See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/355810713

Balanced Scorecard Development as a Performance Management System in

Saudi Public Universities: A Case Study Approach

Article  in  Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation · October 2021

DOI: 10.1177/2319510X211048591

CITATIONS READS

3 343

2 authors, including:

Hussein Sharaf-Addin
Bisha University
15 PUBLICATIONS   46 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Target Costing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hussein Sharaf-Addin on 10 April 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Article

Balanced Scorecard Development Asia-Pacific Journal of Management

Research and Innovation

as a Performance Management
17(1–2) 57–70, 2021
© 2021 Asia-Pacific
Institute of Management
System in Saudi Public Universities: Reprints and permissions:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
A Case Study Approach DOI: 10.1177/2319510X211048591
journals.sagepub.com/home/abr

Hussein H. Sharaf-Addin1,2 and Hesham Fazel1

Abstract
This study’s main objective is developing a balanced scorecard (BSC) model as a performance management system for the University
of Bisha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study aims to describe how the University can move from mission to vision using goals and
objectives articulated in its strategic plan 2017–2022. The study uses a qualitative research approach. It comprises an extensive
review of relevant literature, an in-depth analysis of documentation of the University’s strategic plan 2017–2022, and a comprehensive
discussion and face-to-face interview with relevant executives. A BSC framework was developed as a complementary process for the
University’s strategic plan 2017–2022. In addition, a strategy map was designed based on the BSC model. The BSC framework and
strategy map can be used to assess and monitor the University’s performance towards achieving ‘Educational and Research Excellence’
status by translating its strategic objectives into action plans.

Keywords
Balanced scorecard, strategic plan, strategy map, key performance indicators

Introduction performance and service delivery to increase accountability

The balanced scorecard (BSC) was originally developed by
Kaplan and Norton (1992) to complement traditional
financial performance measures by including non-financial
measures, such as customer satisfaction, internal business
process and learning and growth. It has been promoted to
overcome the deficiencies of traditional measures and their
inability to link long-term strategies with short-term actions
(Kaplan & Norton, 1996). The increase in competitiveness
in both the private and public sectors, or profit and non-
profit organisations, makes it necessary for them to ensure
excellent performance. According to Wisniewski and
Ólafsson (2004), since performance measurement in profit
organisations depends on a set of indicators that measure
profitability and competitiveness compared to other
organisations, non-profit organisations have come under
increasing pressure to modernise and improve their overall
to their stakeholders. Some of the challenges, including the
impact of globalisation, electronic commerce, workforce
diversification, rapid technological advances, governmental
regulations and increasingly competitive environments
have complicated strategic management processes within
these organisations (Martello et al., 2008). Hence, meeting
these challenges requires non-profit organisations to
undergo primal changes and continually look for new
approaches to create their desired future value. In addition,
establishing a strategic plan identifies a non-profit’s
objectives for a certain period and how these objectives will
be achieved.
Higher education organisations, especially public ones
such as public universities, are considered non-profit
organisations and must respond adequately to such
challenges. In today’s knowledge-based economy and
dynamic and competitive environment, it is particularly

1 Business College, University of Bisha, Bisha, Saudi Arabia.

2 Faculty of Administrative Science, Thamar University, Dhamar, Yemen.

Corresponding author:
Hussein H. Sharaf-Addin, Business College, University of Bisha, Bisha 67714, Saudi Arabia.
E-mail: dr.hussein.thu@gmail.com
58 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)
essential for public universities to articulate their mission,
vision and objectives. Public universities are acknowledged
as centres of education, knowledge creation and knowledge
improvement, which contribute to a nation’s overall growth.
The performance evaluation systems could help to address
public universities strategic goals (Nazari-Shirkouhi et al.,
2020), and to make them more competitive and sustainable
over time (Oliveira, 2018). Moreover, addressing strategic
plans would definitely pave the way from universities’
present position, based on their mission, to their desired
future position, as described by their vision. Hence, adopted
as a performance management system, a BSC is a vital
management system to ensure the effective and efficient
achievement of those objectives (Arjunan et al., 2020). The
BSC is supposed to clarify and translate strategic objectives
into action plans and link the strategic objectives with
measures known as key performance indicators (KPIs). The
BSC, through the KPIs, aligns strategic initiatives and
action plans with a performance excellence (Nazari-
Shirkouhi et al., 2020). This requires considerable time and
effort in terms of manager commitment at different levels
and, to some extent, a change in staff mindset and thinking
(Wisniewski & Ólafsson, 2004). Based on these debates,
the main objective of this study is to develop the BSC model
as a performance management system for the University of
Bisha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study specifically
aims to describe how the University can move from its
mission to its vision using goals and objectives articulated
in its strategic plan 2017–2022. The findings of the study
describe the universities’ objectives translated into
initiatives and action plans through the BSC framework and
aligned through the strategy map developed based on the
BSC model.
Literature Review
Balanced Scorecard Development in Non-
profit Organisations
Although the BSC has been widely implemented in
numerous for-profit organisations since it was first designed,
the model has also been effectively utilised in non-profit
organisations (Martello et al., 2008). In addition, the BSC
has provided an innovative alternative for non-profit
organisations that have not found private sector strategic
planning models applicable to their unique planning needs
(Ronchetti, 2006). However, Kaplan and Norton (2001a)
suggested a number of areas where non-profit organisations
might need to modify their approach in adopting the BSC.
For example, they have to rearrange the geography of their
scorecards, expand the customer concept and redefine the
BSC perspectives in consistent with their objectives. Chen
et al. (2006) explained the main difference between
businesses and non-profit organisations in achieving their
missions. That is, non-profit organisations should consider
using indicators that fit their special circumstances in their
scorecards. For example, non-profit organisations must first
ensure they have an appropriate mission and vision to
promote their reputation. They must also clearly articulate
their mission and vision such that it is achievable through
strategic planning (Weinstein & Bukovinsky, 2009; Wu
et al., 2011). Moreover, they must ensure that performance
measures are not simply focused on costs but also include
performance efficiency and effectiveness (Chen et al., 2006;
Wisniewski & Ólafsson, 2004).
Although both financial and customer perspectives must
be used to enhance the perspectives of internal process and
learning and growth, Kaplan and Norton (2001b) suggested
that the financial performance is not the main target of most
non-profit organisations. The customer perspective through
the BSC development in non-profit organisations is the
main determinant of the other three perspectives (Chen
et al., 2006; Dorweiler & Yakhou, 2005). Dorweiler and
Yakhou (2005) described the BSC in non-profit organisations
as a ‘top-down’ hierarchy and indicated the structure’s
power is integrating the individual efforts among the four
perspectives with financial results. However, some
empirical studies provided evidence on BSC development
in non-profit organisations. For instance, Manville (2007)
found that the motivations for adopting the scorecard in the
Bournemouth Churches Housing Association in the UK
were both internal and external. Farneti and Guthrie (2008)
studied Italian and Australian local government
organisations and showed that the BSC was used internally
as a strategic management device that provides material for
external accountability reporting in the Italian case, whereas
the BSC was primarily used for internal purposes, with little
use for external public reporting, in the Australian case.
Conversely, Greatbanks and Tapp (2007) studied the
Customer Service Agency (CSA) section of the Dunedin
City Council, and reported that a BSC had a positive effect
on achieving a CSA plan and excellence goals regarding
delivery of customer service. Similarly, Martello et al.
(2008) showed the greatest benefit of BSC implementation
at the Rehabilitation Centre is the realisation by Centre
personnel that undertaking strategic planning is a
significantly more encompassing process than merely
looking at long-range planning. Chan (2004) conducted a
survey of 451 local government organisations in the United
States and 467 municipal governments in Canada. He found
that, of the 184 government bodies that responded, only
14 government bodies applied the BSC successfully; the
remainder either did not apply the BSC or found it difficult
to implement. Moreover, Lawson-Body et al. (2008) also
studied the effectiveness of the BSC’s four perspectives on
e-government service delivery of 19 country veteran service
offices in the United States. They found that three website-
supported BSC perspectives (learning and innovation,
internal process and veteran value proposition) had a
positive impact on e-government service delivery
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 59
performance, whereas one perspective (financial) had a
negative impact because of the digital divide among the
various generations of veterans.
Balanced Scorecard Development in Public
Universities
As non-profit organisations, public universities have to
establish effective measurement systems to ensure their
goals achievement. The rapid increase in competition and
information technology usage has caused intense
competition among public universities, which in turn have
tried to improve the resource quality of teaching and
research. In essence, public universities need to increase the
number of students and specialisations to ensure they
remain competitive in their teaching and educational
programs (Hsieh et al., 2006; Umashankar & Dutta, 2007).
Therefore, they should establish a set of performance
evaluation techniques to pursue their educational objectives
and develop strategic plans to ensure their competitive
advantages within the global environment (Chen et al.,
2006). Beard (2009) claimed that identifying and using key
performance measures that are consistent with the
institution’s mission and core values offer opportunities to
create value in higher education. The focus should be on
academic measures, such as student numbers, student pass
percentages and dispersion of scores, class rank, percentile
scores, graduation rates, percentage of graduates employed
upon graduation, faculty teaching loads and faculty
research/publications, rather than financial measures
and the business demands of external accountability and
comparability (Umashankar & Dutta, 2007).
Previous studies on BSC implementation in public
universities provides insights supporting its successful
application. In the earlier stages of BSC development in
public universities, Self (2003) indicated that adopting a
BSC in the University of Virginia Library began with
identifying the scorecard metrics, which must be specific
and measurable. The metrics depend on the library’s values,
such as customer service, securing funding, controlling
costs, digital materials and supporting and developing staff.
In addition, Kettunen (2005) also proved that applying a
BSC for the Centre of Mechanical Engineering in Southwest
Finland can serve as a basis for a campus-wide management
information system. Karathanos and Karathanos (2005)
described how the Baldrige Education Criteria for
Performance Excellence have adapted the BSC and
discussed significant differences as well as similarities
between BSCs for businesses and education. They found
the Rosier School of Education at the University of Southern
California adopted a BSC to assess its academic program
and strategic planning. McDevitt et al. (2008) stated the
BSC provides University administrators with a measurement
system that is not only linked to mission and strategy, but
also a learning model that supports continuous improvement
and environmental responsiveness. The learning
environment, which includes facilities, accommodations,
physical environment, policies and procedures, may affect
whether students are attracted to University (Umashankar
& Dutta, 2007). Since universities depend on committed
staff to sustain their competitive advantages and achieve
superior performance (Bashir & Gani, 2020), Dorweiler
and Yakhou (2005) affirm that the BSC provides a
framework for staff contributions to the academic
institution’s objectives and also as a rewards instrument.
Drtina et al. (2007) identified the following 10 core
values cited by faculty and administration: student-centred
culture, small classes, globalisation emphasis, excellent
teaching, use of technology, experiential learning, career
management emphasis, faculty involvement, leadership and
ethics and academic reputation. The survey results of
171 participants revealed that the Rollins College (GSB)
touted its excellent teachers, and its academic reputation
score increased. While teaching was the second-highest
value, technology and a student-centred culture scored
lowest. They commented that the BSC offered a mechanism
for correcting University misalignments, achieved by
selecting measures that encouraged employees to act in a
way consistent with market expectations. Additionally,
Kettunen (2006b) revealed the BSC approach helped the
Centre for Mechanical Engineering partners accomplish its
strategic themes and objectives for communicating its
strategy. Kettunen (2006a) also found that the BSC approach
helped managers and employees of higher education
institutions in Finland to better understand strategic plans
and describe the regional development network strategy.
McDevitt et al. (2008) suggested the BSC model requires
formulating objectives, metrics, targets, process
developments and strategic plans; the latter becomes clearer
as the BSC improves over time. They studied the experience
of business school faculty with several strategic models
before selecting the BSC approach. They found the BSC
put the academic unit in a strong position for requesting
University funds for strategic initiatives and allocating
resources to the major programs that met its desired goals
and objectives. They commented that the business school
faculty’s BSC model was successful in attaining greater
involvement, clarifying the school’s goals and objectives,
and establishing guidelines for the administrative units.
Similarly, Umashankar and Dutta (2007) asserted that
successful application of the BSC in Indian universities will
achieve excellence in their chosen fields and serve as a
driving force, moving them towards their goals. Drtina et al.
(2007) indicated that before a business school implements a
BSC, it must define its strategy using a strategic planning
process. Alani et al. (2018) revealed that the KPIs through
the BSC’s four perspectives act as a strategic tool to evaluate
the performance of Sohar University in Oman. In their
study, the KPIs allowed all staff members to understand the
60 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)
direction of the BSC in performing their tasks and duties
through an effective communication channels throughout
the University. Kettunen (2005) concluded that the
scorecards of Turku Polytechnic in Finland were based on
an agreement between each department and the senior
management teams. The BSC was useful to staff because it
improved their understanding of the strategy and objectives.
In addition, SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats) analysis has been affirmed by some researchers
(Al Frijat, 2018; Lassoued, 2018) as an important step when
identifying KPIs to ensure the BSC model is actionable in a
way that is consistent with the organisational strategic goals
and objectives. Valdez et al. (2017) found that BSC
development helped Autonomous University of Coahuila
ensure that its strategy is clear enough to be operational by
converting its vision into a structured and operative strategy
through which the different department and unit duties
could be assigned in balanced importance of strategy
achievement. Additionally, in the study of Alani et al.
(2018), the BSC framework was adopted and adapted
through translating Sohar University’s vison, mission and
strategy into a set of objectives and measures. They found
an association between the BSC four perspectives and the
University performance. Arjunan et al. (2020) also adapted
the BSC model for Malaysian public universities and found
that the proposed model helped to translate the strategy of
security practices into a system of performance indicators.
However, successful BSC implementation among higher
education institutions such as public universities may face
some challenges. For example, Umashankar and Dutta
(2007) pointed out that higher education institutions in
India are confronted with many barriers, including obstacles
originating from the members themselves that hinder them
from moving towards their goals. The reasons for resistance
include change, fear of accountability and failure and lack
of commitment. Additionally, McDevitt et al. (2008)
presented several important challenges that face BSC
adoption by other academic units, including maintaining a
variety of programs, obtaining consensus within and among
groups, establishing efficient communication tools across
working groups and developing performance measures for
long-term objectives.
Balanced Scorecard’s Four Perspectives in
Public Universities
The four perspectives of the BSC in public universities have
been indicated by the literature in a different arrangement
than those of other organisations. They can be restructured
to be suitable for the circumstances of public universities,
and then to be aligned with the achievement of their strategic
goals. For example, Kettunen (2006b) indicated the
customer perspective should be at the top of the strategy
map, followed by the financial and internal process
perspectives, and finally, the learning and growth
perspective. In addition, Martello et al. (2008) found that
the consumer perspective and financial perspective are
placed together at the top of the strategy map of the
Rehabilitation Centre. However, the BSC construction in
public universities requires cause-and-effect linkages
between its four perspectives and objectives within the
strategy map that clearly communicate how the objectives
can be achieved (Chen et al., 2006; Jusoh & Parnell, 2008;
Kettunen, 2005, 2006a, 2006b).
1. Customer perspective. Chen et al. (2006) described this
perspective as representing a strategy focused on value
creation and differentiation as perceived by the
customer. This perspective helps organisations link
their internal business processes with customer desires
to improve financial outcomes, using different
performance measures such as customer satisfaction,
customer response time, market share and on-time
delivery (Jusoh & Parnell, 2008). However, BSC
development targets in public universities are students
as the main ‘customers’ and academic interpretations
of the other three perspectives (Dorweiler & Yakhou,
2005). Thus, the customer perspective should tend to
the immediate needs and desires of students, parents,
faculty and staff, alumni, the corporate sector and
society at large (Umashankar & Dutta, 2007).
According to Kettunen (2006a), there are three
objectives in the customer perspective that can be
achieved through the innovation, service and learning
processes described in the internal process perspective:
organisational competitive advantage, regional
development and student satisfaction. However,
lecturers, administration, staff and students are all
internal customers, whereas the government, society
and parents are external customers (Chen et al., 2006).
Moreover, Dorweiler and Yakhou (2005) indicated the
customer perspective comprises the following themes:
students, employers, alumni, parents, teaching
innovations, public image, faculty reputation, service
quality and continuous improvement.
2. Internal process perspective. This perspective refers
to the critical internal processes that drive customer
and shareholder satisfaction (Papenhausen &
Einstein, 2006). According to Jusoh et al. (2008),
this perspective focuses on the internal processes the
organisation must do well to add value to customers
and generate financial returns for shareholders. This
perspective’s KPIs may include production
efficiency, quality, defect rates and cycle time. In
universities, however, this perspective focuses on
introducing and achieving a degree of excellence in
their academic programs and research system
(Umashankar & Dutta, 2007). Kettunen (2006a)
described the internal process perspective as
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 61
including sequential processes focused on research
and development, online services and education,
which form the causal chain of value creation.
Moreover, the internal process perspective comprises
the following measures (Dorweiler & Yakhou,
2005): teaching and curriculum excellence, service
quality and efficiency and strategic issues.
3. Learning and growth perspective. This perspective
aims to identify the skills and processes that drive
the universities performance to continuously
improve their internal processes (Papenhausen &
Einstein, 2006). Jusoh et al. (2008) suggested this
perspective focuses on employee abilities, systems
and procedures and the capabilities used to achieve
performance in internal processes that satisfies
customer desires and ultimately produces financial
outcomes. Moreover, the learning and growth of the
teaching and learning activities, research and
community services are the core functions of higher
education institutions, and thus have considerable
internal processes related to these functions (Reda,
2017). This is accomplished by measuring staff
training, development, satisfaction, retention and
productivity. Thus, a complete database and network
facilities could provide the latest information and
encourage staff learning and innovation (Chen et al.,
2006). Kettunen (2006a) described this perspective
as including three objectives—research and
development capabilities, customer knowledge and
the educational institution’s pedagogical skills—
while Dorweiler and Yakhou (2005) indicated it
includes the following measures: teaching and
learning excellence, faculty development, techno­
logy leadership, teaching and learning innovation,
program innovations and improvements, pedagogy
enhancements, distance learning, value-added learn­
ing, lifelong learning, quality of facilities, reward
systems and mission-driven processes.
4. Financial perspective. The financial perspective
includes strategic measures of growth, profitability
and risk from the shareholders’ perspective (Chen
et al., 2006), such as operating income, return-on-
investment, economic value-added, sales growth,
cost control and cash flow (Jusoh et al., 2008).
Unlike business organisations, where profit-driven
financial measures have traditionally been used as
KPIs (Dorweiler & Yakhou, 2005), the financial
perspective in non-profit organisations might
include maximising funding from outside sources or
maintaining fiscal stability, instead of profit
(Martello et al., 2008). For example, Kettunen
(2006a) mentioned that the financial perspective
includes the objectives of external funding and
funding from central government. Consequently,
educational organisations emphasise academic
measures rather than financial performance
(Umashankar & Dutta, 2007). They do not pay
enough attention to the financial perspective, but
emphasise the role of customers and employees
(Kettunen, 2005). Nonetheless, good financial
condition can provide a University with easy access
to the latest facilities and excellent resources.
Excellence in the financial position is expected to
ensure the adequacy of University’s resources, the
effectiveness of using the funds and continuing the
education processes (Gamal & Soemantri, 2017).
Dorweiler and Yakhou (2005) indicated the financial
perspective comprises the following measures: fund
raising, revenue from operations, human capital
investment and financial management.
Research Methodology
Case Study
In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, universities play a vital
role in generating the essential human capital needed to
convert Saudi Arabia into a developed country by achieving
Kingdom’s mission 2030; hence, they must move in tandem
with global challenges, competitiveness and technological
developments. In addition, establishing policies and
governance frameworks for pursuing academic achievement
will enable universities to educate a new generation of
graduates who can actively engage in the global world.
University of Bisha, as a new university established in
2014, was selected as a case study to achieve the study
objective of developing a BSC in Saudi universities. The
University’s role is partly to develop academic programs
both at a semi-professional and professional level consistent
with Kingdom’s vision 2030. Since its establishment in
2013, the University has introduced many professional
programs as part of its endeavour to provide quality
accredited programs and ensure continuous improvement in
both teaching and learning processes and research. The
University’s goal is to ensure its ‘Academic and Research
Excellence’ status is consistent with its vision and mission.
A performance management system such as the BSC is a
compulsory and complementary system as the University
of Bisha pursues institutional accreditation for its current
and newly established programs. The BSC model is
expected to help the University of Bisha tie its strategies to
excellent performance to create stakeholder value. The
University of Bisha was adopted for a case study to develop
a BSC model as a performance management system that
will provide an inclusive overview of the achievement of
the University’s strategic objectives articulated in its
strategic plan 2017–2022. A primary question was drawn to
explore the BSC development as a performance management
system to translate the University’s strategic plan 2017–
2022 into action plans. Subsequent scorecard questions
62 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)

were formulated to explore the suitability and applicability

levels within the BSC framework and strategy map.

Data Collection
Qualitative data were gathered using subsequent processes
to answer the primary study question and scorecard
questions. The primary study question was ‘how to develop
the BSC model as a performance management system for
the University’s strategic plan 2017–2022?’ The scorecard
questions were related to the applicability level of the
proposed initiatives (action plans) and KPIs with its aligned
percentages. However, the data collection began with
analysing the University’s strategic plan 2017–2022,
followed by a structured interview and in-depth discussion
with relevant executives and officers in the Deanship of
Development and Quality–University of Bisha. Of the
Deanship of Development and Quality staff and officers, 8
members were interviewed together two times during
February 2019. This was followed by many meetings, Figure 1.  Key Process Steps Developed for the University’s
workshops and presentations on the progress of developing Strategic Plan 2017–2022.
the initiatives (action plans) and KPIs during this study over Source: The authors.
a 2-month period during May to July 2019, which were
accordingly amended and finalised. The proposed initiatives
(action plans) together with relevant KPIs were approved, urgency of the mechanisms as well as to ensure that the
and finally assigned to allow the development of the BSC’s mechanisms are applicable.
framework and strategy map.

The Strategic Objectives and Initiatives of

Findings and Discussion
Steps to Articulate the University’s Strategic
Plan 2017–2022
The University’s strategic plan 2017–2022 was reviewed
and analysed, and the key steps shown in Figure 1 were
developed to illustrate the University’s movement from its
current position, described by its mission, to the targeted
position, described by its vision. The University strategy
was considered the foundation for the following steps;
strategic themes, objectives, initiatives (action plans) and
KPIs were then developed using the BSC model.
Through the key process steps developed, the University
addresses the consequential dependency of the strategic
planning horizon by conducting the short-term planning at
regular intervals to ensure that the long-term planning is
met. In essence, in the 5-year strategic planning 2017–2022,
the University should start to lay down the achievement of
its vision and mission based on the seven strategic themes,
which derive the strategic objectives. Responsibilities for
each strategic objective under each of the strategic theme
are identified and pursued through the actions plans, and
reported through the KPIs cards developed. Consequently,
the critical issues related to implementation mechanisms
must be well positioned to denote the importance and
the University’s Strategic Plan 2017–2022
The University’s strategic plan 2017–2022 is considered a
movement towards ‘An Innovative and Creative Society’
by placing more focus on ‘Excellence and Sustainability in
teaching and research’, as stated by the Dean of Quality and
Development. After a long discussion with the Deanship of
Quality and Development team, eight strategic objectives
were articulated to ensure the University’s sustainability by
report card for the 51 KPIs and 45 initiatives (action plans)
in tandem with the eight standards of the Institutional
Accreditation Authority in Saudi Arabia. The eight
objectives consist of the following: (1) Budget Allocation,
(2) Diversity and Growth in Financial Resources, (3)
Quality Improvement in Finance, Technical and Human
Resources, (4) Improve Attractive and Innovative
Institutional Work, (5) Design Educational Programs that
meet Labour Market Needs, (6) Build an Advanced
Scientific Research System, (7) Promote Students’ Balanced
Values and Thoughts and (8) Introduce Effective Social
Initiatives. Unlike previous studies (Chen et al., 2006;
Gamal & Soemantri, 2017; Kettunen, 2005; Martello et al.,
2008; Umashankar & Dutta, 2007; Wu et al., 2011), each
action plan was assigned a proportion based on the relevant
strategic objectives as discussed with interviewees and
approved in the final meeting with Quality and Development
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 63
Table 1.  The Strategic Objectives and Initiatives.
No. Objectives
1 Budget allocation
2 Diversity and growth in financial resources
3 Quality improvement in finance, techniques and
human resources
4 Improve attractive and innovative institutional
work
5 Design educational programs that meet labour
market needs
6 Build an advanced scientific research system
7 Promote students’ balanced values and thoughts
8 Introduce effective social initiatives
Source: The authors.
Deanship officers. This allows assigning an importance
level for each plan’s implementation and control the
achievement level in the yearly report. Table 1 provides the
initiatives for the strategic objectives.
The aligned percentages for each initiative can be used to
direct their projects. Initiatives and procedures together form
the mechanisms that will ensure the strategic objectives and
overall vision are achieved. While developing the
Initiatives (Action Plans)
1. Budget tracking system (60%)
2. Best utilisation of resources (40%)
1. Investment in University utilities (25%)
2. Enhance University endowment (20%)
3. Successful investment projects (20%)
4. Develop trading projects and cooperative activities (20%)
5. Manage University assets and resources (15%)
1. Define general framework for job competencies (20%)
2. Attract and select the best qualified staff (20%)
3. Rehabilitation and training of University staff (15%)
4. Motivating human resources (15%)
5. Smart University (15%)
6. Modern utilities and equipment (15%)
1. Manage and control University’s strategic plan (15%)
2. Prepare strategic plans for colleges and admin units in tandem with
University’s strategic plan (15%)
3. Corporate governance (10%)
4. University institutional accreditation (10%)
5. Quality teams and knowledge groups (10%)
6. Business process improvement (10%)
7. Excellence awards (15%)
8. Beneficiary service department (15%)
1. Strategic partnership with marketplace (20%)
2. Develop educational environment (15%)
3. Eligibility to obtain academic accreditation for existing programs (20%)
4. Initial accreditation for new academic programs (15%)
5. Assessment and evaluation of educational process (15%)
6. Graduates department (15%)
1. Smart knowledge database (20%)
2. Support applied scientific research (20%)
3. Research partnerships (20%)
4. Specialist consultations centre (20%)
5. Sponsor creative research ideas (20%)
1. Qualify students for basic life skills (centre) (10%)
2. Attractive non-class activity system (15%)
3. Student guidance and counselling (centre) (15%)
4. Talented and excellent student care (centre) (20%)
5. Volunteer work (centre) (10%)
6. Intellectual awareness unit (15%)
7. Promote Islamic values and affiliations (15%)
1. Advanced media system (20%)
2. Future leaders (centre) (25%)
3. Expertise houses (20%)
4. Business awareness (15%)
5. Effective social partnerships (20%)
45 initiatives, 194 value-creating procedures with aligned
percentages were identified. For each initiative’s procedures,
another 12 executive KPIs were assigned to assess the
procedure implementation. These include: the weighted ratio,
expected results, execution responsibility, starting and ending
date, execution requirements, expected costs, execution ratio
and execution quality ratio, performance level and the
initiative’s participation ratio for each procedure.
64 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)
The BSC framework and strategy map development are
for the strategic objectives and initiatives articulated by the
KPIs, which generally concisely describe the University’s
strategy. According to Kettunen (2006b), the strategic
objectives and initiatives formed should be coherent and
consistent in how to move the organisation towards its
vision. Therefore, the 45 strategic initiatives (action plans)
stated above aim to control complexity and focus on the
critical issues related to all procedures suggested under
each strategic objective. They expedite proper positioning
that denotes the importance and urgency of implementation.
Balanced Scorecard Framework
The BSC framework was developed to translate the
University’s vision as articulated in its strategic plan
2017–2022 into action plans, referred to above as
‘initiatives’. All the strategic themes, objectives,
initiatives and KPIs are assigned in the BSC framework
illustrated in Table 2. Unlike previous studies (Chen
et al., 2006; Gamal & Soemantri, 2017; Kettunen, 2006b;
Martello et al., 2008; Umashankar & Dutta, 2007), the
Table 2.  Balanced Scorecard Framework.
Perspectives Strategic Themes Objectives
Customer Internal 1. Promote students’
stakeholders: balanced values
Students and thoughts
External 2. Introduce effective
stakeholders: social initiatives
Society
aligned percentages for each KPI under each action plan
have been established to indicate the importance of their
execution and assessment. The aligned percentage for
each KPIs indicates the measurement level towards
achieving the strategic objective. Like the action plans,
aligned percentages were assigned based on the relevant
strategic objectives as discussed with interviewees
and approved in the final meeting with Quality and
Development Deanship officers.
Strategy Map Based on the Balanced
Scorecard Model
A strategy map is a graphical representation of an
organisation’s strategy and includes the objectives of the
BSC perspectives and their causal relationships (Kaplan
& Norton, 2001b, 2005). Following Drtina et al. (2007),
a strategy map was developed to formulate the long-term
idealistic strategy targets to achieve the full vision of
‘Towards a Creative and Knowledge-based Community’.
The strategy map’s role is to facilitate communicating
the University’s strategic plans and provide a vision of
KPIs Action Plans
1. Percentage of students holding 1. Qualify students for
targeted life skills (20%) basic life skills (centre)
2. Average per cent of students’ 2. Attractive non-class
representation towards Islamic values activity system
and national affiliation (20%) 3. Student guidance and
3. Average per cent of students’ active counselling (centre)
participation in non-class activities 4. Talented and excellent
compared to approved annual targets student care (centre)
(15%) 5. Volunteer work
4. Percentage of non-performing students (centre)
whose cases have been solved (15%) 6. Intellectual awareness
5. Percentage of talented students who unit
have been nurtured and supported 7. Promote Islamic values
(15%) and affiliations
6. Average per cent of students’ active
participation in social activities
compared to approved annual targets
(15%)
1. Percentage of social service program 1. An advanced media
implementation compared to approved system
annual targets (20%) 2. Future leaders (centre)
2. Average per cent of beneficiary 3. Expertise houses
satisfaction with social services 4. Business awareness
introduced (40%) 5. Effective social
3. Percentage of social partnership partnerships
execution compared to approved
annual targets (20%)
4. Percentage of social initiative
implementation (20%)
(Table 2 continued)
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 65

(Table 2 continued)

Perspectives Strategic Themes Objectives KPIs Action Plans

Internal Educational 1. Design educational   1. Average per cent of targeted 1. Strategic partnership
business programs programs that program coverage for market with marketplace
perspective meet labour needs and aspirations compared 2. Develop educational
market needs to approved annual targets environment
(15%) 3. Eligibility to obtain
  2. Average per cent of targeted academic accreditation
programs meeting academic for existing programs
accreditation requirement 4. Initial accreditation
targeted per year (15%) for new academic
  3. Average per cent of all programs
programs meeting approved 5. Assessment and
descriptions (10%) evaluation of education
  4. Average per cent of employer process
satisfaction with University’ 6. Establish graduation
graduates (10%) department
  5. Student quality assessment of
programs (10%)
  6. Percentage of students failed in the
foundation year (5%)
  7. Percentage of graduate
employment (5%)
  8. Users’ satisfaction with educational
resources (5%)
  9. Average yearly expenditures for each
student (5%)
10. Student satisfaction with services
provided (10%)
11. Percentage of graduates enrolled in
postgraduate study (10%)
Research system 2. Build an Advanced   1. Percentage of papers 1. Smart knowledge
Scientific Research published internationally database
System compared to approved annual 2. Support applied
targets (15%) scientific research
  2. Number of research chairs during 3. Research partnerships
strategic plan period (5%) 4. Specialist consultants
  3. Number of research scholarships centre
supported per year (10%) 5. Creative research idea
  4. Average per cent of external sponsorship
authority satisfaction with
quality of consultation solutions
provided (5%)
  5. Percentage of scientific research
activities compared to approved
annual plans (10%)
  6. Percentage of patents registered
compared to approved annual
targets (5%)
  7. Average papers published for each
staff (15%)
  8. Average citations in indexed journals
for each staff (5%)
  9. Percentage of external research
funds (10%)
10. Number of excellence awards per
year (10%)
11. Scientific research budget vs
university budget (10%)

(Table 2 continued)
66 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)

(Table 2 continued)

Perspectives Strategic Themes Objectives KPIs Action Plans

Learning and Resources 1. Quality 1. Average per cent of staff with skills 1. Define general
growth development improvement in and abilities related to their job (10%) framework for job
finance, techniques 2. Percentage of annual plan competencies
and human implementation for qualifying and 2. Attract and select best
resources training University staff (15%) qualified staff
3. Percentage of University staff 3. Rehabilitate and train
satisfaction with allowances provided University staff
(15%) 4. Motivate human
4. Average per cent of user satisfaction resources
related to e-services provided (15%) 5. Smart University
5. Average percentage of facilities and 6. Modern utilities and
equipment readiness compared to equipment
approved annual target (15%)
6. Average number of students to
number of academic staff (10%)
7. Percentage of academic staff holding
PhD degree (10%)
8. Percentage of academic staff who leave
the university per year (10%)
Institutional 2. Improve attractive 1. Average per cent of actual university 1. Manage and control
environment and innovative plans and initiatives implemented to University’s strategic
institutional work approved annual targets (25%) plan
2. Percentage of businesses whose 2. Prepare strategic plans
policies, procedures and job for colleges and admin
descriptions have been documented units in tandem with
compared to the approved annual University’s strategic
targets (25%) plan
3. Average per cent of documented and 3. Corporate governance
approved policies, procedures and job 4. University institutional
descriptions implemented (20%) accreditation
4. Average per cent of targets achieved 5. Quality teams and
related to operation development that knowledge groups
need to raise quality (15%) 6. Business process
5. Average per cent of beneficiary improvement
satisfaction with University systems 7. Excellence awards
and environment (15%) 8. Beneficiary service
department
Financial Financial 1. Budget allocation 1. Number of projects completed in 1. Reallocation of annual
resources accordance with approved budget budget (budget
(40%) tracking system)
2. Number of out budgeted projects 2. Utilisation of budget
conducted (30%) allocated
3. Usage rate of budgeted resources
compared to approved annual targets
(30%)
2. Diversity and 1. Percentage of annual plans executed 1. Investment in
growth in revenue related to business development (25%) University utilities
resources 2. Annual growth rate in university total 2. Enhance scientific
revenue (40%) endowment
3. Average return on investment (35%) 3. Successful investment
projects
4. Develop trading
projects and
cooperative activities
5. Manage University
assets and resources
Source: The authors.
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 67
Figure 2.  Strategy Map for the University of Bisha.
Source: The authors.
how these plans are linked to the overall objectives.
Figure 2 uses the four major perspectives of the BSC
model to depict the University of Bisha’s strategy map. It
primarily illustrates the cause-and-effect linkages
between the eight strategic objectives and initiatives
within the BSC’s four perspectives based on the four
generations of the model
The causal relationships between strategic themes as
performance drivers of strategic objectives are drawn
starting with the financial perspective to the customer
perspective. The financial perspective includes budgeting
and the diversity and growth in revenue resources that must
be aligned with the learning and growth and internal process
perspectives to achieve customer satisfaction (customer
perspective). However, the learning and growth perspective
includes resource development and institutional
environment themes to improve the quality of finance,
techniques and human resources. These objectives could
support satisfying customers’ needs and desires through the
University’s activities in the internal process perspective.
Designing educational programs that meet the labour
market and an advanced scientific research system could
strengthen the target concerns of the University’s
relationship with its external stakeholders.
The customer perspective comprises both ‘Internal
Stakeholders’ and ‘External Stakeholders’. Internal
stakeholders include one major category, ‘students’,
with one major objective. This objective is concerned with
students’ balanced values and thoughts and aims to develop
qualified, skilled and talented students aligned with
balanced Islamic values and affiliations. Moreover, external
stakeholders include one major category, ‘society’, which
includes one objective concerned with introducing effective
social initiatives that aim to strengthen the University’s
relationship with its external stakeholders.
The strategy map shows that the University typically
should emphasise its stakeholders’ needs and desires.
Satisfaction of both internal and external stakeholders
results from the classes and non-class activities, as well as
value-creating projects under the internal process
perspective. Specifically, both are satisfied by strategic
themes of ‘educational programs’ and ‘research system’
processes. Hence, the internal process perspective describes
the joint projects and initiatives planned to support the
‘educational programs’ and ‘advanced research system’
targets, based on the performance drivers of integrity,
quality and ethical culture pursued in the learning and
growth perspective. The performance drivers in the
University learning and growth perspective describe how to
improve finances, techniques, human resources and
attractive and innovative institutional work to excel in
internal processes, while the financial perspective objectives
in the budgeting and income diversity and growth processes
are aligned with the objectives of the internal process and
learning and growth perspectives. In other words, financial
support of the learning and growth perspective would
definitely propel internal processes towards achieving
customer satisfaction.
Conclusion and Implications
This study’s goal was to develop a BSC model as a
performance management system for the University of
Bisha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The BSC development
68 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)
was a complementary process to the suggested framework
for the University’s strategic plan 2017–2022, which was
based on the eight strategic objectives identified through
the seven strategic themes. The findings document the
University’s strategic plan 2017–2020 in a manner that
reflects long-term strategic plans revisited to ensure the
University’s sustainability. The findings also aligned
the strategic plans with the University’s mission and vision
to construct the BSC approach. The strategic plans identify
the directions that lead to customer satisfaction based on
the strategic goals. Hence, the findings show the initiatives
and KPIs that would help the University implement its
strategy. The BSC framework was developed using a
customer-based strategy since customer satisfaction is at
the top of the University’s strategy. The fundamental
finding is the translation of the University’s strategic goals
into action plans. Based on the objectives under each
strategic theme, those objectives were classified into the
BSC’s four perspectives to develop the framework. The
choice of strategic themes and objectives for the BSC’s
four perspectives was based on what is necessary to clarify
the strategy identified through the documentation analysis
and interviews. The customer perspective includes two
objectives for achieving customer satisfaction. The
internal process perspective includes two objectives that
propel value-creating projects towards achieving
‘Academic and Research Excellence’. The learning and
growth perspective includes two objectives to support
finance, techniques, human resources and attractive
institutional work objectives to excel in the internal
process perspective. Finally, the financial perspective
includes two objectives aligned with the objectives of the
learning and growth and internal process perspectives.
Strategic initiatives were assigned, and the KPIs under
each initiative were normalised with all objectives under
each perspective.
A total of 44 initiatives and 51 KPIs are included in the
BSC’s four perspectives; these indicators were tied to faculty
performance evaluation. The KPIs are followed by specific
action plans (initiatives), as structured value-creating projects
were positioned to achieve strategic objectives under each of
the strategic themes. The findings also include the University
of Bisha’s strategy map, which presents the University
strategy’s main characteristics in a manner that ensures the
action plans are linked with the overall objectives under each
theme. Hence, it provides a visual linkage between the
strategic objectives and action plans to help the University
staff and employees work in a more coordinated and
collaborative manner towards achieving the overall
objectives. The visual linkage provided in the strategy map
allows the University’s progress towards a better future
described by its vision to be measured and evaluated.
According to the study’s findings, some major practical
implications can be identified. First, the BSC framework
can be used to assess and monitor the Saudi universities’
overall performance towards achieving its ‘Academic and
Research Excellence’ status locally and internationally.
The framework developed translates the innovative
themes, identified with aligned strategic objectives, into
aligned action plans through the KPIs developed and
geared to the individual action plans. Thus, relevant
management units in Saudi universities could consider the
framework developed in this study as a reference to assess
their activities regarding each aligned KPI for enhancing
or reforming their performance. Second, the strategy map
developed based on the BSC model describes the cause-
and-effect linkages of the objectives under strategic
themes with action plans. The map focus reflects the
direction of operational excellence in the internal processes
towards stakeholder value and ‘Academic and Research
Excellence’ status. The map also shows the importance of
learning and growth combined with global development in
educational programs to excel in internal processes and
aligns these objectives with the financial objectives.
Therefore, using the strategy map as a best way to capture
the Saudi Universities’ strategic objectives and assess the
priorities of importance for each value-creating project
discovers the facets needed to be tracked and improved.
Finally, through the BSC model developed in this study, it
could be useful for Saudi universities to assess their
academic and research status from viewpoints of internal
and external customers, internal processes, learning and
growth and finance perspectives in order to further
enhance their performance actively.
Like other studies, this study includes some limitations.
The University perceptions of BSC implementation and
its expected outcomes is the main limitation. A
questionnaire survey should be conducted to support the
research findings with some significant results. In
addition, the specific KPIs of the financial perspective
related to the budgeting process are not considered in
detail, especially in the BSC framework. Hence, future
research should investigate BSC implementation as an
integral model, taking into consideration all the detailed
KPIs and action plans of the financial perspective. In
other words, in addition to the interview conducted with
the Deanship of Quality and Development members,
other data collection sources from the relative departments
should be considered to highlight the overall opinion of
University staff and key personnel regarding the BSC
model and how it works.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Sharaf-Addin and Fazel 69
ORCID iD
Hussein H. Sharaf-Addin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0467-
2758
References
Alani, F. S., Khan, M. F. R., & Manuel, D. F. (2018). University
performance evaluation and strategic mapping using balanced
scorecard (BSC): Case study—Sohar University, Oman.
International Journal of Educational Management, 32(4),
689–700.
Al Frijat, Y. S. (2018). Activating balanced scorecard importance
as a way to improve the accounting education in Jordanian
universities. International Business Research, 11(9), 66–78.
Arjunan, L., Habidin, N. F., Mohamad Yusof, M. S., & Muniandy,
R. (2020). Evaluate safety practices of Malaysian Public
Universities by using balanced scorecard. Journal of Cognitive
Sciences and Human Development, 6(1), 20–43.
Bashir, B., & Gani, A. (2020). Correlates of organisational
commitment among university teachers in India: An empirical
investigation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research
and Innovation, 16(1), 7–20.
Beard, D. F. (2009). Successful applications of the balanced
scorecard in higher education. Journal of Education for
Business, 84(5), 275–282.
Chan, Y-C. L. (2004). Performance measurement and adoption of
balanced scorecard: A survey of municipal governments in the
USA and Canada. The International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 17(3), 204–221.
Chen, S., Yang, C., & Shiau, J. (2006). The application of balanced
scorecard in the performance evaluation of higher education.
The TQM Magazine, 18(2), 190–205.
Dorweiler, V. P., & Yakhou, M. (2005). Scorecard for academic
administration performance on the campus. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 20(2), 138–144.
Drtina, R., Gilbert, J., & Alon, I. (2007). Using the balanced
scorecard for value congruence in an MBA educational
setting. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 27(1), 4–13.
Farneti, F., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Italian and Australian local
governments: Balanced scorecard practices. A research note.
Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 12(1),
4–13.
Gamal, A., & Soemantri, A. I. (2017). The effect of balanced
scorecard on the private college performance (case study at the
University of WR Supratman Surabaya). Archives of Business
Research, 5(5), 126–134.
Greatbanks, R., & Tapp, D. (2007). The impact of balanced
scorecards in a public sector environment: Empirical evidence
from Dunedin City Council, New Zealand. International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, 27(8),
846–873.
Hsieh, L.-F., Chin, J.-B., & Wu, M.-C. (2006). Performance
evaluation for university electronic libraries in Taiwan. The
Electronic Library, 24(2), 212–224.
Jusoh, R., Ibrahim, D. N., & Zainuddin, Y. (2008). The performance
consequence of multiple performance measures usage:
Evidence from the Malaysian manufacturers. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 57(2),
119–136.
Jusoh, R., & Parnell, J. A. (2008). Competitive strategy and
performance measurement in the Malaysian context: An
exploratory study. Management Decision, 46(1), 5–31.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard
measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review,
70(1), 71–79.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard:
Translating strategy into action, Harvard Business Press.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001a). The strategy-focused
organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive
in the new business environment. Harvard Business School
Press.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001b). Transforming the
balanced scorecard from performance measurement to
strategic management: Part I. Accounting Horizons, 15(2),
147–160.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2005). The balanced scorecard:
measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review,
83(7), 172.
Karathanos, D., & Karathanos, P. (2005). Applying the balanced
scorecard to education. Journal of Education for Business,
80(4), 222–230.
Kettunen, J. (2005). Implementation of strategies in continuing
education. International Journal of Educational Management,
19(3), 207–217.
Kettunen, J. (2006a). Strategic planning of regional development
in higher education. Baltic Journal of Management, 1(3),
259–269.
Kettunen, J. (2006b). Strategies for the cooperation of educational
institutions and companies in mechanical engineering.
International Journal of Educational Management, 20(1),
19–28.
Lassoued, K. (2018). Balanced scorecard implementation
in higher education: An Emirati perspective. Corporate
Ownership and Control, 15(3–1), 205–216.
Lawson-Body, A., Keengwe, J., Mukankusi, L., Illia, A., & Miller,
G. (2008). E-government service delivery performance:
An adaption of the balanced scorecard to the public sector.
Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 6(2),
11–28.
Manville, G. (2007). Implementing a balanced scorecard
framework in a not for profit SME. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 56(2), 162–169.
Martello, M., Fischer, M. J., & Watson, J. G. (2008). Implementing
a balanced scorecard in a not-for-profit organization. Journal
of Business & Economics Research, 6(9), 67–80.
McDevitt, R., Giapponi, C., & Solomon, N. (2008). Strategy
revitalization in academe: A balanced scorecard approach.
International Journal of Educational Management, 22(1),
32–47.
Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Mousakhani, S., Tavakoli, M., Dalvand, M.
R., Šaparauskas, J., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2020). Importance-
performance analysis based balanced scorecard for
performance evaluation in higher education institutions: An
integrated fuzzy approach. Journal of Business Economics
and Management, 21(3), 647–678.
Oliveira, C. (2018). Balanced scorecard in universities. Journal
of Intercultural Management, 10(4), 57–83.
 70 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 17(1–2)
Papenhausen, C., & Einstein, W. (2006). Implementing the
balanced scorecard at a college of business. Measuring
Business Excellence, 10(3), 15–22.
Reda, N. W. (2017). Balanced scorecard in higher education
institutions: Congruence and roles to quality assurance
practices. Quality Assurance in Education, 25(4), 489–499.
Ronchetti, J. L. (2006). An integrated balanced scorecard strategic
planning model for nonprofit organizations. Journal of
Practical Consulting, 1(1), 25–35.
Self, J. (2003). From values to metrics: Implementation of the
balanced scorecard at a university library. Performance
Measurement and Metrics, 4(2), 57–63.
Umashankar, V., & Dutta, K. (2007). Balanced scorecards in
managing higher education institutions: An Indian perspective.
International Journal of Educational Management, 21(1),
54–67.
Valdez, A., Cortes, G., Castaneda, S., Vazquez, L., Medina, J.,
& Haces, G. (2017). Development and implementation of
View publication stats
the balanced scorecard for a higher educational institution
using business intelligence tools. International Journal
of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 8(10),
164–170.
Weinstein, L., & Bukovinsky, D. (2009). Use of the
balanced scorecard and performance metrics to achieve
operational and strategic alignment in arts and culture not-
for-profits. International Journal of Arts Management,
11(2), 42–55.
Wisniewski, M., & Ólafsson, S. (2004). Developing balanced
scorecards in local authorities: A comparison of experience.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 53(7), 602–610.
Wu, H. Y., Lin, Y. K., & Chang, C. H. (2011). Performance
evaluation of extension education centers in universities
based on the balanced scorecard. Evaluation and Program
Planning, 34(1), 37–50.