IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/joinma/v10y2018i4p57-83n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balanced Scorecard in Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Fijałkowska Justyna

    (University of Social Sciences, Lodz, Poland)

  • Oliveira Cidalia

    (University of Minho Braga, Portugal)

Abstract

Objective: Performance measurement and reporting leading to greater transparency and accountability of universities have become a challenging issue. Increasingly, universities have been required to provide performance indicators—empirical evidence of their value creation — to the different group of stakeholders. One of the approaches that may be applied by universities is the Balanced Scorecard (BSC). The objective of this paper is to indicate the BSC as a useful tool for the evaluation of the universities’ performance.Methodology: This study is based on the following research methods: descriptive, deductive, and the literature review. It refers also to case studies that are quoted in the context of their practical BSC application experience and it presents the pioneer approach of California University in BSC adoption. The rationale of this paper follows the principal-agent theory that is a foundation of the accountability concept. It refers also to the new managerialism, new public management, and entrepreneurial university.Findings: Based on the literature review concerning the analysis of the examples of universities implementing BSC, this paper argues that BSC provides a framework for the performance measurement that allows for the increased transparency and accountability of these institutions.Value added: The pioneer BSC framework presented in this paper can be used as the basis for the development of general performance measurement in universities.Recommendations: It is recommended that the universities that want to boost their transparency and be accountable for their outcomes apply and develop the BSC framework to which we refer to in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Fijałkowska Justyna & Oliveira Cidalia, 2018. "Balanced Scorecard in Universities," Journal of Intercultural Management, Sciendo, vol. 10(4), pages 57-83, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:joinma:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:57-83:n:3
    DOI: 10.2478/joim-2018-0025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/joim-2018-0025
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/joim-2018-0025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tariq H. Ismail & Mansour Al-Thaoiehie, 2015. "A balanced scorecard model for performance excellence in Saudi Arabia's higher education sector," International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(3/4), pages 255-280.
    2. Minga Negash, 2011. "Resource allocation challenges in South African universities: a management accounting perspective," International Journal of Critical Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2/3), pages 265-292.
    3. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Abdolhamid Safaei Ghadikolaei, 2013. "Performance evaluation of private universities based on balanced scorecard: empirical study based on Iran," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 696-714, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fahmi Fadhl Al-Hosaini & Saudah Sofian, 2015. "A Review of Balanced Scorecard Framework in Higher Education Institution (HEIs)," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 5(1), pages 26-35.
    2. Noor Azmi Bin Hashim & Aliyu Olayemi Abdullateef & Bashir Danlami Sarkindaji, 2015. "The Moderating Infl uence of Trust on the Relationship between Institutional Image/Reputation, Perceived Value on Student Loyalty in Higher Education Institution," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 5(3), pages 122-128.
    3. Qi-Zhen Zhang & Shan Jiang & Ran Liu & Hu-Chen Liu, 2020. "An Integrated Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Key Performance Indicators in University Performance Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    5. Negash, Minga & Lemma, Tesfaye T. & Samkin, Grant, 2019. "Factors impacting accounting research output in developing countries: An exploratory study," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 170-192.
    6. Gul, Muhammet & Yucesan, Melih, 2022. "Performance evaluation of Turkish Universities by an integrated Bayesian BWM-TOPSIS model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. Ertugrul Ayyildiz & Mirac Murat & Gul Imamoglu & Yildiz Kose, 2023. "A novel hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate universities based on student perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 55-86, January.
    8. Vivek Agrawal & Nitin Seth & Jitendra Kumar Dixit, 2022. "A combined AHP–TOPSIS–DEMATEL approach for evaluating success factors of e-service quality: an experience from Indian banking industry," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 715-747, September.
    9. Yaser Saleh Al Frijat, 2018. "Activating Balanced Scorecard Importance as a Way to Improve the Accounting Education in Jordanian Universities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(9), pages 66-78, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    balanced scorecard; performance measurement; universities;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M19 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Other
    • M49 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:joinma:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:57-83:n:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.