Chinas Paper Queen

The Balanced Scorecard framework was first introduced in the 1992 Harvard Business review article, ‘The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance.’ (Kaplan 2006) The purpose of the Balanced Scorecard is to harmonise the corporation’s strategy, operational objectives and performance measures so that they can be controlled to achieve goals. (Stevanovic et al. 2012, p.261) The BSC can be conceptualized as, “…a management system, which is structured according to the logic of the cyber-netic management circle (“plan-do-check-act”) (Bieker 2002, p.2) The model usually measures four core domains organised into quadrants; the customer perspective, internal business perspective, innovation and learning perspective, and the financial perspective. Each closely relating to a recognised aspect of firm performance. (Kaplan & Norton 2005) As seen in the figure below, the scorecard is organised such that the interrelationship between these variables as well as comparison between goals and measures are easily seen.

A balanced scorecard is a tool to provide management a way to bridge the gap between the organization’s strategy and vision and the operational processes used to do business. It enables the company to look at more than just the financial targets, but to include nonfinancial measures such as customer service, internal business processes and more. These intangible measures provide better focus on the organization’s long-term strategies. This paper is an attempt to analyze Frieda Fizz decision to utilize a balanced scorecard as they expand into new geographic areas. The strengths and weaknesses of each perspective are discussed along with the pros and cons of using

The foundation of effective strategic planning framework is the inclusion of goals and objectives that capture shareholder value, customer value, process and internal operations, and learning & growth objectives for employees. All of these factors must be orchestrated around a compelling vision and mission for the business. An effective balanced scorecard can transform a diverse enterprise into a single, unified organization that strives to attain the most challenging goals and objectives together (Abernathy, 1997). For companies including We Do Your Proposal, the potential exists for delivering transformational value to customers through the use of a balanced scorecard strategy planning and management process. Balanced scorecards have been shown to continually improve the clarity of vision and probability of long-term success for even the most compel of enterprises that adopt them (Jennings, 2010).

A balanced scorecard provides managers with tools they need to be able to achieve future competitive success. A balanced scorecard translates an organisation’s mission and strategy into a comprehensive set of performance measures that provides the framework for a strategic measurement and management system (Kaplan & Norton, 1996). The scorecard measures performance across four critical business perspectives: financial, customers, internal business processes, learning and growth.

Performance measures which are utilized as tools for management have to be broadened in order to include input and measures of process. The balanced scorecard for example is one approach which would assess a company and its programs from different perspectives that include the client, process, employee and finance departments (Poister, 2003). This is a scorecard which would create a holistic model of the strategy which would allow every worker to see the way it contributes to company success.

The scorecard addresses a serious deficiency in traditional management systems: their inability to link a company’s long term strategy with its short-term actions. Managers using the balance scorecard do not rely on short-term financial measures as the sole indicators of the company’s performance. The scorecard introduces four new management processes that, separately & in combination, contribute to linking long-term strategic objectives with short term actions.

The balance scorecard refers to a component within a comprehensive management system that integrates strategy and operations (Kaplan, 2009, pp. 1265). The balanced scorecard has been a multi-dimensional performance measurement system (Kaplan and Norton, 1992), which over the years has upgraded versions with much interest not only in academic fields (Hoque, 2014); but also as a management tool (Rigby & Bilodeau, 2013). The upgraded versions contain outcome measures and also the performance drivers of each outcome which have been linked together in cause-and-effect relationships thus making the performance measurement system to be a feed-forward control system.

Facing the changing of enterprise external environment, it asks for managers should stand at the height of strategic management to makes an overall plan for the development of the enterprise. The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) has great advantages in the link of enterprise strategy and performance management. It covers strategic areas, and includes human resource management. However, it has many shortages and theoretical defect.

A balanced scorecard can be thought of as a strategic management tool, which the management of various organizations can use to monitor how the activities of employees affect the related operations. The origin of the concept can be traced back to the 1990s when Robert Kaplan and David Norton developed and published the idea in Harvard review journal. It can transform a company’s mission and vision into objectives, which can be quantified and measured. Therefore, it can quantify financial performance, the performance of business processes in the market, innovation performance, and employee performance among others. This tool can further be defined by two characteristics. Firstly, it focuses on organizations ' main agenda. Secondly, it uses a small number of data to measure various processes. This paper seeks to determine the ideal inputs for the four major elements of the Balanced Scorecard.

Balanced scorecards have been around since the 1990’s and was developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton (Edwards (2011) and is used by many organizations of all types all over the world, non-profit, for-profit, governmental agencies, ect., in order to develop a strategic planning and improve strategies within their organizational structures. It pertains to many different aspects from financial aspects, employee retention, and customer satisfaction, internal and external perspectives, to employee morale, as well as accountability. A balanced scorecard will indicate weaknesses and strengths of all aspects within an organization such as finances, the business prospective, short and long term goals, customer satisfaction, knowledgeable concepts, as well as the organization’s mission and vision statements.

Management makes plans and measures performance against targets. Many organizations have struggled to integrate the information requirements of the balanced scorecard into their strategic management system. The information necessary for the balanced scorecard includes nonfinancial information (measures) that drive financial performance. The purpose of this paper is to modify the REA framework as to include the financial and nonfinancial information that maps to the balanced scorecard in terms of resources, events, and agents. Most of the balanced scorecard is already supported by the REA framework. To view this information in

Definition of what comprised a Balanced Scorecard was sparse and focused on the high level structure of the device. Simple ‘causality’ between the four perspectives was illustrated but not used for specific purpose. Kaplan and Norton’s original paper’s focus was on the selection and reporting of a limited number of measures in each of the four perspectives (Kaplan and Norton, 1992). The paper suggested use of attitudinal questions relating to the vision and goals of the organisation to help in the selection of measures to be used, and also encouraged the consideration of ‘typical’ areas of interest in this process. Kaplan and Norton’s original work makes no specific observations concerning how the Balanced Scorecard might improve the performance of organisations; the implication is that the provision of

Organisations, in order to increase performance, profitability, efficiency and to gain a competitive advantage, will benefit from a good strategic performance measurement system to ensure that lower-level managers are acting in a way that is consistent with top managers’ goals and whole organisation’s strategy. One the dominant system is the balanced scorecard framework (Hill, Jones & Schilling, 2015, p.376). The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) defined as “a tool that translates an organisation’s mission, objectives and strategies into performance measures. It is used to implement strategy and to monitor and manage performance, and may form part of the

The balanced scorecard consists of four critical performance measures that managers can use to align their company’s initiatives with organizational strategy. It is one of the most important developments in management accounting, particularly in strategic planning and control because it offers a balanced view of how non-financial and financial measures can be casually linked together (Shutibhinyo, 2014). The purpose of this research paper is to provide a brief history of the balanced scorecard, the components of a balanced scorecard, and finally an in-depth comparative analysis of how two companies use the balanced scorecard to meet its strategic objectives.

The balanced scorecard was developed by Dr. Robert Kaplan and David Norton. It was initially introduced as a tool for multidimensional performance management. But over the years it has evolved into a framework for strategic planning and management. It is a performance evaluation framework which augments the performance measures related to the non-financial aspects to traditional financial metrics to give executives. Thus companies can monitor the financial aspects while simultaneously keeping in check the progress on capabilities, intangible assets acquired for the future growth. Thus the managers and the executives have a 'balanced ' view of the organization’s performance.