Introduction
The Balanced Scorecard brings strategy and cost management and management
accounting down to all levels of management. No longer does it appeal
or aim itself only at top management.
These notes are designed to explain the above assertion.
The scorecard describes the organization's vision of the future to
the entire organisation. It creates shared understanding.
The scorecard creates an holistic model of the strategy that allows
all employees to see how they contribute to organisational success.
Without such linkage, individuals and departments can optimise their
local performance but not contribute to achieving strategic objectives.
The scorecard focuses change efforts. If the right objectives and
measures are identified, successful implementation will likely occur.
If not, investments and initiatives will be wasted. (Kaplan & Norton
pp147-8)
A scorecard should be transparent back to the strategy:
In the past, if you had lost my strategic planning document on
an airplane and a competitor found it, I would have been angry … [similarly
with my] monthly operating review … This balanced scorecard, however,
communicates my strategy so well that a competitor seeing this would
be able to block the strategy and cause it to become effective.
(Kaplan & Norton p148)
Definition of strategy and the scorecard
A strategy is a set of hypotheses about cause and effect. The measurement
system should make the relationships (hypotheses) among objectives
(and measures) in the various perspectives explicit so that they can
be managed and validated. The chain of cause and effect should pervade
all four perspectives of a Balanced Scorecard:
The above diagram illustrates the example:
Return On Capital Employed (ROCE) may be seen as the most important,
financial, scorecard measure. The driver of this measure could be
repeat and expanded sales from existing customers, the result of a
high degree of loyalty among those customers. So, customer loyalty
is included on the scorecard (in the customer perspective) because
it is expected to have a strong influence on ROCE … Analysis of customer
preferences may reveal that on time delivery (OTD) of orders is highly
valued by customers. Thus, OTD is expected to lead to higher customer
loyalty, which, in turn, is expected to lead to higher financial performance.
So both customer loyalty and OTD are incorporated into the customer
perspective of the scorecard ... what internal processes must the
company excel at to achieve exceptional OTD … short cycle times in
operating processes and high quality internal processes. And how [do
organisations do this]? By training and improving the skills of their
operating employees …
(Kaplan & Norton pp30-1))
Feedforward: feedback control model
Linking performance measures and competitive strategies
in business
Business Performance Criteria
| Financial
performance |
profitability
|
|
|
liquidity
|
|
|
capital
structure |
|
|
market
ratios |
| Competitiveness
|
relative
market share and position |
|
|
sales
growth |
|
|
measures
of the customer base |
| Resource
utilisation |
productivity
(input: output) |
|
|
efficiency
(resources planned: consumed) |
|
|
utilisation
(resources available: consumed) |
| Quality
of service |
overall
service indicators |
|
|
measures
of the twelve determinants of |
|
|
service
quality: |
|
|
reliability,
responsiveness, aesthetics, |
|
|
cleanliness,
comfort, friendliness, |
|
|
communication,
courtesy, competence, |
|
|
access,
availability, security |
| Innovation
|
proportion
of new to old products and services |
|
|
new
product and service sales levels |
| Flexibility
|
product/service
introduction flexibility |
|
|
product/service
mix flexibility |
|
|
volume
flexibility |
|
|
delivery
flexibility |
Source: Table 11.1 Brignall et al
Performance measures used by Regional Office (RO) to measure
branch performance: a high street bank (a retail bank)
| Financial
performance |
|
| profit
and loss account |
quarterly
report to RO |
| average
gross margins as % of average interest rate |
reported
half yearly by branches to RO |
| ratio
of total commissions and expenses |
calculated
annually by RO and circulated to branches |
| return
on notional capital |
calculated
annually by RO and circulated to branches in the form of a league
table |
| level
of bad debts |
branches
supply list of all high risk accounts/out of order accounts to
RO every two months |
| Competitive
performance |
|
| number
of accounts by product category |
quarterly
report to RO |
| number
of corporate accounts lost and gained, with reasons for transfer
|
quarterly
report to RO |
| Resource
utilisation |
|
| ratio
of total workload and total available man hours |
monthly
reporting to RO |
| average
debit and credit balance per head of staff |
calculated
annually by RO for each branch and circulated as a league table
|
| Service
quality |
|
| number
of customer complaints received |
continuously
monitored by RO |
| number
of corporate accounts lost and gained, with reasons for transfer
|
quarterly
report to RO |
| audit
of quality of branch lending decisions |
carried
out every three years by RO |
| Innovation
and flexibility |
|
| none
identified |
|
Source: Table 11.2 Brignall et al
Performance measures used to monitor hotel performance
| Financial
performance |
|
| profit
and loss account |
monthly
report to management team; costs and revenues broken down by department
|
| budget
variance analysis |
each
month general managers have to submit their P&L account explanation
for the three largest variances |
| breakdown
of payroll costs, days absence, overtime etc |
reported
by each hotel every two weeks to head office |
| Competitive
performance |
|
| market
share (number of rooms occupied out of total number of rooms available
in local market |
monthly
report to management team |
| number
and % of rooms occupied for each of the top six local competitors
|
monthly
report to management team |
| average
room rates charged by the top six local competitors |
monthly
report to management team |
| number
of rooms sold by customer type |
monthly
report to management team |
| customer
loyalty: number of repeat bookings |
data
available from automated booking system |
| Resource
utilisation measures |
|
| %
of rooms occupied out of total number available |
monthly
report to management team |
| Service
quality measures |
|
| customer
satisfaction with: overall |
guest
questionnaires: data compiled |
| service
levels: |
into
a monthly report to |
| staff
friendliness, helpfulness, attentiveness, efficiency and |
management
team with |
| discretion,
cleanliness, appearance |
statistics
on all the items listed |
| and
comfort of rooms, functionality |
opposite
|
| of
facilities, quality of food, handling |
|
| of
check in, value for money |
|
| likelihood
of repeat custom |
guest
questionnaires |
| staff
turnover by avoidable/ unavoidable reasons for transfer |
monthly
report to management team |
| Innovation
and flexibility |
|
| none
identified |
|
Source: Table 11.3 Brignall et al
See also Table 11.4 in Brignall et al for similar table relating to
the home electronics supply industry
Royal Mail (UK) approach to measurement
This model is based on a series of steps that, if an when applied
properly, will lead to 'good value added' measurement.
There are 10 steps in this model which, most of the time, apply to
both in process situations and results oriented situations:
| Step
1 |
identify
measurement classification - process or results and overall purpose
|
| Step
2 |
identify
precise aim and the type of measurement |
| Step
3 |
determine
who will use it |
| Step
4 |
position
the measurement (if attached to the process) |
| Step
5 |
identify
specifically what to measure |
| Step
6 |
select
an appropriate measurement technique |
| Step
7 |
define
the measurement feedback technique |
| Step
8 |
ensure
a healthy mix of measurement is established |
| Step
9 |
apply
the measurement 'added value' test equations |
| Step
10 |
develop
and implement measurements |
References
Kaplan RS and Norton DP (1996) The Balanced Scorecard Harvard Business
School Press
Zairi M Measuring for today and tomorrow: the role of non financial
performance assessment (in Drury C (Ed) (1996) Management Accounting
Handbook Butterworth Heinemann in association with CIMA pp185-202)
Brignall TJ, Fitzgerald L, Johnston r, Silvestro R Linking performance
measures and competitive strategies in service business: three case
studies (in Drury C (Ed) (1996) Management Accounting Handbook Butterworth
Heinemann in association with CIMA pp246-265)
Duncan Williamson
August 2001 revised 9 December 2001 and 26 February 2003