The document discusses the history and key aspects of the Balanced Scorecard framework developed by Kaplan and Norton. It describes the Balanced Scorecard as translating strategy into implementation across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal business processes, and learning and growth. Each perspective aims to address important questions for an organization. The financial perspective focuses on traditional financial measures, while the other three perspectives capture additional leading indicators important for future performance.
NetMap for Organisational Analysis and RestructuringNetMap
NetMap is a powerful data relationship visualisation analysis software, which lends itself particularly well to analysing communication and information flows within organisations.
NetMap for Organisational Analysis and RestructuringNetMap
NetMap is a powerful data relationship visualisation analysis software, which lends itself particularly well to analysing communication and information flows within organisations.
Strategic management contribute to :
develop competitive advances and reveals implementation practices and mechanisms of control
Allow a long-term alignment and a progressive environment strategy
Lead to globalization and strategic flexibility
An understanding of return on investment (ROI) on employee enables an organization to strategically align the efforts prioritized for its human capital management initiatives to those that can have the most influence on the performance outcomes.
Balance Scorecard by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton.
References: "Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part 1"
Strategic management contribute to :
develop competitive advances and reveals implementation practices and mechanisms of control
Allow a long-term alignment and a progressive environment strategy
Lead to globalization and strategic flexibility
An understanding of return on investment (ROI) on employee enables an organization to strategically align the efforts prioritized for its human capital management initiatives to those that can have the most influence on the performance outcomes.
Balance Scorecard by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton.
References: "Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part 1"
Know the basics of Balance Scorecard and its evolution. Also understand perspectives involved into BSC.
PS. The source of the document is as mentioned inside the document.
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves for c.docxgertrudebellgrove
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves
for competition that is based on information, their abil-
ity to exploit intangible assets has become far more
decisive than their ability to invest in and manage
physical assets. Several years ago, in recognition of this change,
we introduced a concept we called the balanced scorecard. The
balanced scorecard supplemented traditional fi nancial measures
with criteria that measured performance from three additional
perspectives – those of customers, internal business processes,
and learning and growth. (See the exhibit “Translating Vision
and Strategy: Four Perspectives.”) It therefore enabled compa-
nies to track fi nancial results while simultaneously monitoring
progress in building the capabilities and acquiring the intangible
assets they would need for future growth. The scorecard wasn’t
Editor’s Note: In 1992, Robert S. Kaplan and
David P. Norton’s concept of the balanced
scorecard revolutionized conventional
thinking about performance metrics. By
going beyond traditional measures of
fi nancial performance, the concept has
given a generation of managers a better
understanding of how their companies are
really doing.
These nonfi nancial metrics are so valu-
able mainly because they predict future
fi nancial performance rather than simply
report what’s already happened. This
article, fi rst published in 1996, describes
how the balanced scorecard can help
senior managers systematically link current
actions with tomorrow’s goals, focusing
on that place where, in the words of the
authors, “the rubber meets the sky.”
Using the Balanced Scorecard
as a Strategic Management System
by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton
A
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | January–February 1996
150 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
R
o
b
e
rt
M
e
g
an
ck
1284 Kaplan.indd 1501284 Kaplan.indd 150 6/7/07 10:51:38 AM6/7/07 10:51:38 AM
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System
152 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
a replacement for fi nancial measures;
it was their complement.
Recently, we have seen some compa-
nies move beyond our early vision for
the scorecard to discover its value as the
cornerstone of a new strategic manage-
ment system. Used this way, the score-
card addresses a serious defi ciency in
traditional management systems: their
inability to link a company’s long-term
strategy with its short-term actions.
Most companies’ operational and
management control systems are built
around fi nancial measures and targets,
which bear little relation to the com-
pany’s progress in achieving long-term
strategic objectives. Thus the emphasis
most companies place on short-term fi -
nancial measures leaves a gap between
the development of a strategy and its
implementation.
Managers us ...
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves for c.docxpoulterbarbara
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves
for competition that is based on information, their abil-
ity to exploit intangible assets has become far more
decisive than their ability to invest in and manage
physical assets. Several years ago, in recognition of this change,
we introduced a concept we called the balanced scorecard. The
balanced scorecard supplemented traditional fi nancial measures
with criteria that measured performance from three additional
perspectives – those of customers, internal business processes,
and learning and growth. (See the exhibit “Translating Vision
and Strategy: Four Perspectives.”) It therefore enabled compa-
nies to track fi nancial results while simultaneously monitoring
progress in building the capabilities and acquiring the intangible
assets they would need for future growth. The scorecard wasn’t
Editor’s Note: In 1992, Robert S. Kaplan and
David P. Norton’s concept of the balanced
scorecard revolutionized conventional
thinking about performance metrics. By
going beyond traditional measures of
fi nancial performance, the concept has
given a generation of managers a better
understanding of how their companies are
really doing.
These nonfi nancial metrics are so valu-
able mainly because they predict future
fi nancial performance rather than simply
report what’s already happened. This
article, fi rst published in 1996, describes
how the balanced scorecard can help
senior managers systematically link current
actions with tomorrow’s goals, focusing
on that place where, in the words of the
authors, “the rubber meets the sky.”
Using the Balanced Scorecard
as a Strategic Management System
by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton
A
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | January–February 1996
150 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
R
o
b
e
rt
M
e
g
an
ck
1284 Kaplan.indd 1501284 Kaplan.indd 150 6/7/07 10:51:38 AM6/7/07 10:51:38 AM
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System
152 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
a replacement for fi nancial measures;
it was their complement.
Recently, we have seen some compa-
nies move beyond our early vision for
the scorecard to discover its value as the
cornerstone of a new strategic manage-
ment system. Used this way, the score-
card addresses a serious defi ciency in
traditional management systems: their
inability to link a company’s long-term
strategy with its short-term actions.
Most companies’ operational and
management control systems are built
around fi nancial measures and targets,
which bear little relation to the com-
pany’s progress in achieving long-term
strategic objectives. Thus the emphasis
most companies place on short-term fi -
nancial measures leaves a gap between
the development of a strategy and its
implementation.
Managers us.
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves for c.docxaryan532920
S COMPANIES AROUND THE WORLD transform themselves
for competition that is based on information, their abil-
ity to exploit intangible assets has become far more
decisive than their ability to invest in and manage
physical assets. Several years ago, in recognition of this change,
we introduced a concept we called the balanced scorecard. The
balanced scorecard supplemented traditional fi nancial measures
with criteria that measured performance from three additional
perspectives – those of customers, internal business processes,
and learning and growth. (See the exhibit “Translating Vision
and Strategy: Four Perspectives.”) It therefore enabled compa-
nies to track fi nancial results while simultaneously monitoring
progress in building the capabilities and acquiring the intangible
assets they would need for future growth. The scorecard wasn’t
Editor’s Note: In 1992, Robert S. Kaplan and
David P. Norton’s concept of the balanced
scorecard revolutionized conventional
thinking about performance metrics. By
going beyond traditional measures of
fi nancial performance, the concept has
given a generation of managers a better
understanding of how their companies are
really doing.
These nonfi nancial metrics are so valu-
able mainly because they predict future
fi nancial performance rather than simply
report what’s already happened. This
article, fi rst published in 1996, describes
how the balanced scorecard can help
senior managers systematically link current
actions with tomorrow’s goals, focusing
on that place where, in the words of the
authors, “the rubber meets the sky.”
Using the Balanced Scorecard
as a Strategic Management System
by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton
A
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | January–February 1996
150 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
R
o
b
e
rt
M
e
g
an
ck
1284 Kaplan.indd 1501284 Kaplan.indd 150 6/7/07 10:51:38 AM6/7/07 10:51:38 AM
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | BEST OF HBR | Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System
152 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 | hbr.org
a replacement for fi nancial measures;
it was their complement.
Recently, we have seen some compa-
nies move beyond our early vision for
the scorecard to discover its value as the
cornerstone of a new strategic manage-
ment system. Used this way, the score-
card addresses a serious defi ciency in
traditional management systems: their
inability to link a company’s long-term
strategy with its short-term actions.
Most companies’ operational and
management control systems are built
around fi nancial measures and targets,
which bear little relation to the com-
pany’s progress in achieving long-term
strategic objectives. Thus the emphasis
most companies place on short-term fi -
nancial measures leaves a gap between
the development of a strategy and its
implementation.
Managers us ...
In many modern major enterprises, financial controllership functions have been just that – functional. Generally focused on managing risk, they have included technical accounting and financial reporting support, the implementation and maintenance of accounting standards, the management, simplification and improvement of processes and the guardianship of internal controls. Insightful controllership provides an entirely new way of looking at financial controllership.
NTHEMIND OF GREATCOMPANIESBy Scott BlanchardThe.docxhenrymartin15260
NTHE
MIND OF GREAT
COMPANIES?
By Scott Blanchard
T
he old saying, "money isn't
everything," rings hollow in
today's business world.
where rninute-by-minute
stock quotes scroll across
our computer monitors, and
careers are won or lost based
on Wall Street's analysis of a
company's perforniance. Throw in giob-
al competition, outdated products and
services, increased costs, corporate silos
and other business challenges, and it's
no wonder that tnatiy of today's compa-
nies focus solely on their bottom line,
ofteti at the expense of customer service
and employee satisfaction.
It need not be this way. Great compa
nies focus on more than one bottom
line when gauging their perforniance.
Ttiey choose to be not only the invest-
ment of choice, but also the provider of
choice for their products or services, as
well as the employer of choice for work-
ers in their industry. By looking beyond
immediate, short term results and focus-
ing on strategies to make their compa-
nies successful for the long-term, they
recognize challenges sooner, identify
solutions more quickly and deliver re-
sults ahead of their competitors. In short,
they learn to lead at a higher level.
A clear warning sign that your busi-
ness is trapped in a short-term mindset
is the presence of an "either/or" philoso-
phy. Managers either believe they can
achieve profitability or they can develop
a great workplace, but not both. These
leaders don't always take morale and job
satisfaction into consideration. Their
focus is only their financial bottom line.
From there, it's a short leap to the false
notion tlrat making money is the sole
reason to be in business.
A NEW APPROACH
Contrary to the either/or philosophy,
leading at a higher level requires man-
agers to embrace a "both/and" approach.
In great companies, the development of
people is of equal importance to finan-
cial performance. As a result, the focus
is on long-term results and human satis-
faction. Accordingly, great companies
begin by both creating and nurturing a
vision of the future, and then measuring
progress against that vision.
There are three questions to ask,
which represent the main components
of a corporate vision. By focusing on
these questions, companies are more
likely to ensure they don't lose sight of
their path to success. They are:
• What business are you in? This will
help you identify your company's signif-
icant purpose.
• What will the future look like if you
are successful?
• What guides your behavior and deci-
sions on a daily basis? This will help
you identify clear values.
Great companies keep al! three of
these ideas clearly in mind and make
necessary course corrections when they
realize they are off track.
The next step is to create a corporate
culture that both reflects and reinforces
the corporate vision. The culture con-
sists of the values, attitudes, beliefs,
behaviors and practices of the organiza-
tion's members. Culture is an organiza-
tion's personality, and it can help or hin-
.
ALL THE DETAILS ARE MENTIONED IN THE DOCUMENT RELATED TO ALL 4 PERSPECTIVES OF BSC.
-REFERRED MAINLY FOR STRATEGIC COST MANAGEMENT.
-INCLUDES ALL THE EXPLANATION WITH APPROPRIATE EXAMPLES & CASE STUDY
MRTP Act
MTP Act
RTP Act
UTP Act
Compeition (Amendment) bill
Competition LAw
Competition and Industrial Policy
Anti Competitive Agreements
Competition Comission OF India
IPR Protection
Abuse of Dominance
IRDA
Foreign Exchange Management Act
Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI
The Consumer Protection Act, 1986
2. History of the Balanced Scorecard
In 1992, an article by Robert Kaplan and David Norton entitled "The
Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive Performance" in the
Harvard Business Review caused a lot of attention for their method,
and led to their business bestseller, "The Balanced Scorecard:
Translating Strategy into Action", published in 1996.
The financial performance of an organization is essential for its
success. Even non-profit organizations must deal in a sensible way
with funds they receive. However, a pure financial approach for
managing organizations suffers from two drawbacks:
It is historical. Whilst it tells us what has happened to the
organization, it may not tell us what is currently happening. Nor it is
a good indicator of future performance.
It is too low. It is common for the current market value of an
organization to exceed the market value of its assets. Tobin's-q
measures the ratio of the value of a company's assets to its market
value. The excess value is resulting from intangible assets. This kind
of value is not measured by normal financial reporting.
3. 4 perspectives of the Balanced ScorecardThe
Balanced Scorecard method of Kaplan and Norton is
a strategic approach, and performance management
system, that enables organizations to translate a
company's vision and strategy into implementation,
working from 4 perspectives:
Financial perspective.
Customer perspective.
Business process perspective.
Learning and growth perspective.
4. The balanced scorecard forces managers to look at the
business from four important perspectives. It links
performance measures by requiring firms to address four
basic questions:
How do customers see us? - Customer perspective
What must we excel at? - Internal perspective
Can we continue to improve and create value? -
Innovation & learning perspective
How do we look to shareholders? - Financial perspective
This allows the monitoring of present performance, but
the method also tries to capture information about how
well the organization is positioned to perform in the
future.
5. 1. The Financial Perspective
Kaplan and Norton do not disregard the traditional need for financial data.
Timely and accurate funding data will always be a priority, and managers will
make sure to provide it. In fact, there is often more than sufficient handling
and processing of financial data. With the implementation of a corporate
database, it is hoped that more of the processing can be centralized and
automated. But the point is that the current emphasis on financial issues
leads to an unbalanced situation with regard to other perspectives. There is
perhaps a need to include additional financial related data, such as risk
assessment and cost-benefit data, in this category.
2. The customer perspective
Recent management philosophy has shown an increasing realization of the
importance of customer focus and customer satisfaction in any company.
These are called leading indicators: if customers are not satisfied, they will
eventually find other suppliers that will meet their needs. Poor performance
from this perspective is thus a leading indicator of future decline. Even
though the current financial picture may seem (still) good. In developing
metrics for satisfaction, customers should be analyzed. In terms of kinds of
customers, and of the kinds of processes for which we are providing a product
or service to those customer groups.
6. 3. The Business Process perspective
This perspective refers to internal business processes. Measurements based on this
perspective will show the managers how well their business is running, and whether
its products and services conform to customer requirements. These metrics have to
be carefully designed by those that know these processes most intimately. In addition
to the strategic management processes, two kinds of business processes may be
identified:
Mission-oriented processes. Many unique problems are encountered in these
processes.
Support processes. The support processes are more repetitive in nature, and
hence easier to measure and to benchmark. Generic measurement methods can be
used.
4. Learning and Growth perspective
This perspective includes employee training and corporate cultural attitudes related
to both individual and corporate self-improvement. In a knowledge worker
organization, people are the main resource. In the current climate of rapid
technological, economic changes and new legislation and regulations, it is becoming
necessary for knowledge workers to learn continuously. Government agencies often
find themselves unable to hire new technical workers and at the same time is showing
a decline in training of existing employees. Kaplan and Norton emphasize that
'learning' is something more than 'training'; it also includes things like mentors and
tutors within the organization, as well as that ease of communication among workers
that allows them to readily get help on a problem when it is needed. It also includes
technological tools such as an Intranet.
The integration of these four perspectives into a one graphical appealing picture, has
made the Balanced Scorecard method very successful as a management methodology.