Balanced Scorecard ：Basic Concepts(英文)
I Manage into the future not in the past
II Implementing the strategy requires 4 steps
Managing Strategy : Four Processes
4Clarifying the vision 4Gancial
Results that
Internal
the business
Process
Customer
provides to its shareholders
Identifies Customer, market
segments and value propositions
to be delivered
4 Translates a company’s strategy into a coherent set of performance measures.
4 Establishes cause and effect relationships between Key Performance Indicators.
Key internal processes which drive the
business
Infrastructure,
people,
systems and
Learning and procedures.
Growth
What is it?
Balanced Scorecard:
Two underlying
Translating the
Vision
Communicating Dynamic
and Linking
BSC
4Articulating the shared vision 4Supplying strategic feedback 4Facilitating strategy review
and learning
Building a scorecard can help managers link today’s actions with tomorrow’s goals
=
Link long-term strategic objectives with term actions
short-
Strategic Perspectives
The Financial perspective is critical but it only measures past performance.
The BSC introduces additional perspectives, the drivers of future financial performance.
Performance drivers
Performance Measures
✓ Diagnostic measures.
Monitor if the business remains in control
✓ Strategic measures. BSC
Define a strategy designed for competitive excellence.
What is it?
Balanced Scorecard:
Two underlying
factors:
I Manage into the future not in the past
What is it?
Balanced Scorecard: I Manage into the future not in the past
Financial
Measures organizational performance across four balanced perspectives:
Customer
Learning and Growth
Internal Process
Strategic Perspectives
Measures organizational performance across four balanced perspectives:
Strategic Measures “Balanced?” Scorecard
Generic measures.
Lag Indicators.
Core outcome measures Profitability, market share, customer satisfaction, etc..
• Most companies were improving existing processes but were not identifying the ones that were truly strategic.
What is it?
Balanced Scorecard:
4 Management process to implement a business strategy.
Feedback and
Learning
4Communicating and educating 4Setting Goals 4Linking rewards to performance
measures
Business Planning
4Setting Targets 4Aligning strategic initiatives 4Allocating resources 4Establishing milestones
Balanced Scorecard ：Basic Concepts （英文）
BSC History
1990, Research arm of KPMG - Study in “Measuring Performance in the Organization of the Future”.
• Relying mainly on financial performance measures was impeding the organizations’ ability to create future value.
平衡计分卡(Balance Score Card)
过程性指标
客户面
新增的绩 效指标
内部营运面
学习与成长面
平衡记分卡的四个层面：内部营运面
结果性指标 传统的绩 效指标
财务面
过程性指标
客户面
建立平衡记分卡的顺序，通常是在先制定财务 和客户方面的目标与指标后，才制定企业内部 流程面的目标与指标，这个顺序使企业能够抓 住重点，专心衡量那些与股东和客户目标息息 相关的流程 内部运营绩效考核应以对客户满意度和实现财 务目标影响最大的业务流程为核心
什么是绩效管理体系？
绩效管理体系的定义 绩效管理体系是一套有机整合的流程 和系统，专注于建立、收集、处理和 监控绩效数据。它既能增强企业的决 策能力，又能通过一系列综合平衡的 测量指标来帮助企业实现策略目标和 经营计划 高效的绩效管理体系是企业实现运 营目标的重要的工具
第0页
高效的绩效管理体系怎样帮助企业实现其运营目标？
固定资产利用率
公司
客户方面的关键成功因素与绩效指标的因果关系举例
关键成功因素
关键绩效指标
关键成功因素
提高大客户的满意度
关键绩效指标
大客户的满意度 市场上由于经销商造成的冲货次数
主要负责部门
销售部门 销售部门 销售部门 技术开发部门 技术开发部门 销售部门 销售部门 销售部门 销售部门 销售部门 销售部门
非财务性指标
客户面 内部流程 学习与成长面
年度经营计划中纲要性提示若干非财 务性目标规划的指标，但缺乏与日常 运作连结的执行计划 企业的定期检查以衡量财务性指标的 实现情况作为重点，忽略了非财务性 指标 非财务性指标与整个评估体系未作很 好的因果联结 财务性数据发生的根本原因，不做深 入的分析和调查
“我们在客户 眼里的表现？”
平衡计分卡的基本概念(英文版)
Performance Measures
Diagnostic measures.
Monitor if the business remains in control
Strategic measures. BSC
Define a strategy designed for competitive excellence.
Building a scorecard can help managers link today’s actions with tomorrow’s goals
=
Link long-term strategic objectives with short-term actions
Strategic Perspectives
Strategic Measures “Balanced?” Scorecard
Generic measures.
Lag Indicators.
Core outcome measures Profitability, market share, customer satisfaction, etc..
• Most companies were improving existing processes but were not identifying the ones that were truly strategic.
What is it?
Balanced Scorecard:
Management process to implement a business strategy.
Balanced Scorecard : 990, Research arm of KPMG - Study in “Measuring Performance in the Organization of the Future”.
平衡计分卡(中英文)
Measurement of Behavior
2010/11/5
• 组织的测量系统强有力地影响着经理和雇员 的行为 • 传统的财务测量
• 持续改进和创新的诨导信号 • 丌符合当今的竞争环境所需要的技能?
• 运作测量更重要吗?
• 周期时间 • 缺陷率
• 没有一种单一的测量,可以提供一个清晰的绩 效目标戒集中精力于业务的关键领域
2010/11/5
Benefits
• 通过限制使用的测量数目，使信息过载达到最小化
• 许多公司持续增加新测量 • 促使经理们聚焦于少数最关键的测量
• 将公司竞争议程中很多看似丌相关的元素集中在一仹 管理报告里
• • • • • • 成为顾客导向的 缩短响应时间 改进质量 强调团队合作 减少新产品发布次数 为长期而管理
• • • • • • Fuel Air speed Altitude Bearing Destination Other indicators that summarize the current and predicted environment
• Reliance on only one instrument can be fatal
收益
2010/11/5
• Helps focus strategic vision
• Requires managers to select a limited number of critical indicators within each of the four perspectives
• Provides balance
• • • • Product Process Customer Market development
平衡记分卡(Balanced Scorecard)概要
INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES
A-6
CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE
OBJECTIVE MEASURE NATIONAL TARGET
Customer Satisfaction
CORE Customer Satisfaction Index Data Source: Customer Climate Survey Also, documented results from formal Baldrige, Presidential or Energy Quality Award Self-Assessments and Site Visit Evaluations Elements: Timeliness: Extent of customer satisfaction with timeliness of procurement processing; planning activities; and on-going communications Quality: Extent of customer satisfaction with the quality of procurement services Communications: Extent to which procurement communicates accurate information which impacts the work of my organization 85% customer satisfaction rating in 1998 (90% in 1999, 95% in 2000)
MISSION
To provide acquisition and assistance services to support accomplishment of the Department's programmatic goals and objectives.
什么是平衡记分卡
什么是平衡记分卡？平衡计分卡（Balanced Scoreboard），源自于哈佛大学教授Robert Kaplan与诺朗顿研究院（Nolan Norton Institute）的执行长DavidNorton于90年所从事的“未来组织绩效衡量方法”研究计划，该计划的目的在于找出超越传统以财务会计量度为主的绩效衡量模式，以使组织的“策略”能够转变为“行动”。
该研究的结论“平衡计分卡：驱动绩效的量度”发表在1992年哈佛企管评论1月与2月号，平衡计分卡强调传统的财务会计模式只能衡量过去发生的事项（落后的结果因素），但无法评估企业前瞻性的投资（领先的驱动因素）。
因此，必须改用一个将组织的远景转变为一组由四项观点组成的绩效指标架构来评价组织的绩效。
此四项指标分别是：财务（Financial）、顾客（Customer）、企业内部流程（Internal Business Processes）、学习与成长（Learning and Growth）。
藉着这四项指标的衡量，组织得以明确和严谨的手法来诠释其策略，它一方面保留传统上衡量过去绩效的财务指标，并且兼顾了促成财务目标的绩效因素之衡量；在支持组织追求业绩之余，也监督组织的行为应兼顾学习与成长的面向，并且透过一连串的互动因果关系，组织得以把产出（Outcome）和绩效驱动因素（Performance Driver）串联起来，以衡量指标与其量度做为语言，把组织的使命和策略转变为一套前后连贯的系统绩效评核量度，把复杂而笼统的概念转化为精确的目标，藉以寻求财务与非财务的衡量之间、短期与长期的目标之间、落后的与领先的指标之间，以及外部与内部绩效之间的平衡。
平衡记分卡（the Balanced Score Card,简称BSC）作为一种前沿的、全新的组织绩效管理手段和管理思想，在全世界的各行各业得到广泛的运用。
一、平衡记分卡的来源哈佛商学院的罗伯特.S.卡普兰（哈佛商学院的领导力开发课程教授）和诺朗诺顿研究所所长大卫.P.诺顿（复兴全球战略集团创始人兼总裁）经过为期一年对在绩效测评方面处于领先地位的12家公司的研究后，发展出一种全新的组织绩效管理方法，即“平衡记分卡”，并发表于1992年1/2月号的《哈佛商业评论》中。
平衡计分卡基本概念讲义
Building a scorecard can help managers link today’s actions with tomorrow’s goals = Link long-term strategic objectives with short-term actions
Strategic Perspectives
Communicating and Linking
Communicating and educating Setting Goals Linking rewards to performance measures
Dynamic BSC
Feedback and Learning
Business Planning
Financial Internal Process Customer
Measures organizational performance across four balanced perspectives:
Learning and Growth
Strategic Perspectives
Financial Internal Results that the business Process provides to Customer its Identifies shareholders Key internal Customer, market processes segments and which value propositions drive the to be delivered business Infrastructure, people, systems and Learning and procedures. Growth
平衡计分卡BSC(The Blanced ScoreCard)概念
哈佛商业评论》在庆祝创刊80周年华诞之际，隆重评选推出了过去80年来最具影响力的十大管理理念，平衡计分卡名列第二。
目前，平衡计分卡作为一个强有力的战略绩效管理的工具在世界500强的大部分企业里得到应用。
什么是平衡计分卡？你对这个名词可能会感到陌生！其实它就实实在在地在我们身边！目前我集团公司导入的绩效管理系统正是运用了平衡计分卡的思想，只是我们一直没有明确提出这个概念而已。
对于平衡计分卡，我们可以这样表述：平衡计分卡的核心思想就是通过财务、客户、内部流程及学习与发展四个方面的指标之间的相互驱动的因果关系展现组织的战略轨迹，实现绩效考核——绩效改进以及战略实施——战略修正的战略目标过程。
它把绩效考核的地位上升到组织的战略层面，使之成为组织战略的实施工具。
首先我们要清楚，平衡计分卡究竟“平衡”什么？之所以称之为“平衡计分卡”，主要因为它是通过财务指标与非财务指标考核方法之间的相互补充“平衡”，同时也是在定量评价与定性评价之间、客观评价与主观评价之间、组织的短期目标与长期目标之间、组织的各部门之间寻求“平衡”的基础上完成的绩效考核与战略实施过程。
以下是对平衡计分卡的四个角度的简单阐述：财务角度：我们怎样满足股东？企业经营的直接目的和结果是创造价值，利润始终是企业所追求的最终目标。
我集团公司的指标如：利润额、开发成本等。
客户角度：客户如何看我们？如何向客户提供所需的产品和服务，从而满足客户需要，提高企业竞争力，已经成为企业能否获得可持续性发展的关键。
客户角度正是从质量、性能、服务等方面，考验企业的表现。
具体如：新客户开发、客户满意度等指标。
内部流程角度：我们必须擅长什么？我们企业是否建立起合适的组织、流程、管理机制，在这些方面存在哪些优势和不足。
内部流程角度应该从以上方面着手，制定考核指标。
如：技术管理、质量管理等指标。
学习与发展角度：我们能否继续提高并创造价值？企业的成长与员工的能力素质和企业竞争力的提高息息相关，而从长远角度来看，企业唯有不断学习与创新，才能实现长远的发展。
平衡积分卡指标库
平衡积分卡指标库平衡积分卡指标库是指在实施平衡积分卡（Balanced Scorecard）管理方法时，为了衡量组织绩效而建立的指标库。
平衡积分卡是一种以多维度方式衡量企业绩效的管理工具，它通过将企业目标划分为四个维度来提供一个整体的绩效评估系统，包括财务、客户、学习与成长及内部流程。
建立平衡积分卡指标库的目的是帮助组织识别和衡量关键绩效指标，进而指导和改善组织的战略执行。
下面将介绍一些常见的平衡积分卡指标库的内容。
1.财务维度：-营业收入：衡量企业销售能力和市场占有率的指标。
-净利润率：反映企业管理效率和盈利能力的指标。
-总资产回报率：衡量企业对资产的利用效率的指标。
-债务比率：衡量企业债务风险的指标。
-股东权益回报率：反映企业对股东权益的回报能力的指标。
2.客户维度：-客户满意度：衡量客户对企业产品和服务的满意程度的指标。
-客户维护率：反映企业保持现有客户的能力的指标。
-客户增长率：反映企业获取新客户的能力的指标。
-客户投诉率：反映客户对企业产品和服务的不满意程度的指标。
-客户忠诚度：反映客户对企业的忠诚程度的指标。
3.学习与成长维度：-员工培训率：反映企业对员工培训和发展的投入情况。
-员工满意度：反映员工对企业工作环境和福利待遇的满意程度。
-创新能力：反映企业推动创新的能力和效果的指标。
-员工离职率：反映员工流失情况的指标。
-知识管理能力：反映企业对知识的获取、传播和利用能力的指标。
4.内部流程维度：-生产效率：反映企业生产过程的效率和质量的指标。
-产品质量：反映企业产品质量的指标。
-供应链效率：反映企业供应链管理的效率和成本的指标。
-客户支持：反映企业提供客户支持服务的质量和效率的指标。
-过程改进：反映企业对内部流程进行改进的能力和效果的指标。
除了上述维度的指标之外，根据不同组织的战略目标和需求，还可以添加其他特定的指标。
此外，需要注意的是，平衡积分卡指标库应根据组织的战略定位和目标进行定制，没有一个通用的标准指标库适用于所有组织。
策略管理的工具——平衡计分卡(The Balanced Scorecard)
KPMG
18
運用平衡記分卡把量度連結至策略的原則
▪ 需有因果關係
– 應可透過一連串的因果關係，陳述事業單位的策略 – 衡量系統應清楚表達各構面的目標(和量度)之間的關係(假設)，才能管理並
组织成长与学习
•关键成功因素 •绩效衡量指标 •绩效目标
流程面
•关键成功因素 •绩效衡量指标 •绩效目标
KPMG
7
經由平衡計分卡連結量度與策略
衡量目的為溝通而I 非控制
1 溝通及澄清共同願景
2 實現願景
3 發展及調整變革計劃
願景 "The
Organization of the Future"
KPMG2
我們能夠維持創新、 改變與改善嗎？
企業流程 目標 衡量方法
哪一條企業流程是價 值的驅動力
KPMG
6
平衡绩效卡是一种极为实用的管理技术，用来结合企业愿景及营 运的关键成功因素、主要绩效衡量指针和目标。
财务面
•关键成功因素 •绩效衡量指标 •绩效目标
客户面
•关键成功因素 •绩效衡量指标 •绩效目标
愿景 与 策略
結果
員工生產力
促成因子 員工技能
員工滿意度 科技基礎架構
行動氣候
KPMG
15
核心的員工衡量標準
▪ 員工滿意度
– 反映員工士氣以及員工對工作的整體滿意度
– 一般調查問卷可能包括之問題
• 參與決策的程度
• 工作表現優異時是否獲得獎勵
• 是否能取得勝任工作之必要資訊
• 企業能否積極鼓勵員工創造力與主動性
平衡记分卡的概念基础【外文翻译】
本科毕业论文（设计）外文翻译原文：Creating and Popularizing a Management Accounting Idea: The Case of the Balanced Scorecard1. IntroductionThis study seeks to understand how management accounting techniques, often created in local practice, are developed, extended and popularized into global management practice. Commonly, the creation and spread of new ideas is depicted as a story of great innovators and the diffusion of ideas, a rationalist story that stresses the pull of fixed ideas. Instead, we concentrate on the fragility and variability of ideas and the importance of ideas being pushed along. We stress the crucial role of customization and translation in converting an idea into a tool that managers can regard as practical, with the potential to be used by thousands of organizations around the world. How does an idea, easily dismissed as impractical, a fad or ambiguous, become an acceptable innovation and even a taken for granted component of good management?We concentrate on the Balanced Scorecard as an example in order to provide an in depth understanding of the processes by which management accounting ideas enter the world of specific organizational practices and technologies. The BSC has been outlined in a series of influential articles and best-selling business books (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996) that now forms the basis of a major consulting industry and set of organizational practices. We focus on the processes by which ideas of a strategic performance measurement system are translated into a multitude of specific practices that today comprise the Balanced Scorecard (BSC).This study is concerned with the implementation of the key ideas of the BSC. However we do not focus on how one or more organizations adopt and adapt the BSC,which would study adopters and users of the BSC (Wenisch, 2003, Tuomela, 2006). While such studies can provide valuable insight on how the BSC has been used and adapted across site, such studies take for granted the idea of the BSC as an established technology, accept organizational boundaries as more or less fixed, and do not problematize its purpose and development. We focus on how new ideas and concepts enter into managerial thinking and thereby have the potential to become widely known, accepted and implemented.1.1. The Balanced Scorecard as a Management InnovationManagerial discourse has seen a shift from financial-oriented management control systems to strategic management accounting systems with a focus on value creation (Ittner and Larker, 2001). A diverse set of managerial accounting techniques have been introduced since the 1990s, including the Balanced Scorecard, economic value added, and target costing etc. The BSC has gained currency, seems to have some durability and has spread rapidly during the past decade. According to the editors of the Harvard Business Review, the BSC is ―one of the most important management ideas in the last seventy-five years (cited in Meyer, 2002: pp. 2). Kaplan and Norton‘s BSC, for example, emphasizes non-financial measures to complement financial measures. It emphasizes four perspectives on performance: financial, customer, internal business processes, and learning and growth and stresses a link between performance measures and strategy (Otley, 1999, p.374). The BSC has been prescribed as a technique that can be used to translate an organization‘s strategy into terms that are understandable, and can be communicated and acted upon. It promotes the use of the language of measurement to define more clearly the meaning of abstract concepts like quality, customer satisfaction, and organizational learning and growth (Kaplan and Norton, 2001). The concept of the BSC developed rapidly after the publication of Kaplan and Norton (1992). The following outlines significant developments:The BSC had its origins in complaints that management accounting was too focused on financial measures (Kaplan, 1984; Hayes and Abernathy, 1980). Revised performance measurement systems were proposed to capture leading indicators ofperformance.In 1991, Kaplan and Norton began to shape the concept with 12 companies through a research project sponsored by a research arm of KPMG.In 1992, Kaplan and Norton published the results of this initial study in the Harvard Business Review, presenting the BSC as “measures that drive performance”. The BSC was presented as an innovative system which complemented the financial measures with measures on customer satisfaction, internal processes and the organization’s innovation, learning and growth (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, p.71).In 1996, Kaplan and Norton published their first book on the BSC, arguing that it is a way of “translating strategy into action”, a methodology for promoting strategic management.In 2001, Kaplan and Norton released their second book, The Strategy Focused Organization, which describes the BSC as an enterprise strategic management system, integral for a ‘strategy focused organization’.In 2004, Kaplan and Norton published their third book on “Strategy Mapping” as a way of “Transforming Intangible Assets into Tangible Results”. The concept of ‘strategy map’, first articulated in 2000, is proposed as a visual way to communicate an organization’s perspectives, objectives, and measures, and the causal linkages between them. The concept of ‘strategy matrix’ is also proposed as a useful visualization and summarization tool to display objectives, measures, targets, and initiatives.Kaplan and Norton’s fourth book, “Alignment: using the BSC to create corporate synergies”, explores one of the elements on ‘strategy focused organizations (SFO)’. We can expect further books that further develop each element of a SFO.The take up of the idea of the BSC is evidenced by numerous books and articles in academic and professional journals and magazines, seminars and workshops, case studies and public conferences and software applications devoted to the technique. Moreover, surveys (eg., Malmi, 2001; Kald and Nilsson, 2000; Silk, 1998), suggest that the BSC has been adopted and implemented in various countries and industries. For example, recent surveys indicate that approximately 60% of large US companiesnow use the BSC (Bain 2006). According to a Cranfield University research report, 75% of the companies that have a formal process of performance measurement (46% of all companies surveyed) use the BSC as their main method (cited in Balanced Scorecard Collaborative ‘How-To’ Training Material, 2006). The BSC has also been incorporated into management accounting teaching, as well as having become a standard service offering within many management consulting firms.Although the BSC has attracted considerable interest as a performance measurement innovation (Ittner and Lacker, 1998), it has also been perceived as a management fad (e.g., Collins, 2000). There have been concerns about its variable success in actual implementation (Malina and Selto, 2001), questions about the logical validity of the idea (Norreklit, 2000), and how its rhetoric obfuscates the weaknesses of the idea (Norreklit, 2003). Others have questioned its universal appeal (Bourgignon et al, 2005; Cooper and Ezzamel, 2007), and cautioned that the BSC needs to adapt to variations in communication, reward structures, strategies, and information characteristics (Luft and Shields, 2003; Otley, 1999). Such concerns, also typical of other management accounting innovations, create skepticism and doubt, and can be the basis for management resistance and barriers to organizational adoption and implementation. Despite (or at times, as a response to) the above criticisms, the BSC has to be turned into a detailed and meaningful set of techniques that managers believe they can use.1.2. Motivation and Objectives of the StudyThere has been little research on how popular management accounting ideas travel across time and space, and how and to what extent, these ideas are given local meaning and relevance. A notable attempt to study the spread of management ideas into practice is, however, (Jones and Dugdale 2002), which traced the emergence of ABC, and illustrated how it permeates the business world. While our research has similarities to their study, we extend their research not just by focusing on the details of the BSC, but also because we examine how the BSC idea gets converted into widely accepted practices, for example, business models and strategic maps, IT and knowledge management systems, performance appraisal techniques, consultationdevices etc.Concentrating on one innovation, the BSC, permits an in depth understanding of how new management accounting ideas are not just talked about (whether enthusiastically or skeptically), but how they enter the sphere of organizational practices. The BSC has a relatively long history that is well documented by its popularizers (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996; Kaplan, 1998). Kaplan (1998, 1994) largely repeats this history as an account of a knowledge creation cycle, but, rather improbably, depicts the process as smooth and without conflict. The present study illustrates some of the previously undocumented translations, disruptions, maneuvers and tensions involved in the process of dis-embedding and re-embedding the idea, drawing on Giddens’notion of global and local interconnectedness (cf., Jones and Dugdale, 2002). Specifically, we examine how the idea of the BSC emerged from local practice during the late 1980s, and how it was subsequently generalized, thus enabling it to travel as a thinkable, manageable concept. We also illustrate how the construction of processes (of, for example, strategy implementation) and of people, notably the expertise around the idea, enabled it to be seen as operable and even necessary at various times and places, even in the face of skepticism.Translation processes are crucial in converting an abstract idea into a practical technology. Power (2007) focuses on the rise and discursive acceptance of specific ideas and their role in constituting the practices of risk management, and suggests, “all management practices necessarily embody and are constituted by ideas of what they should be”. These ideas which constitute programmatic elements in practice are often linked to larger value systems (Rose and Miller, 1992). In the case of the BSC, the larger value system includes the importance of quantification and the value of strategic management.We examine both the construction of the object of technology, the BSC, and how some actors are constructed as BSC experts. Sturdy et al. (2006) argue that the translation process has emphasized “the activity of inanimate objects such as technological hardware”, but “the transformation of human actors is underplayed”. The making of experts is an important element in the making and un-making of the。