Measuring Business Performances: The Balanced Scorecard Model

  • Stefano BiazzoEmail author
  • Patrizia Garengo
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Business book series (BRIEFSBUSINESS)


In this chapter performance measurement system is described as a balanced and strategic system that is able to support the decision-making process by gathering, elaborating and analysing critical information. The search for balance of the measurement system is a way to support and make explicit the need for abandoning the model of opportunistic search for profit, in favour of a circular and holistic vision of the concept of entrepreneurial success. The looking for strategic alignment underlines the need to create a system focusing on a limited number of critical phenomena that lead an enterprise to finding a specific position in the industry and to taking advantage of specific internal resources and competencies.

The design of a strategic and balanced dashboard may be based upon various reference models; in this chapter, we focus out attention on the Balanced Scorecard as it is the most diffused, easy to understand and renowned model at the international level.


Performance dashboard Strategic alignment Critical success factors Strategy maps Value proposition Performance pyramid 


  1. Becker BE, Huselid MA, Ulrich D (2001) The HR scorecard: linking people, strategy, and performance. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  2. Cameron K, Quinn E (1999) Diagnosing and changing organizational culture. Addison-Wesley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Coda V, Mollona E (2006) Dynamics of strategy: a feedback approach to corporate strategymaking. In: Minati G, Pessa E, Abram M (eds) Systemics of emergence: research and development. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Daniel DR (1961) Management information crisis. Harv Bus Rev 39(5):111–121Google Scholar
  5. De Waal A (2007) Strategic performance management. A managerial and behavioural approach. Pagrave Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Eccles R (1991) The performance measurement Manifesto. Harv Bus Rev 69:131–137Google Scholar
  7. Garengo P (2009) Performance measurement system in SMEs taking part in quality award programs. Total Qual Manage Bus Excell 20:91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horton S (2000) Introduction. The competency movement: its origins and impact on the public sector. Int J Public Sect Manage 13:306–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaplan R, Norton D (1992) The balanced scorecard: the measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev 70:71–79Google Scholar
  10. Kaplan R, Norton D (1996) Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harv Bus Rev 74:75–85Google Scholar
  11. Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1999). The Balanced Scorecard. Harvard University Press, Boston, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaplan R, Norton D (2001) Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: part I. Account Horiz 15:87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaplan R, Norton D (2003) Strategy maps: converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaplan R, Norton D (2008) Execution premium. Linking strategy to operations for competitive advantage. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. Neely A, Adams C, Kennerley M (2002a) The performance prism: the scorecard for measuring and managing stakeholder relationship. Prentice Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Neely A, Bourne M, Mills J, Platts K, Richards R (2002b) Getting the measure of your business. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Neely A, Gregory M, Platts K (2005) Performance measurement system design: A literature review and research agenda. Int J Oper Prod Manage 25(12):1228–1263Google Scholar
  18. Niven PR (2002) Balanced scorecard step-by-step: maximizing performance and maintaining results. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Rockart JF (1979) Chief executives define their own data needs. Harv Bus Rev 57:81–93Google Scholar
  20. Shook J (2008) Managing to learn. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  21. Spencer LM, Spencer SM (1993) Competence at work models for superior performance. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Thiétart RA, Forgues B (1995) Chaos theory and organization. Organ Sci 6:19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ulrich D (1997) Measuring human resources: an overview of practice and a prescription for results. Hum Resour Manage 36:303–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DIMEGUniversity of PaduaPadovaItaly
  2. 2.DIMEGUniversity of PaduaPadovaItaly

Personalised recommendations