International Review of Management and Marketing

Vol. 5, No. 1, 2015, pp.26-35

ISSN: 2146-4405
www.econjournals.com

A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education

Institution (HEIs)

Fahmi Fadhl Al-Hosaini

Department of Accounting and Finance,
Faculty of Management, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Malaysia. Email: fhyemen@gmail.com

Saudah Sofian1
Department of Accounting and Finance,
Faculty of Management, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Malaysia. Email: Saudah@utm.my

ABSTRACT: Many studies have been conducted to investigate the effectives of the BSC in
organisations. It is observed that many organisations adopt different perspectives suitable for their
functions in line with their vison, mission and strategic themes. Some reseachers have highlighted its
relevance to Higher Education institutions. However, previous studies have not defined wich
perspectives are most relevant for public HEIs, which are not for profit by nature. Higher Educational
Institutions (HEIs) are involved in routine processes of providing tertiary education in colleges,
universities, and institutes including both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, vocational and
education training. One of the aims of HEIs is to achieve results in terms of products and services for
the customers and other stake holders. In this paper, we review recent studies in top journals using the
Balanced Scorecard Framework in HEIs. The paper identifies the relenvant perspectives for HEIs and
presents its contextual analysis. When implemented, this can be used to monitor their performance and
enable them to adjust to emerging challenges that come as a result of implementing key strategies.

Keywords: Balanced Scorecard; Higher Educational Institutions

JEL Classifications: M1, M41

1. Introduction
Higher education is the education leading to academic qualifications such as degrees and
diplomas awarded by universities, colleges and other higher institutions of learning. This level of
education encapsulates undergraduate, college and post graduate levels. Most higher education
programs provide professional education which primarily caters for vocations and professions. Higher
education graduates have an opportunity to select from a multitude of jobs compared to those who are
high school graduates, and they generally have better salaries compared to their non-graduate
counterparts. Higher education generally enhances an individual’s quality of life as universities
continue to exist to enhance knowledge and understanding. However, owing to the sector’s expansion
over the last twenty years, higher education has become a primary contributor to a country’s economy,
facilitating employment, enhancing productivity infrastructure, increasing export earnings and
significantly contributing to the development of cities and regions.
The higher education systems are under pressure because there is a gap between skills
demanded by the labour markets and skills acquired by graduates from the Higher Education
Institutions (HEI’s). The unemployment rate among university graduates in many countries has
become continuously higher during the past decade (Issa and Siddiek, 2012). The recent financial
crisis has made this problem even more serious. One of the solutions to this was offered in Briqa'an
and Alqurashi (2012), based on World Bank study in 2012, that university needs to resort to
innovative ways in order to produce educated graduates who are more competitive and thereby
contribute to the economic and social growth of their countries.

1
Corresponding author.

26
A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

However the education sector in general and higher education in particular, did not respond to
these changes at the same pace with the rapid development of modern communication technologies in
the world. This status became the main concern for universities conducting daily business without
having clear visions of the future, prior planning, or having a good mechanism to respond to the issues
facing universities and other education institutions (Briqa'an and Alqurashi, 2012).
It is imperative Universities’ administrators to adopt a different approach in focusing on their
missions, relaying their strategy across the organizational processes. Such efforts should include
laying down accountability measures, relating strategic objectives to the vision and mission of the
university, re-aligning annual budgets, and more importantly, gauging and monitoring outcomes in
both the short and long terms. It is recommended by practitioners and scholars that, through the
Balanced Scorecard (BSC), the balancing of the four perspectives of a University performance can be
accomplished. These perspectives are financial growth, customer satisfaction, internal business
operations, and learning and growth, which address continuous improvement with the help of human
resources. These dimensions are crucial to provide an effective framework for performance
management (Archer, 2007; Carr, 2005; Jones, 2004; Lee, 2006; Syfert et al., 1998). The
concepualisation of the BSC was done with an underlying goal of linking business activities with the
strategy, all directed towards achieveing the ultimate end result which is organizational performance
(Dkhili and Noubbigh, 2013). Thus, this study reviews the different studies on using Balanced
Scorecard Framework (BSC) in the Context of Higher Institutions Perspective.

2. The Balanced Scorecard

The BSC’s uses financial measures to determine the performance of organisations basing on
important dimemnsions and indicators. These include: customer relationships, core competencies,
and organizational capabilities. This makes the BSC measurements to be based on a cause and effect
relationship, connecting interdependent processes, such as those elements of the non-financial aspects
(current customer, internal process, employee, and system performance) to a long-term financial
success. These are geared towards achieving the strategic goals and objectives of the organisations,
such as Higher Education Institutions.
To achieve these trends, the classical Kaplan and Norton (1992) BSC based on a sets of four
parameters. It is considered as an assessment tool that enables top management to monitor the
improvements in one area of the organization or the other, and usually, at the expense of other
performance measurements (Ali, 2007; Kaplan and Norton, 1993). Thus, the quest for the means of
measuring performance in form of indicators necessitated the incorporation of the four perspectives of
performance, which are: Financial, Customer, Internal Process, and Employee Learning and Growth.
These form the basis of developing measures to be used in assessment of the organisations’
performance. Furthermore, by requiring managers to select a limited number of critical indicators
within each of the four perspectives, the scorecard helps to focus this strategic vision (Ali, 2007;
Kaplan and Norton, 1993).
Measuring performance also implies the monitoring of the effects and influence by tracking
the overall financial results while monitoring the progression. The BSC is a comprehensive framework
that helps in translating the organization’s strategic objectives into a coherent set of performance
measures. This is done so that effective measurement becomes an integral part of the management
process.

3. Four Perspectives of Balanced Scorecard

The BSC framework is a tool that reveals the cause and effect scenarios in the adopted
strategic management structure in an organization in respect of the four perspectives of BSC (Kaplan
and Norton, 2001b): financial, customer, internal process and learning and growth (Figure 1). Parts of
the implications of these perspectives is the effect of the organizations’ internal process and learning
and growth innovations have on the creation of new services and products that will satisfy the needs of
the customers and enable better and prosperous financial achievements. Thus, the internal structures of
an organization have a direct relationship to the outcomes that are being offered to the outside
customers (Kaplan, 2004). A brief description of the various perspectives is given in the following
sub-sections.

27
International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 5, No.1, 201, pp.26-35

Figure 1. Four Perspectives of BSC

Financial Perspective
Are we meeting the expectations of
our Shareholder?

Customer Perspective Internal Process Perspective

Are we delighting (or at least Are we doing the right things?
satisfying) our customers? And doing things right?

3.1 Financial Perspective

Learning and Growth
Perspective
Are we prepared for the future?

Source: Kaplan and Norton (1996a)

3.1. Financial Perspective

The financial perspective is considered as the most important perspective among the others,
particularly in relation to key strategy implementation and assessment of organizations’ performances.
Usually, it occupies the topmost part of the BSC. This is usually actualized through the provisions of
the organisations’ mission and vision statements and the transformation of financial issues into
sustainable goals and minimal cost (Niven, 2011). The cause and effect trend can be seen through the
financial index, irrespective of whether they are tangible or intangible. In addition, there should be
ways by which the financial perspective can be used for raising the long-term stakeholder values,
expanding the market and reducing costs.
In light of this, Ronchetti (2006) argued that the financial perspective, defines financial
strategic objectives and financial performance measures that provide evidence of whether or not the
company’s financial strategy is yielding increased profitability and decreased costs. This view also
captures how the organization must look to customers in order to succeed and achieve the
organization’s mission; thus, achieving financial strategic objectives is the primary means to realize
the company’s mission. To achieve this, however, the other three perspectives are very crucial.
3.2. Customer Perspective
According to Kaplan and Norton (1992), there are two measurement standards. First is the
“core measure group”, which includes customer retention, market share, customer satisfaction,
customer acquisition, and customer profitability. The next performance driver guides the organisation
to the customer value position, and include lead times, quality, attributes of product and quality, image
and relationship. It was therefore argued in Kaplan and Norton (2001b), that these will be achievable
with the right choice of customers with highest value propositions. These values, according to Niven
(2011), can be achieved in any of the following three ways: (i) operational excellence concentrates on
reasonable price and quick response, (ii) there are turn around innovate drives by product leadership
towards improving both products and services qualities of the organisation, (iii) creating an enabling
customer intimacy based on long-term relationship due to vivid understanding of customer needs.
From the report of research by Ittner and Larcker (1998) it is revealed that customer behaviour
and financial results are relatively constant over broad ranges of customer satisfaction, changing only
after satisfaction moves through various "threshold" values, and diminishing at high satisfaction
levels. Thus, supporting the argument as in Kaplan and Norton (1996a) and Ittner et al. (1997) to
include customer satisfaction indicators in internal performance measurement systems and
compensation plans.

28
A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

3.3. Internal process perspective

Kaplan and Norton (2004) stated that organisations should continue to conduct innovation in
products, services and internal processes for the creation of more customer value. A process of
innovation guided by the needs of customers encapsulates four major processes; identification of the
opportunities for new products and services, managing the R&D portfolio, designing and developing
new production and service, bringing novel products and services to the market. Hence, the internal
process can be referred to as a supply chain which develops services to customers. The institution
should keep on adding value to the processes in order to offer better service. The case institution
should conduct four operations; innovation process, quality service process, customer management
process, and regulatory and social processes.
3.4. Learning and Growth perspective
Learning and growth are two major features that every organization’s strategy should
incorporate. There are different varieties of leading indicators and intangible assets that can be used to
depict these features. These include (Chuang, 2007): human, information, and organisation capital,
culture, alignment, and teamwork. Thus, the organization must adopt a measurement method that they
want as opposed to what they can. In Kaplan and Norton (2004), the importance of this perspective in
measured through the ability of organisational capital, employees, and knowledge systems on one
hand, as well as their importance in communicating value creations to the organisations on the other.
Human capital attempts to emphasize the investment on the employees who are responsible
for critical internal processes to achieve an extraordinary level. The information capital backs up the
infrastructure and strategic to assist the performance of human capital. The four elements of
organisational capital namely culture, alignment, leadership, and teamwork facilitate and transform the
behaviour of a successful organisation that is focused on strategy (Kaplan and Norton, 2004).
According to Park and Gagnon (2006), the learning and growth perspective (organization’s
employees, infrastructures, and environment, and reflects employee satisfaction, motivation,
empowerment, and the capabilities of employees and information systems) are argued to facilitate the
performance of the other three perspectives. Whereas, the model used in Al Bento et al. (2012),
showed the influence of the financial dimension on the other three perspectives, it is always being
directly affected by continuous improvements. In addition, Kaplan and Norton (2001a) considered the
learning and growth perspective to be related to the organisations’ internal skills and capabilities.

4. The Implementation of the Balanced Scorecard in Higher Education

Examining existing literature, one finds few works exploring application of the BSC to HEIs.
Previous studies have addressed the applicability of the BSC to non-profit organisations, thereby
highlighting the need for such organisations to utiltise the BSC in improving performance
effectiveness and enhancing service value to their customers. In general, Schools are regarded as not
for profit organizations, although in some cases private schools may be driven by business objectives.
Their vision and mission normally focus more on customer satisfaction rather than profitability
concerns. These institutions can align their core values to address any emerging issues for improving
performance measurement (Rohm, 2002).
i. To provide a clear structure for continuous quality improvement;
ii. To establish a culture of Academic Quality;
iii. To evaluate the efficient use of resources for each of the academic programs;
iv. To document the contribution of each activity towards the mission of the HEI as well as
promoting personal and academic excellence; and
v. To determine priorities on future planning and needs assessment.
Researchers have underscored the importance of availability of financial resources as key
drivers of performance in HEIs (Al-Zwyalif, 2012). Relating to the dimensions of the BSC, the
Financial Perspective focuses on generating targeted financial results. Subsequently, HEIs pay more
attention to cash flow consequences in their respective departments (Neely and Adams, 2003). It was
suggested that this proposition holds for both public and private educational institutions. Once an
institution’s financial strategy is clearly defined and purposely implemented to focus on the
educational outcomes, this will translate into overall success of the academic institution (Schobel and
Scholey, 2012).

29
International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 5, No.1, 201, pp.26-35

On the other hand, implementation of the BSC can utilise existing tools such a Strategy Map
to enhance clarity. This is especially useful to guide the middle management and operational staff of
the institution, as well as other non-technical stakeholders. Using a strategy map, each one is able to
visualize how their activities contribute to the institutional strategic goals and final outcomes.
A strategy map is a handy tool that is used to give a graphical snapshot of the strategy of the
institution so as to clarify the linkages among the strategic objectives, the initiatives and specific
actions to be accomplished. (Kaplan and Norton, 2000), the originators of the BSC have written the
most authoritative synthesis on the tools and supporting applications that may assist in implementing
the BSC in educational institutions. They demonstrate that a Strategy map provides a visual insight
into how individual actions of employees contribute to strategic objectives and subsequently the
overall organizational performance of the institution. This enables workers to collaborate and
coordinate their actions in order to achieve maximum efficiency and effectiveness while executing the
institution’s mission. A strategy map is developed following the cause and effect relationships in the
BSC. It is structured in a top to bottom style, mapping out a destination and thereby clearly showing
the route to be taken to achieve it. Once implemented, the monitoring by the institution’s board and
top management will be easier (de Waal, 2003).
A Strategic map is made up of five basic components, usually from bottom to top: Financial
Perspective, Learning and Growth Perspective, Internal Process Perspective, Stakeholders Perspective,
in addition to the Vision, Mission and Strategic Thrusts; providing a visual framework that illustrates
patterns of the cause and effect chain connecting the desired outcomes with the key drivers that are
essential to achieve them. As such it provides a more practical way of implementing the BSC
framework in higher education.

5. BSC Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

Many HEIs are seeking to establish management systems that can monitor their performance
and enable them to adjust to emerging challenges that come as result of implementing key changes.
One key element of HEIs is achieving results in terms of products and services for the customers and
other stake holders. These include concerned government departments, the ministry of Higher
Education, and this is where the BSC becomes such an essential tool (Rahman and Hassan, 2011).
Kaplan and Norton, the key promoters of the BSC concept, argue that it can play a key role in driving
organisational change and transformation (Kaplan and Norton, 1996b). Such change comes as a result
of ongoing innovations that are done to improve service delivery. Innovative organizations are
increasingly using the BSC to transform their strategic objectives into Key Performance Indicators
(KPI’s), which are regarded as the determinants of where the institution is going (Kaplan and Norton,
1996b; Rahman and Hassan, 2011). If Institutions are to survive in a competitive environment, they
must develop measures that are generated from analysis their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats. Subsequently, the BSC is seen as a tool that can enable HEIs to convert their vision, mission
and strategies into KPI’s that can be communicated to management and employees, there by
channeling their energies to key result areas. By measuring organizational performance in the BSC
perspectives, it complements traditional methods with measures for customers, internal processes,
innovations and improvement processes, which are in turn linked to the overall institutions’ strategic
vision. Azizi et al. (2012) in a detailed review studied on which perspectives in the balanced scorecard
are appropriate for the universities. They conducted an extensive survey on different perspectives
adopted by a number of universities and higher education institutes around the world. They indicated
that universities and higher education institutions as non-profit organizations are able to apply four
main perspectives of BSC by replacing customer perspective with financial perspective at top of
scorecard. This paper presents presents a contextual anlaysis of more recent literature reviewed with
respect to BSC in the Context of Higher Education Institutions as seen in Table 1.

30
A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

Table 1. BSC in the Context of Higher Education Institutions Perspective

Authors Title of Papers Perspectives

Beard (2009) Successful applications of the Student learning results, Student-and
balanced scorecard in higher education Stakeholder –focused results, Budgetary,
financial, and market results Faculty and
staff results Organizational effectiveness
Results, Governance and social
Responsibility results
Ballentine and Dueling scorecards :how two colleges Financial, Constituent
Eckles (2009) utilize the popular planning Method Internal processes
Human and organizational
Development
Yu et al. (2009) The e-balanced scorecard (e-BSC) for Customer, Financial, Internal business
measuring academic staff performance processes, Learning and growth
excellence
Weisensee et al. Integrating financial and non- financial Stakeholder
(2009) information to enhance strategic decision- Financial
making capabilities at McMaster Internal
University Learning and Growth
Eltobgy and Monitoring Egyption Higher Education Educational and learning excellence,
Radwan (2010) Institutions Performance Development, Scientific research excellence,
The Balanced Scorecard Approach Community Participation, environment
development and stakeholders, Financial
resources, Institutional capacity and
quality management
Nistor (2010) An empirical research about the contain of Customer and stakeholders
Balanced scorecard concept in public Financial, Internal business
sector Learning and Growth
Wu et al. (2011) Performance evaluation of extension Financial, Customer,
education centers in universities based on Internal processes, Learning and growth
the balanced scorecard
Negash (2011) Resource allocation challenges in South Customer and stakeholder, Financial,
African universities: Internal, Business Process,
A management accounting perspective Organizational learning and
Development
Zangoueinezhad Measuring university
and Moshabaki performance using a Financial, Customer satisfaction, internal
(2011) knowledge-based balanced business processes, and the learning and
scorecard grow ability
Philbin (2011) Design and implementation of the Financial, people development Institute
Balanced Scorecard at a university capability, Research output
institute
Al-Ashaab et al. A balanced scorecard for measuring the Competitiveness, sustainable
(2011) impact of industry–university development, Innovation, strategic
collaboration partnership, Human capital, Internal
business processes
Li (2011) Performance Evaluation for Private Goals school, stakeholders satisfaction,
Colleges and Universities Based on the Internal business processes,
Balanced Scorecard Organization developing ability
(Rahman and Implementing the Balanced Scorecard to Resource, Learning and growth, Internal
Hassan, 2011) Facilitate Strategic Management in a processes, Customer and Stakeholders
Public University
Sayed (2012) Ratify, reject or revise: balanced scorecard Stakeholdersf, Internal
and universities businessprocesses, Learning and growth,
Financial

31
International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 5, No.1, 201, pp.26-35

Aljardali et al. The implementation of the balanced

(2012) scorecard in lebanese public higher Customer, Internal processes, Innovation
education institutions and Learning, Financial

Al-Zwyalif (2012) The Possibility of Implementing Balanced Financial , Customer, Internal business
Scorecard in Jordanian Private Universities processes, Learning and growth
Taylor and Baines Performance management in UK Financial , Customer,
(2012) universities: implementing the Balanced Internal processes, Organisational
Scorecard development
Schobel and Balanced Scorecards in education: Customer, Financial,
Scholey (2012) Focusing on financial strategies Internal processes, Learning and growth
Chen et al. (2012) Innovative Operation in a Private Customer, Internal procedure, Learning
University of Technology - An and Learning, Finance
Application of Strategy Map on Balanced
Scorecard
Zolfani and Performance evaluation of private
Financial, Customer, Internal process,
Ghadikolaei (2013) universities based on balanced scorecard:
Learning and growth
empirical study based on Iran
Franceschini and Quality improvement and redesign of Financial ,Customer
Turina (2013) Performance measurement systems: an Internal process
application to the academic field Innovation and Learning
Jairak and Applying IT governance balanced Corporate contribution;
Praneetpolgrang scorecard and importance-performance Stakeholders;
(2013) analysis for providing IT governance Operational excellence;
strategy in university Future orientation.
Atafar et al. (2013) Evaluation of university performance Financial , Customer, Process,
using BSC and ANP Learning and growth
Weerasooriya Adoption the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) Financial , Customer , Internal
(2013) Framework as a Technique for Business processes, Learning and
Performance Evalaution in Sri Lankan growth
Universities
Sustainability reporting by universities Financial , Customer ,
And corporations: an integrated approach processes, Internal Business,
Pineno (2013) Or a separate category within the Balanced Innovation and Learning
scorecard
Chalaris et al. A holistic approach for quality assurance
(2014) and advanced decision making for Financial, Internal business processes,
academic institutions using the balanced Innovation and Learning, Customer
scorecard technique
Libing et al. (2014) Application of the Balanced Scorecard In financial enterprise, customer, internal
The University Budget Management business processes and learning and
growth
Zhang et al. Application research of BSC theory in the Client, Teacher’s Contribution, Teaching
(2014). salary design of teacher in college and and research , Personal ascension
university
Beard and Alignment of University Information
Humphrey (2014) Technology Resources With the Malcolm Student learning and process results,
Baldrige Results Criteria for Performance Customer-focused results, Leadership
Excellence in Education: A Balanced and governance results , Budgetary-
Scorecard Approach financial and market results

The result shows that different oragnisations employed different BSC perspectives, while the
others used the traditional ones with a slight modification in title and order, for example, the
stakeholder perspective was used in some studies rather than the customer perspective.
As shown in Table 1, the BSC has been implemented in a variety of situations in the context
of HEIs, producing tangible outcomes. Athough there is no clear agreement about wich perspectives
are more suitable for HEIs, some researchers give prominence to the customer perspective, where as
others emphasise the financial perspective. There is need to explore cross fertilization of the BSC
32
A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

other models to deal with the Unique environment in Private Universities, as opposed to Public ones.
Perhaps the same consideration can be made to deal with different countries and cultures. A further
discussion and conclusion is presented here after.

6. Discussion and Conclusion

This review provides valuable information on the use if the BSC in Higher Institutions of
Learning, providing a justification for the suitability of this tool, and the importance of linking the
vision, mission with a mapping of goals and objectives, performance. Although Higher education is
concerned with academic qualifications such as degrees and diplomas awarded by universities,
colleges and other higher institutions of learning. In this paper, we have reviewed the at present, the
use of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in order to identify the most suitable perspectives to consider in
order to assess the performance of higher education institutions. Althought, the main four conventional
perspectives are: financial, customer, internal business process, and learning and growth, the findings
of this paper indicates that universities and higher education institutions as non-profit organizations
are suggested to apply other non-financial prospectives such as community participation, innovation,
strategic partnership and scientific research excellence.
This review reveals the of applicability of the BSC in HEIs and the wich BSC perspectives
are relevant for HEIs. As part of its contribution some benefits of using the BSC in HEIs, namely,
such as; determining priorities on future planning and needs assessment, providing a clear structure for
continuous quality improvement, establishing a culture of Academic Quality among the institutions,
evaluating the efficient use of resources for each of the academic programs, and documenting the
contribution of each activity towards the mission of the HEI so as to promote personal and academic
excellence.
The Balanced Scorecard is presented as a prominent tool that can be used to strategize and
monitor organisational performance, continuously benchmarking this with key elements of the
strategic plan.The review addresses the question of applicability of the BSC in HEIs, similarities as
well as significant differences between the BSC as applied to Education and the BSC applied to
business. These are highlighted as part of contribution the contribution. Overall the strength of the
BSC is seen to be that its establishes an evaluation system which generates appropriate performance
Indicators in HEIs.

References
Al-Ashaab, A., Flores, M., Doultsinou, A., Magyar, A. (2011). A balanced scorecard for measuring
the impact of industry–university collaboration. Production Planning & Control, 22(5-6),
554-570.
Al-Zwyalif, I.M. (2012). The Possibility of Implementing Balanced Scorecard in Jordanian Private
Universities. International Business Research, 5(11), p113.
Al Bento, Regina Bento and Lourdes Ferreira White. (2012). Validating Cause-and-Effect
Relationships in the Balanced Scorecard. Cambaridge Business & Economics Conference.
Ali, M. N. A. S. (2007). Performance Evaluation of Palestinian Telecommunication
Corporations by using Balanced Scorecard approach. . The Islamic University- Gaza.
Aljardali, H., Kaderi, M., Levy-Tadjine, T. (2012). The Implementation of the Balanced Scorecard in
Lebanese Public Higher Education Institutions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62,
98-108.
Archer, J. (2007). Districts tracking goals with balanced scorecards database. Academic Search
Premier, 26(24), 10.
Atafar, A., Shahrabi, M., Esfahani, M. (2013). Evaluation of university performance using BSC and
ANP. Decision Science Letters, 2(4), 305-311.
Azizi, F., Behzadian, M., Afshari, A. J. (2012). Which Perspectives in the Balanced Scorecard are
Appropriate for the Universities? European Journal of Scientific Research, 74(2), 164-175.
Ballentine, H., Eckles, J. (2009). Dueling Scorecards: How Two Colleges Utilize the Popular Planning
Method. Planning for Higher Education, 37(3), 27-35.
Beard, D. F. (2009). Successful applications of the balanced scorecard in higher education. Journal of
Education for Business, 84(5), 275-282.

33
International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 5, No.1, 201, pp.26-35

Beard, D.F., Humphrey, R.L. (2014). Alignment of University Information Technology Resources
With the Malcolm Baldrige Results Criteria for Performance Excellence in Education: A
Balanced Scorecard Approach. Journal of Education for Business, 89(7), 382-388.
Briqa'an, A.M.A., Alqurashi, A.A. (2012). Governance and role of universities in the face of
challenges. Paper presented at the International Scientific Conference, Lebanon.
Carr, N. (2005). Process meets progress: Borrowing from business in Charlotte-Mecklenburg.
American School Board Journal, 24(2), 14-17.
Chalaris, I., Chalaris, M., Gritzalis, S. (2014). A holistic approach for quality assurance and advanced
decision making for academic institutions using the balanced scorecard technique. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the 18th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics.
Chen, Y.-F., Lee, S.-C., Mo, H.-E. (2012). Innovative Operation In A Private University Of
Technology--An Application Of Strategy Map On Balanced Scorecard. International Journal
of Asian Social Science, 2(11), 1877-1891.
Chuang, M. (2007). The Balanced Scorecard: Creating a management system for private technical
universities in Taiwan. (3243815 Ed.D.), Spalding University, Kentucky, United States.
Retrieved from https://vpn.utm.my/docview/304741860?accountid=41678 ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
de Waal, A.A. (2003). The future of the balanced scorecard: an interview with Professor Dr Robert S.
Kaplan. Measuring Business Excellence, 7(1), 30-35.
Dkhili, H., Noubbigh, H. (2013). Management Control System and the Case of CSR in the Tunisian
Industrial Companies: What Findings by the Method of Structural Equation? International
Review of Management and Marketing, 3(2), 86-92.
Eltobgy, H., Radwan, M. (2010). Monitoring Egyption Higher Education Institutions Performance
DEVELOPMENT, The Balanced Scorecard Approach. Higher Education Enhancement
Projects Management Unit, Ministry of Higher Education, Egypt.
Franceschini, F., Turina, E. (2013). Quality improvement and redesign of performance measurement
systems: an application to the academic field. Quality & Quantity, 47(1), 465-483.
Issa, A., T. E. and Siddiek, A. G. (2012). Higher Education in the Arab World & Challenges of Labor
Market. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(9).
Ittner, C.D., Larcker, D.F. (1998). Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial
performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of accounting research, 36, 1-35.
Ittner, C.D., Larcker, D.F., Rajan, M.V. (1997). The choice of performance measures in annual bonus
contracts. Accounting Review, 231-255.
Jairak, K., Praneetpolgrang, P. (2013). Applying IT governance balanced scorecard and importance-
performance analysis for providing IT governance strategy in university. Information
Management & Computer Security, 21(4), 228-249.
Jones, K. (2004). A balanced school accountability model: An alternative to high-stakes testing. Phi
Delta Kappan, 85(8), 584-590.
Kaplan, R., Norton, D. (2004). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes
(Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press).
Kaplan, R.S. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes: Harvard
Business Press.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (1992). The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance.
Harvard business review, 70(1), 71-79.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (1993). Putting the balanced scorecard to work. The performance
measurement, management and appraisal sourcebook, 66-79.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (1996a). Translating strategy introduction the balanced scorecard.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (1996b). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system.
Harvard business review, 74(1), 75-85.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (2000). Having trouble with your strategy?: Then map it: Harvard Business
School Publishing Corporation.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (2001a). The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard
companies thrive in the new business environment: Harvard Business Press.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (2001b). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance
measurement to strategic management: Part I. Accounting horizons, 15(1), 87-104.

34
A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)

Lee, N. (2006). Measuring the performance of public sector organisations: a case study on public
schools in Malaysia. Measuring Business Excellence, 10(4), 50-64.
Li, W. (2011). Performance evaluation for private colleges and universities based on the balanced
scorecard. Paper presented at the Management Science and Industrial Engineering (MSIE),
2011 International Conference on.
Libing, Z., Xu, Z., Ruiquan, Z. (2014). Application of the Balanced Scorecard In The University
Budget Management. Paper presented at the 2014 Conference on Informatisation in
Education, Management and Business (IEMB-14).
Neely, A., Adams, C. (2003). The new spectrum: How the performance prism framework helps.
Business Performance Management, 2, 39-47.
Negash, M. (2011). Resource allocation challenges in South African universities: a management
accounting perspective. International Journal of Critical Accounting, 3(2), 265-292.
Nistor, C.S. (2010). An empirical research about the contain of Balanced scorecard concept in public
sector. Studia Universitatis Babes Bolyai-Negotia(3), 51-68.
Niven, P.R. (2011). Balanced scorecard: Step-by-step for government and nonprofit agencies: Wiley.
Park, J.A., Gagnon, G.B. (2006). A causal relationship between the balanced scorecard perspectives.
Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 5(2), 91-116.
Philbin, S. P. (2011). Design and implementation of the Balanced Scorecard at a university institute.
Measuring Business Excellence, 15(3), 34-45.
Pineno, C.J. (2013). Sustainability Reporting By Universities And Corporations: An Integrated
Approach Or A Separate Category Within The Balanced Scorecard. Journal of Business and
Accounting, 6(1), 51-70.
Rahman, A.A., Hassan, M.A.A. (2011). Implementing The Balanced Scorecard To Facilitate Strategic
Management In A Public University.
Rohm, H. (2002). Improve public sector results with a balanced scorecard: nine steps to success.
Washington, DC: US Foundation for Performance Measurement.
Ronchetti, J.L. (2006). An integrated Balanced Scorecard strategic planning model for nonprofit
organizations. Journal of practical consulting, 1(1), 25-35.
Sayed, N. (2012). Ratify, reject or revise: balanced scorecard and universities. International Journal of
Educational Management, 27(3), 2-2.
Schobel, K. and Scholey, C. (2012). Balanced Scorecards in education: focusing on financial
strategies. Measuring Business Excellence, 16(3), 17-28.
Syfert, P., Elliott, N., Schumacher, L. (1998). Charlotte adapts the'balanced scorecard.'. American City
& Country, 113(11), 32.
Taylor, J., Baines, C. (2012). Performance management in UK universities: implementing the
Balanced Scorecard. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34(2), 111-124.
Weerasooriya, R.B. (2013). Adoption the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) Framework as a Technique for
Performance Evalaution in Sri Lankan Universities. Available at SSRN 2223933.
Weisensee, D., McInnis, A., Hult, L. (2009). Integrating Financial and Non-Financial Information to
Enhance Strategic Decision-Making Capabilities at McMaster University. Paper presented at
the SAS Global Forum 2009 proceedings,(paper section: Business Intelligence User
Applications).
Wu, H.-Y., Lin, Y.-K., Chang, C.-H. (2011). Performance evaluation of extension education centers in
universities based on the balanced scorecard. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(1), 37-50.
Yu, M.L., Hamid, S., Ijab, M.T., Soo, H.P. (2009). The e-balanced scorecard (e-BSC) for measuring
academic staff performance excellence. Higher Education, 57(6), 813-828.
Zangoueinezhad, A., Moshabaki, A. (2011). Measuring university performance using a knowledge-
based balanced scorecard. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 60(8), 824-843.
Zhang, J., Gao, S., Jiang, J., Xing, H. (2014). Application Research of BSC Theory in the Salary
Design of Teacher in College and University. Paper presented at the Measuring Technology
and Mechatronics Automation (ICMTMA), 2014 Sixth International Conference on.
Zolfani, S.H., Ghadikolaei, A.S. (2013). Performance evaluation of private universities based on
balanced scorecard: empirical study based on Iran. Journal of Business Economics and
Management, 14(4), 696-714.

35