Kanji's Business Scorecard

Abstract

The balanced scorecard was first devised by Kaplan and Norton (1992, Harvard Business Review, Jan.-Feb., pp. [71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79] as a nzeasurement franzework that was expected to overconze some of the dejiciencies of traditional perjormance systems. It gives a holistic view of the organization by sinzultaneously looking at four important perspectives financial, customer, internal processes, innovation and learning). Apart >om being a measurenlens framework, the balanced scorecard achieved recognition as a strategic management system. The new approach to pe$ormance measurement suggested in the balanced scorecard is consistent with the initiatives under way in many companies: cross-functional integration, continuous inlprovement, customer-supplier partnerships and team rather than individual accountability. In this sense, it fits well into the quality management philosophy, embracing some of the business excellence principles of Kanji's Business Excellence Model. Nevertheless, the balanced scorecard, as presented by Kaplan and Norton, is not without limitations. The causality links suggested among rhe four perspectives are particularly problematic and ambiguous. Additionally, it fails to recognize explicitly the contributions of important stakeholders, such as employees and suppliers. Taking into account the potentialities and linzitations of the traditional balanced scorecard, we propose the development of a new framework integrating the elements of Kanji's Business Excellence Model (Kanji, 1998, Total Quality Management, 9, pp. 633-643) and taking advantage of the strengths of its sound methodological support. The business scorecard may be improved by integrating the total quality nzanagement principles and critical success factors that constitute Kanji's Business Excellence Model. The Karljik Business Scorecard (KBS) we present in this paper is not only a conceptuczl model, but also a measurement model. Furthermore, Kanji's approach has the potential to give a deeper understanding of how achievenzents in the dzfferent areas feed each other to form a cycle of continuoi~s improvement. Finally, the implementation of K B S can help organizations to develop, cascade and implen~ent a strategy for business excellence.

A Comparison between Two Balanced Scorecards: Optimal vs. Kaplan and Norton Model

“…As recorded by Fielden [4], worldwide organizations use the ability of BSC for converting vision and strategy into measurable objectives. Several studies estimate that 60 percent of Fortune 1000 companies have worked with the BSC [5].…”

“…Consequently, a discrepancy should be admitted between the strategy emerging from the actions and the assumed strategy [9]. Kanji (2002) summarizes more BSC downsides emphasizing that the model [10] is overly abstract and not user-friendly as a measurement model. Furthermore, the relations between criteria are not clearly explained and, finally, the causal relationships are problematic (more like interdependence, rather than correlations).…”

Choice and change of measures in performance measurement models

“…Some academics and consultants have prescribed forms of causal PMM (e.g., Kaplan & Norton, 1996;Epstein et al, 2000;Kanji & Moura e Sa, 2002). Regardless of the sources of business models, causal relations among firms' multiple performance measures often are neither specified nor measured well .…”

“…More comprehensive PMM include Otley's (1999) performance management model, Ittner and Larcker's (2001) value-based management model, Epstein et al's (2000) APL model, Kanji's business scorecard (Kanji & Moura e Sa, 2002) and the balanced scorecard (BSC) (Kaplan & Norton, 1996;. These models describe links among business decisions and outcomes and serve to guide strategy development, communication, implementation, and feedback at multiple points along the value chain.…”

Development of a measure to assess quality management in certified firms

“…From their conclusions they obtained seven concepts which form Deming's quality management theory: forward-looking leadership, internal and external cooperation, learning, administrative processes, continuous improvement, employees' performance and customer satisfaction. On the other hand, Kanji´s Business Excellence Model (Kanji, 1998;Kanji and Moura e Sá, 2002) which propose the development of a framework integrating the critical success factors of TQM based on a set of principles and core concepts to achieve business excellence.…”