease
  • Creating sense of ownership among organizational members to enhance their understanding of issues during implementation of balanced scorecard and letting them find solution for the issues
  • The need of bringing change through implementation of balanced scorecard need to be communicated clearly
  • Supporting change process through cultural and leadership sources
  • The change programs will be organised to address issues of stakeholders
  •  

CIR

Conflict of interest risk (Conflicting interest can arise from involved parties)

2

3

6

  • Open communication will be carried out with all key stake holders of the balanced scorecard to reduce their conflicting views
  • Accommodating behavior will be adopted by the leaders of NOVATIS PM in order to obtain higher cooperation from all members of organisation
  • The leaders will act as partners to clarify scenarios of implementation to stake holders for reducing agency issues
  • Extensive negotiation will be carried out to convey the cause of implementing new strategy and motivating members of organisation to make the new implementation their common interest

FR

Financial risk (Risk to arrange for necessary finance for supporting implementation of balanced scorecard)

2

2

4

  • Investments will be secured
  • Cost minimisation efforts will be carried out  
  • The diversification can be carried out by maintaining huge number of investments
  • The saving accounts can be maintained by NOVATIS PM to reduce any potential financial risk
  • Researching the market and gaining detailed information about balanced scorecard to obtain most reasonable package

AR

Alignment risk (Lack of support from key stakeholders and all units of organisation can offer challenge for success of new strategy implementation)

2

3

6

  • The cascading approach will be followed to align all the levels of organisation to gain greater support for implementation of new strategy through balanced scorecard
  • To communicate openly with stakeholder to gain their huge contribution in implementation process
  • To follow transformational style of leadership with an aim of motivating employees and other key parties to offer their contribution in implementation process
  • To convey the fruits of implementing balanced scorecard to stakeholders in the form of innovative and agility of organisation so that they can support implementation process
  • To arrange awareness programs for employees and enabling them to understand the long run benefits of balanced scorecard

TR

Technology risk (Technology and key performance indicators can become unable to offer competitive advantage)

2

3

6

  • Technology experts can be hired as facilitators during the process of balanced scorecard implementation
  • Flexibility can be maintained in key performance indicators and corrective actions can be taken immediately

SR

Sustainability Risk (the success of balanced scorecard can be difficult to maintain in long run)

2

2

4

  • To monitor performance of new strategy on continual basis
  • To readily take corrective actions as and when required

 

5.Conclusion

The study has maintained its focus on implementation of balanced scorecard in NOVATIS PM. The balanced scorecard is considered as an important tool for execution of new business strategy and it could offer substantial assistance to the underlying organisation in adoption of innovative business model. The balanced scorecard is mainly based on four perspectives including; customers, finance, internal processes and learning and growth. The cause and effect relationship is maintained in strategy map and different steps are taken for implementation of strategy. Along with this, mitigation approach for managing risks is crucial for success of implementation of new balanced scorecard strategy.

 

 

References

Amaratunga, D., Haigh, R., Sarshar, M. and Baldry, D., 2002. Application of the balanced score-card concept to develop a conceptual framework to measure facilities management performance within NHS facilities.International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance15(4), pp.141-151.

Anand, M., Sahay, B.S. and Saha, S., 2005. Balanced scorecard in Indian companies. Vikalpa30(2), pp.11-25.

Arora, R., 2002. Implementing KM-a balanced score card approach. Journal of Knowledge Management6(3), pp.240-249.

Atkinson, H., 2006. Strategy implementation: a role for the balanced scorecard?. Management Decision44(10), pp.1441-1460.

Bhagwat, R. and Sharma, M.K., 2007. Performance measurement of supply chain management: A balanced scorecard approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering53(1), pp.43-62.

Banker, R.D., Chang, H. and Pizzini, M.J., 2004. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of performance measures linked to strategy. The Accounting Review79(1), pp.1-23.

Braam, G.J. and Nijssen, E.J., 2004. Performance effects of using the balanced scorecard: a note on the Dutch experience. Long Range planning37(4), pp.335-349.

Brander Brown, J. and McDonnell, B., 1995. The balanced score-card: short-term guest or long-term resident?. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management7(2/3), pp.7-11.

Bieker, T., 2003. Sustainability management with the Balanced Scorecard. Proceedings of 5th international summer academy on technology studies, pp.17-34.

Bremser, W.G. and Barsky, N.P., 2004. Utilizing the balanced scorecard for R&D performance measurement. R&D Management34(3), pp.229-238.

Brewer, P.C. and Speh, T.W., 2000. Using the balanced scorecard to measure supply chain performance. Journal of Business Logistics21(1), p.75.

BurgeSmani, R.A. and Wheelwright, S.C., 2004. Strategic management of technology and innovation. READING1(1).

Cebeci, U., 2009. Fuzzy AHP-based decision support system for selecting ERP systems in textile industry by using balanced scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications36(5), pp.8900-8909.

Chavan, M., 2009. The balanced scorecard: a new challenge. Journal of Management Development28(5), pp.393-406.

Davis, S. and Albright, T., 2004. An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard implementation on financial performance. Management Accounting Research15(2), pp.135-153.

Eilat, H., Golany, B. and Shtub, A., 2008. R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach. Omega36(5), pp.895-912.

Epstein, M.J. and Wisner, P.S., 2001. Using a balanced scorecard to implement sustainability. Environmental Quality Management11(2), pp.1-10.

Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S. and Wagner, M., 2002. The sustainability balanced scorecard–linking sustainability management to business strategy. Business strategy and the Environment11(5), pp.269-284.

Freeman, R.E., 2010. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.

Gumbus, A. and Lussier, R.N., 2006. Entrepreneurs use a balanced scorecard to translate strategy into performance measures. Journal of Small Business Management44(3), pp.407-425.

Hill, C.W., Jones, G.R. and Schilling, M.A., 2014. Strategic management: theory: an integrated approach. Cengage Learning.

Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D. and Hoskisson, R.E., 2012. Strategic management cases: competitiveness and globalization. Cengage Learning.

Ittner, C.D., Larcker, D.F. and Meyer, M.W., 2003. Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: Evidence from a balanced scorecard. The Accounting Review78(3), pp.725-758.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 1995. Putting the balanced scorecard to work. Performance Measurement, Management, and Appraisal Sourcebook66, p.17511.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 1996. Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 1998. Putting the balanced scorecard to work. The Economic Impact of Knowledge, pp.315-324.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 2001. The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business Press.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., 2006. Alignment: Using the balanced scorecard to create corporate synergies. Harvard Business Press.

Karathanos, D. and Karathanos, P., 2005. Applying the balanced scorecard to education. Journal of Education for Business80(4), pp.222-230.

Kim, J., Suh, E. and Hwang, H., 2003. A model for evaluating the effectiveness of CRM using the balanced scorecard. Journal of Interactive Marketing17(2), pp.5-19.

Libby, T., Salterio, S.E. and Webb, A., 2004. The balanced scorecard: The effects of assurance and process accountability on managerial judgment. The Accounting Review79(4), pp.1075-1094.

Maiga, A.S. and Jacobs, F.A., 2003. Balanced scorecard, activity-based costing and company performance: an empirical analysis. Journal of Managerial Issues, pp.283-301.

Maltz, A.C., Shenhar, A.J. and Reilly, R.R., 2003. Beyond the balanced scorecard:: Refining the search for organizational success measures. Long Range Planning36(2), pp.187-204.

Meyer, M.W., 2003. Rethinking performance measurement: Beyond the balanced scorecard. Cambridge University Press.

Milis, K. and Mercken, R., 2004. The use of the balanced scorecard for the evaluation of information and communication technology projects .International Journal of Project Management22(2), pp.87-97.

Möller, A. and Schaltegger, S., 2005. The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard as a Framework for Eco?efficiency Analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology9(4), pp.73-83.

Niven, P.R., 2011. Balanced scorecard: Step-by-step for government and nonprofit agencies. John Wiley & Sons.

Norreklit, H., 2000. The balance on the balanced scorecard a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Management Accounting Research,11(1), pp.65-88.

Nørreklit, H., 2003. The balanced scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the balanced scorecard. Accounting, Organizations and Society28(6), pp.591-619.

Pandey, I.M., 2005. Balanced scorecard: myth and reality. Vikalpa30(1), pp.51-66.

Punniyamoorthy, M. and Murali, R., 2008. Balanced score for the balanced scorecard: a benchmarking tool. Benchmarking: An International Journal15(4), pp.420-443.

Ravi, V., Shankar, R. and Tiwari, M.K., 2005. Analyzing alternatives in reverse logistics for end-of-life computers: ANP and balanced scorecard approach. Computers & industrial engineering48(2), pp.327-356.

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, pp.509-533.

Thompson, A.A. and Strickland, A.J., 2001. Strategic management: Concepts and cases.

Töpfer, A., Lindstädt, G. and Förster, K., 2002. Balanced Score Card.Controlling14(2), pp.79-84.

Van Grembergen, W. and Timmerman, D., 1997. Monitoring the IT process through the balanced score card (No. 1997011).

Ward, J. and Peppard, J., 2016. The Strategic Management of Information Systems: Building a Digital Strategy. John Wiley & Sons.

Wheelen, T.L. and Hunger, J.D., 2011. Concepts in strategic management and business policy. Pearson Education India.

Wongrassamee, S., Simmons, J.E.L. and Gardiner, P.D., 2003. Performance measurement tools: the Balanced Scorecard and the EFQM Excellence Model. Measuring business excellence7(1), pp.14-29.

Zelman, W.N., Pink, G.H. and Matthias, C.B., 2003. Use of the balanced scorecard in health care. Journal of Health Care Finance29(4), pp.1-16.

 

             

 


Get in Touch With us

Get in touch with our dedicated team to discuss about your requirements in detail. We are here to help you our best in any way. If you are unsure about what you exactly need, please complete the short enquiry form below and we will get back to you with quote as soon as possible.