The Balanced Scorecard: The New Performance Management Paradigm and the Nigerian Firms- A Review

Iwora G Agara Finance and Accounts, Geometric Power Ltd, iworagodfrey@yahoo.com; agarai@geometricpower.com Abstract This paper aims to explore literature to discover how the strategic management performance management model called the Balanced Scorecard, has faired among firms that have introduced the model. We confirm from empirical evidences, that firms that have implemented BSC have indicated recovery from their otherwise abysmal performance conditions and reverted their loss situations to. However we suggest that the generic four perspectives should be expanded to incorporate the fifth perspective which is environmental and culture because of the critical impact environment and culture place in the survival of any organisation. modified BSC

diagram has been suggested in this paper. We base our conclusion on the results from the library studies of evidences from prior researches. This approach provided us with the explanation needed to understand the dynamics of the BSC model and its moderators especially as it relates to the issue of environment and culture that may not have been contemplated in the original model of BSC. We have presented this paper in three ma!or sections. The "ntroduction outlines the basic framewor# of BSC, followed by $mpirical evidences from literature and then our Conclusion. We posit that for %igerian organi&ations to participate in the global economic arena the adoption of BSC is imperative. Ke words: Balanced corecard, trategic !anagement, perspecti"es, en"ironment an culture
1

!NTR"#$%T!"N #he proponents of the Balanced corecard $B %&, Professor 'o(ert )aplan of *ar"ard

+ni"ersity and ,a"id P -orton a management consultant of -olan, -orton and %oy Inc, a !assachusetts.s (ased information technology consulting firm say /what you measure is what you get0 $)aplan and -orton, 1223&. #he need to measure the performance of an organisation remains "alidly imperati"e4 at least for one reason5 the sta6eholders need to 6now whether or not the organisation is fulfilling its purpose. 7("iously, there are many reasons for measuring the performance of an organisation. )enny $3818&, in his sur"ey of accountants disco"ered the reasons for performance measurement to include5 pro"ision of the element of chec6 and (alance that encourages efficiency in performance, measurement of producti"ity and impro"ement, enhancement of management and staff communication, achie"ement of set targets, ensuring that the right people are deployed to the right places wor6ing together to achie"e a common 6nown goal and outcomes, esta(lish what is wor6ing and what is not, o(ser"e trends in (usiness, and to set apart performers from non4performers for remuneration and reward purpose.

,uring the industrial re"olution of 19:8 ; 12<:$!uhammad, 3818& performance measurement re"ol"ed around the use of purely accounting or financial data to gauge the performance of firms. =ith the emergence of the information age, in the last decades of the twentieth century, the use of only financial data as the (asis for measuring performance has (een o(ser"ed to (e inade>uate to manage corporate performance of organisations in the face of glo(al economic integration, which is characterised (y integrated supply and demand chains $!uhammad, 3818&. Financial data ha"e (een criticised as (eing micro4oriented and ha"e inherent lagging characteristic (ecause financial data are compiled from only the financial perspecti"e and use already 6nown
2

e"ents. #herefore, financial data are said to possess "ery limited predicti"e a(ility and considered to (e inade>uate to position organisations to perform effecti"ely and efficiently and ena(le them to respond to customer and en"ironmental comple?ities in the information age $)aplan and -orton, 1223&. Also, the nature of financial perspecti"e measure, @ohnson and )aplan $129<& o(ser"e, are two late, too aggregated and too distorted to (e useful in the information age. #he flaws identified with managing performance (ased only on financial perspecti"e has resulted in the suggestion of se"eral management control tools such as Beyond Budgeting, Acti"ity4Based %osting, Goldratt.s #heory of %onstraints, Balanced corecard, Aconomic Balue Added,

Performance Prism, etc $*ope and Fraser 122<; 'o(in, %. et al 388<; Asa, 1229, !uhammad, 3818, -eely et al, 3883& 7f all the strategic management tools, the Balanced corecard appears to (e the most cele(rated, (y (oth management practitioners and the academia in relation to its introduction a(out 38 years now. #his underscores the importance of the Balanced corecard $B %& and the imperati"es of this paper in the interest of the -igerian economy and management scholars.

Performance measurement is a good management control mechanism, (ut to achie"e its (enefits, the appropriate measuring criteria must harmonise with o(Cecti"es and strategies of the firm in order to illicit the o("ious and potential (enefits and threats to the organisation. !ost importantly, as )aplan $3818& indicates, any model that does not clarify and communicate the strategies of the firm in such a manner as to ena(le (oth the middle and front4line managers to understand the corporate strategies and internaliDe them, would fail to achie"e its purpose.

BA&AN%'# S%"R'%AR# #he Balanced corecard $B %& model was introduced in 1223 (y )aplan and -orton in response to their findings from a year4long research study of the performance measurement systems of 13 companies at the leading edge of performance measurement. #he model according to )aplan and -orton $1223& allows the /managers to loo# at the business from four important perspectives in order to provide answers to four 'uestions05 *ow do we loo6 to shareholders $financial perspecti"e&E *ow do customers see us $customers. perspecti"e&E =hat must we e?cel at $internal (usiness process perspecti"e&E %an we continue to impro"e and create "alue $learning and growth&E

)aplan and -orton $1223& present the a(o"e perspecti"es in a diagram titled /#he Balanced corecard Lin6s Performance !easurement0. #he original "ersion has (een amended and impro"ed upon significantly to focus the model on achie"ing corporate "ision , strategies and o(Cecti"es of the firm$%o((old and Lawrie, 3883&

)aplan and -orton $122F(& li6en the Balanced corecard to the dials and the indicators in an airplane coc6pit. #he pilot needs details a(out all aspects of the airplane to accomplish the comple? tas6 of flying. #he in"entors say of Balanced following words( ) Briefly summarised, balanced scorecards tell you the #nowledge, s#ills, and systems that your employees will need*their learning and growth+ to innovate and build the right strategic capabilities and the efficiencies*the internal processes+ that deliver specific value to the corecard summarise B % in the

mar#et*the customers+ which will eventually lead to higher shareholder value*the financial+.)aplan and -orton, 3888, p.G

#he creators of B % do not appear to ha"e pro"ided a standard definition of the model. #his has (een ascri(ed to the open4ended and e"ol"ing nature of the model gi"ing rise to its redefinition inline with the efflu?ion of time $=ong6ae", 388<&. *owe"er, the Balanced corecard Institute $B I&, defines B % as H as a strategic planning and management system that is used extensively in business and industry, government, and nonprofit organi&ations worldwide to align business activities to the vision and strategy of the organi&ation, improve internal and external communications, and monitor organi&ation performance against strategic goals, Fig(re ): The Balanced Scorecard &in*s Performance Meas(re
Financial Perspectives GOALS MEASURES How Do Customers See Us? How Do Look to Shareholder ?

Customers Perspectives GOALS MEASURES

Internal Business Process Perspective GOALS MEASURES

hat Must e E!"el At?

Learning and Growth Perspective GOALS MEASURES Ca# e Co#t$#ue to %m&ro'e a#d Creates 'alue

So(rce: Robert S Ka+lan and #avid P Norton-,)--./ The Balanced Scorecard: Meas(res that #rive Performance

Birtanen $3882& also sees Balanced

corecard as H a management system that enables

organi&ations to clarify their vision and strategy and translate them into action. When fully deployed, the Balanced Scorecard transforms strategic planning from an academic exercise into the nerve centre of an enterprise,.

Although many writers ha"e indicated that the Balanced corecard$B %& is the first model that included none4financial measures in assessing corporate performance, )aplan$3818& notes that the Balanced corecard / was not original for advocating that non-financial measures be used to motivate, measure, and evaluate company performance 0 (ut rather Balanced corecard has its lin6 to the performance measurement systems of General Alectric that considers financial and non4financial "aria(le in corporate performance measurements. Also, in the use of the word H corecard., )aplan $1818& states that *er( imon and his colleagues at the Graduate chool of Industrial Administration, %arnegie4!ellon +ni"ersity, first used the word H corecard. in their >uest to identify the se"eral purposes for accounting information in organisations. Financial Pers+ective #he financial perspecti"e loo6s at how the in"estors or the shareholders see the firm in terms of di"idend payout ratio, impro"ement on the cost structure, profit after ta?, return on capital employed $'7%A&, and growth the sales "olume. %(stomers Pers+ective +nder the customers. perspecti"e the measures include customer relations, >uality of products in terms of defecti"e rate, response to customers complains, deli"ery time, >uality of after sales ser"ice, mar6et segments to compete in and measure of penetration in those segments, customer profita(ility, etc.
)

!nternal B(siness Process #he measures under this perspecti"e include, defect rate, response to customers. complaints, >uality of after sales ser"ice, internal process (ureaucracy, process completion time, >uality and s6ill of staff and their le"el of moti"ation. &earning and 0rowth Learning and growth considers the fle?i(ility of a firm and its adapta(ility to change in the (usiness en"ironment, how fast new technology is deployed to counteract change in (usiness en"ironment, total firm capa(ilities and inno"ati"eness. According to )aplan and -orton $1223& a company inno"ati"e a(ility, learning and impro"ement s6ills ties directly to the company.s "alue and growth.

Fig(re . 1 Balanced Scorecard modified to incor+orate environmental and c(lt(ral +ers+ectives +ENVIRON
E N V I R O N

EN!

"N#

C$L!$RE

ENVIRON EN! C$L!$RE

"N# E N V I R O N E N ! " N #

,%+A+C%AL
E N ! " N #

CUS-OMERS

LEAR+%+G A+D GRO -H

C $ L ! $ R E

%+-ER+AL .ROCESS

C $ L ! $ R E "N#

ENVIRON EN!

"N#

C$L!$RE EVIRON EN! C$L!$RE

A cursory loo6 at the a(o"e definitions and pictorial impression of the B %, shows an o("ious omission of a "ery critical moderator of the performance of any organisation and that is culture and en"ironment. #his moderator, in our opinion, is too potent to (e su(sumed under any of the mentioned four perspecti"es. It should (e considered as a separate perspecti"e since the en"ironment and culture can affect the (eha"iour of an organisation. At least institutional organisational theory posits so $Aisenhardt, 1299&. #o incorporate the en"ironment and culture moderator as one of the perspecti"es, we suggest figure 3.

Figure 3 a(o"e shows that all the other perspecti"es are moderated (y the en"ironment and culture perspecti"e which has the following measures5 le"el of social security for the firm, willingness to pro"ide human capital for the firm, rate of "iolations of set standards and rules, corporate responsi(ility rating, social responsi(ility contri(ution to the immediate en"ironment, rate of pu(lic complaints against the firm, and corporate4community rating inde?. #hese measures moderate the performance and (eha"iour of the other four perspecti"es and therefore affect the performance of an organisation. A?ample, a customer may refuse to (uy goods from a company that is "iewed to support or promote the course of another customer when (oth are at war. *ere, the customer will not (uy the goods from that company e"en if the >uality is the (est. #his (eha"iour, in our opinion is moderated not (y any of the other four perspecti"es.

'FF'%T!2'N'SS "F BS%- 'MP'R!%A& '2!#'N%'S %urrently, se"eral thousand of pri"ate, pu(lic and non4profit enterprises around the world are reported to ha"e adopted the Balanced corecard and there are no indications that managers

would soon wean from using B % in performance management $)aplan, 3818; =oodley, 388F&. )aplan $3818& indicates that / after publication of the .//0 HB1 article, several companies 'uic#ly adopted the Balanced Scorecard giving us deeper and broader insights into its power and potential. 2uring the next .3 years, as it was adopted by thousands of private, public, and non-profit enterprises around the world *p.4+

Balanced corecard is well suited to the 6ind of organiDation many companies would aspire to (ecome (ecause it puts strategy and "ision, not control, at the centre. Goals are set and employees are allowed the fle?i(ility to adopt strategies to achie"e the goals (ecause the (usiness en"ironment is dynamic and setting rules of operation will wea6en the competiti"e edge of a firm to respond to competition $)aplan and -orton, 1223&

Although originally, )aplan and -orton $1223& intended the B % to apply to (ig pri"ate ser"ice and production firms, the model has now (een successfully implemented (y all shades of organiDations including go"ernment owned agencies and not4for4profit organisations. Ampirical studies ha"e indicated that B % is scala(le and capa(le of (eing adapted in all organiDations4 pri"ate, pu(lic, profit and none4profit $=ong6ae", 388<&. *owe"er, its introduction may lead to the displacement of some systems, corporate structures, and cultures. #his calls for the

in"ol"ement of all managers and the support of the top or e?ecuti"e management to ena(le it to succeed $Behery, 388:&.

7n the implementation horiDon, empirical e"idences indicate that apprecia(le length of time is re>uired to successfully implement B % in all organisations, the actual length of time, howe"er, "aries according to the structure dynamics of an organisation. Pimentel and !aCor$3882&, Burney and wanson$3818&,!almi$3881&, 7ng, et al$3818&, and Behery$388:&; =oodley, 388F;

=ong6aew, 388<, and Birtanen, 3882& pro"ide an sight into the causes of delay and foot dragging in the implementation process to include organisational power politics, resistance culture of managers to change, fear of failure of the new system to achie"ed corporate goals, fear of lost of rele"ance leading to depletion of earlier assigned resources, lac6 of s6illed personnel with 6nowledge a(out the translation of B %, high cost of implementing B% since its

deployment would re>uire in"estment in I%# and human capital and other systems to dri"e the process, low le"el of inno"ation and competiti"e dri"e of firms, cultural differences and fear of dilution of the local corporate cultural settings (y the introduction of the model which is seen as supporting the Hwestern culture, fear of dislocation of priorities and interest (loc6s that e?ist in firms, and lac6 of clear understanding of the "ision and strategies of the organisation

According to Business Intelligence $1222& and !uhammad $3818& to succeed, B % implementation must ensure that e"ery (ody in the organisation is clear a(out the corporate "alues and philosophy, understand that the goal is itself a "ehicle for getting somewhere and engage all le"els of the organiDation in defining the goals and align the organiDation (ehind the goals, and consider the cultural settings in which the organisation operates.

#o o"ercome the a(o"e challenges, )aplan and -orton $122G& suggest eight steps for the effecti"e implementation of B %. tep 7ne4 Identify the units to implement B %.
11

tep #wo4 %arry our first round inter"iew of senior e?ecuti"es of the firm on their understanding of the strategies of the firm and their understanding of B % model. tep #hree4 *old first round wor6shop on B % with only e?ecuti"es of the firm. tep Four4 %arry out second inter"iew with e?ecuti"e to consolidate on the gains of the first wor6shop. tep Fi"e4 +nderta6e second

e?ecuti"e wor6shop, this time include the immediate su(ordinates to the e?ecuti"es to discuss the model. tep i?4 +nderta6e third wor6shop to discuss the outcome of the second enlarged wor6shop and agree on implementation timelines. tep e"en4 Form implementation team to handle the education and communication of the new model to enlist support and employee (uy in. tep Aight 4 %arry out periodic re"iews to identify new measures and eliminate those that ha"e (ecome irrele"ant (ased on current situations.

B'N'F!TS "F BA&AN%'# S%"R'%AR# As a strategic management system that considers (oth tangi(le$financial indices& and the intangi(le$non4financial& indices, B % has (een said to (e capa(le of enforcing the achie"ement of corporate strategies especially as there are causal relationship (etween the performance of the organiDation and the effecti"e management of the dynamics of the four perspecti"es $)aplan and -orton, 388F&. 3G%$3889& indicates that the implementation of B % would result in impro"ed operational performance, increased profit, impro"ed communication among staff, impro"ed long and short term planning process, and (etter management of intangi(les including capa(ilities and human capital. Also adoption B % influences the allocation of resources, the reward for performance, support inno"ation and position the organiDation competiti"ely to function effecti"ely and efficiently in a competiti"e en"ironment. B % is said to also help managers to understand the numerous interrelationships and causal effects of internal and e?ternal factors that
11

affect the firm in order to manage their operations much more optimally $*uang, 3882&. #he model is also capa(le of lin6ing the measures to the reward system of organisations, there(y assisting in promoting hard wor6 among staff $)aplan and -orton, 122Fa&. Further, Behery$388:&,=oodley$388F& and =ong6aew$388<& in their indi"idual case studies on the translation of Balanced corecard in organisations o(ser"e that B % , if well implemented, is a potent model capa(le of enhancing the performance of the company and does also ha"e the capa(ilities of adaptation in different cultural settings.

#he implementation of B % does not, howe"er, automatically translate to the gains enumerated, (ut rather the (enefits can only result when the model is implemented in the appropriate depth, $that is implemented as a company wide performance management model and not as one of the management models& supported (y management and staff allowed to operate for some time to outli"e the management team that introduced it and consider the impact and support of the en"ironment that hosts the company$Braam and -iCssen, 388I; Je6,et al. 388<; and Kingales and *oc6erts, 388G&

T3' N!0'R!A %"NT'4T #he Balanced corecard model, which, although, has (ecome popular in Aurope and America, is still at the rudimentary le"el in u(4 aharan Africa. !any studies ha"e focused on the

implementation of B % in (oth pri"ate and pu(lic organisations in ad"anced economies with little reference made to the translation dynamics of B % in de"eloping economies $Pimental and !aCor, 3882, =oodley, 388F&. For instance, as at August, 3811 the we(site of a maCor consulting and training outfit on B % implementation, 'ose>ueen %onsulting $http5LLwww.u(agroup.com&
12

indicates the names of only two -igerian commercial (an6s$,iamond Ban6 Plc and terling Ban6 Plc& and the %entral Ban6 of -igeria that were said to ha"e attended training program on the use of B %. +nited Ban6 for Africa $+BA& Plc, howe"er, indicated in it.s we(site $http5LLwww.u(agroup.comLcareersLgenericpageLG<1&, that it may ha"e implemented the B %. #he earlier mentioned implementation challenges may ha"e (een responsi(le for the delay in introducing B % (y firms in -igeria.

#o the (est of our 6nowledge, there appears to (e no significant documentation on the translation of B % in any -igerian firm that could ser"e as a reference point for replication in spite of the success already recorded (y companies that ha"e implemented B % $)aplan, 3818&. =e, therefore, posit that B % is not yet popular among organisations in -igeria, perhaps (ecause of all or some of the reasons for delay in implementation of B % earlier mentioned.

%"N%&$S!"N #he glo(aliDation of trade and economic co4operations pose significant challenge to firms, (oth at local and international spheres. #his is (ecause the free trade, which is one of the pillars of the glo(al economic co4operations, allows and encourages firms to (e efficient and effecti"e to (e a(le to compete internationally. #his calls for the adoption of accepta(le glo(al (usiness ethics, practices, technology and processes. #he Balanced corecard is fast (ecoming an accepta(le strategic performance management model which firms, that aspire to remain rele"ant in the emerging glo(al economic co4operation, must adopt and adapt to >uic6ly.

13

*onestly, organiDations in -igeria do not now seem to ha"e time at their side to delay the use of B % in performance management. 7therwise, they would soon (ecome incapa(le of matching with glo(al performance standards and una(le to ta6e ad"antage of the glo(al economic opportunities to increase their worth. #his fear has (ecome e"idently gra"e in the face of the multiple economic alliances (etween -igeria and other de"eloped countries with strong managerial e?pertise. #hese alliances ha"e e?posed the -igerian economy to foreign competition ; (oth in terms of goods and ser"ices. Pretending further not to ac6nowledge the management de"elopments em(raced (y companies in the ad"anced economies we ha"e alliances with, would put us in perpetual lameness and it may not (e too long when we shall (e faced with managerial and economic re4coloniDation as we shall (e forced, out of the an?iety to >uic6ly catch up with what o(tains in those countries, to engage the corporate managers of those countries to help us out. #he conse>uence is that our unemployment situation would (e more deplora(le, youth resti"eness would escalate, go"ernment would lose re"enue and her national integrity eroded. =e (elie"e that, -igeria would (e challenged e?cessi"ely unless the (usiness sector and managers see6 for 6nowledge pro4acti"ely, em(race strategic inno"ations and adopt tested managerial inno"ations and practices that would position our enterprises to operate competiti"ely in the glo(al economy whose (oundaries are fast (ecoming ne(ulous and fluid.

uffice to state that empirical e"idences ha"e confirmed that B % may (e a superior performance management model to the other models that lean hea"ily towards the financial perspecti"e. As %ameron $3883& puts its, in today.s "olatile economic climate, many managers use the B % to help steer their organisations in the right direction. #he truth, howe"er, is that to (e successful, B % must (e "iewed as the tip of the impro"ement ice(erg and (e made part of
14

the culture of all mem(ers of the staff and not (e seen as one of those possi(le management tools used (y the managers to coerce staff to perform their responsi(ilities against their wish$ Braam and -iCssen, 388I&.

Lest we (e misunderstood, we are not (y this paper recommending the use of B % line4hoo64and sin6er without e"aluating whether the model would (etter assist organisation in achie"ing their strategic o(Cecti"es than their e?4 ante performance models. -e"ertheless, we ad"ocate that organisations in -igeria should ac6nowledge the capacity of B % as a strategic managerial tool, e"aluate its usefulness "is a "is the e? ante performance measurement models in use, and ta6e steps to firm up their management s6ills and capa(ilities to a"oid the potential in"asion of our economic space (y products from foreign firms that are optimally managed. 7rganiDations in -igeria should (e ready to modify and adapt B % the model to suit their peculiarities and en"ironmental dictates and capa(ilities $)enny, 3818& in order to remain rele"ant in the glo(al economic setting.

R'F'R'N%'S
12 3G% $3889& What are the main benefits of a Balanced Scorecard M7nlineN 3G% Acti"e

!anagement, +). A"aila(le at www223"2"o2uk4&d542GC6,A7261/10112&d52 A""essed o#

04142112

2. Balanced

corecard Institute $3811& Balanced Scorecard Basics ,"nline/5 Available at

http5LLwww.(alancedscorecard.orgLB %'esourcesLA(outtheBalanced corecardLta(idL::L,ef ault.asp?. Accessed on 38L<L11 G. Behery, !ohamed *$388:& Change nd Culture( The Balanced Scorecard nd The
1(

$gyptian 5ertili&er 6anufacturing Sector -

Thesis Submitted "n 7artial 5ulfilment 8f The

1e'uirements 8f 9lasgow :niversity 5or +ni"ersity of Glasgow, -o"em(er 388:.

2octoral 2egree t The :niversity 8f 9lasgow ,

I. Braam, Geert @.! and -iCssen, Adwin @$388I& Performance effects of using the Balanced corecard5 a note on the ,utch e?perience, Alse"ier Ltd. :. Burney ,Laurie L. and wanson, -ancy @. $3818& #he 'elationship Between Balanced ;ong 1ange 7lanning, G<$388I&GG:4GI2,

corecard %haracteristics and !anagers. @o( atisfaction <ournal 8f 6anagerial "ssues Bol. OOII -um(er 3 ummer 3818, .==-.>. F. Business Intelligence $1222&, Building and "mplementing a Balanced Scorecard( Case Study5 +-+! %orporation $7nline& A"aila(le at http(??www.exinfm.com?training?pdfiles?Balanced @0AScorecard@0ACs.pdf. ccessed 0A?B?0A.. <. %ameron, Preston$3883& #he Balancing Act, C6 6anagement, Fe(ruary 3883, 394G1 9. %o((old, Ian and Lawrie, Ga"in$3883& The 2evelopment of the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic 6anagement Tool, 7aper 7resented at 76 Conference, Boston, :S , !ay,

3883, 3G% Acti"e !anagement, +) 2. Aisenhardt, )athleen ! $1299&. Agency4 and Institutional4#heory A?planations5 #he %ase of 'etail ales %ompensation, The 1299&, I994:11. 18. Asa !P6elPinen Asa$1229& "ntroduction to $conomic CalueD8nlineE http5LLwww.e"anomics.comLdownloadLIntro.pdf 11. *ope, @. and Fraser, '. $122<&. Beyond (udgeting...(rea6ing through the (arrier to Qthe third wa"eQ. 6anagement ccounting, B3$11&, 3843G. vailable at cademy of 6anagement <ournal, Bol. G1, -o. G. $ ep.,

1)

13. *uang, *ao4%hen $3882& ,esigning a )nowledge4(ased system for strategic planning5 A (alanced scorecard perspecti"e M7nlineN, $xpert Systems with A"aila(le at www.sciencedirect.com. Accessed on GL1L3813 1G. @ohnson, *. #homas and )aplan, 'o(ert . $129<& 'ele"ance Lost5 #he 'ise and Fall of !anagement Accounting. ccounting Hori&ons, 1$I&, 118411F 1I. )aplan ,'o(ert and -orton ,,a"id P $1223& Balanced corecard4 !easures that ,ri"e pplication 4=, 3824319.

Performance, Havard Business 1eview, <anuary-5ebruary .//0, BA-B/ 1:. )aplan ,'o(ert and -orton ,,a"id P $122G& Putting the Balanced corecard to =or6 ,

M7nlineN Harvard Business 1eview, Accessed on 38L18L3811. 1F. )aplan, 'o(ert

eptem(er47cto(er, 122G. A"aila(le at www.h(r.org.

and -orton, ,a"id P,$122Fa&Balanced Scorecard, *ar"ard Business

chool Press, *ar"ard. 1<. )aplan, 'o(ert !anagement "ersion and -orton, ,a"id P,$122F(& +sing the Balanced corecard as a trategic ystemM7nlineN, Harvard Business 1eview $@anuary4Fe(ruary 122F&5 7nline a"aila(le at http5LLmiha.ef.uni4

lC.siLRdo6umentiGplus3L12:13GL*B'R+singRtheRB %R388<.pdf. Accessed on 38L<L3811 19. )aplan, '. ., S -orton, ,. P. $3888&. *a"ing Pro(lem =ith Jour trategyE #he !ap

ItM7nlineN, Harvard Business 1eview, $ eptem(er ;7cto(er, 3888&5 A"aila(le at http5LLwww.(scol.seLRwcmLdocumentsL*a"ingT38trou(leT38withT38yourT38stategy T38thenT38mapT38itT38T393T32.pdf. Accessed on :L1L3813 12. )aplan, '. ., S -orton, ,. P. $388F&. Alignment5 +sing the Balanced corecard to %reate %orporate ynergies. Boston, !A 5 Harvard Business School 7ress.

1*

38. )aplan, 'o(ert

. $3818& Conceptual 5oundation of the Balanced Scorecard, *ar"ard

Business chool, =or6ing Paper 1848<I 31. )enny, Graham$3818& ,itching #he Balanced corecard, %ational ccountant,

,ecem(erL@anuary , 3818, 3343I 33. !almi, #eemu $3881&Balanced scorecards in Finnish companies5 A research note$7nline&, 6anagement ccounting 1esearch, 0AA., .0, 0ABF00A 3G. !uhammad, Ahmed Bin $3818& Corporate 7erformance 6anagement G "mpact of Balanced Scorecard System, 1esearch 7aper( 17-$CB76?AA0/M7nlineN, A"aila(le at

www.ec(pm.com, Auropean %entre for Best Practice !anagement +ni"ersity. 3I. -eely, Andy; Adams, %hris and )ennerley, !i6e$3883&, The 7erformance 7rism( The Scorecard for 6easuring and 6anaging Business Success, Pearson Aducation, +). 25. Pimentel ,LuUs and !aCor ,!aria @oVo $3882& Management Accounting Change: A

Case Study of Balanced Scorecard Implementation in a Portuguese Service Company5 I

%#A Business chool, Lis(on ,

3F. 'o(in, %ooper, ,a"id A Bra" and !ichael I ParDen$388<& Who Wins in a 2ynamic World( Theory of Constraints Cs. ctivity-Based CostingH paper presented at %orth merican

ssoc. for Computational Social and 8rgani&ational Science *% 0AAB 3<. #De an 7ng, Boon *eng #he, %hee )wong Lau, and

CS8S+ Conference, <une

haron Lee

hyan =ong$3818&, sia-7acific

Adoption And Implementation 7f Balanced

corecard In !alaysia,

6anagement ccounting <ournal, Bolume : Issue 1, 314I8, 3818 39. Birtane, #ony $3882& =hite Paper5 9uidelines for "mplementing Balanced Scorecard M7nlineN WP' oftware Plc , A"aila(le at www.>pr.com. Accessed on 38L<L3811
1/

32. Boelpel, "en %., Lei(old, !arius; Ac6hoff , 'o(ert A. and ,a"enport , #homas *. $388:& The Tyranny of the Balanced Scorecard in the "nnovation $conomy, 7aper presented at the Ith "nternational Critical 6anagement Studies Conference, "ntellectual Capital Stream, %am(ridge +ni"ersity, +nited )ingdom, @uly I4F G8. =ila4sini =ong6aew $388<& 6anaging 6ultiple 2imensions of 7erformance( 5ield Study thesis

of Balanced Scorecard Translation in the Thai 5inancial Services 8rganisation.

submitted in partial fulfilment of the re'uirements for the degree of 2octor of 7hilosophy in "ndustrial and Business Studies, +ni"ersity of =arwic6, +). G1. =oodley, P.! $388F& Culture 6anagement Through The Balanced Scorecard( 2efence College 8f 6anagement :niversity, %ranfield +ni"ersity, +) G3. Je6, #.!., Penney, ,., and eow, A.%.* $388<& :sing Balanced Scorecard to improve Juality and 7erformance of Cocational $ducation and Training( 1$ 0AAB Conference, -o"em(er 3:4 32; Fremantle, Australia. GG. Kingales, F and *oc6erts, ) $388G& Balanced corecard and ustaina(ility5 A?amples from Literature and Practice, I- AA, Faculty and 'esearch, =or6ing Paper eries, %entre for the !anagement of An"ironmental 'esources. case Study in Singapore. Case Study

nd Technology, 7h2 TH$S"S submitted to Cranfield

10