Traditional ways of measuring an institutions’ performance have given way to more broad and comprehensive models like the balanced scorecard. The need for balancing short-term compulsions with long-term survival made organizations commit themselves to more pervasive and comprehensive models that captured among others the financial, customer, internal process and learning perspectives. In doing so, the traditional disregard for intangible processes and outcomes was overcome and the notion that value lay in intangible resources was reinforced yet again. Traditionally, the balanced scorecard has been used in performance evaluation of an organization’s strategy. It is observed overtime that its applicability to nonbusiness situations has gained ground. In this study, we discuss the importance of the balanced scorecard using strategy maps. These maps describe how the four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, learning and growth are linked and how they create a balance between the more tangible outcomes through intangible resources. Lists of objectives in each perspective were identified using past literature and linkages between each perspective were illustrated to indicate a strategy map for an educational institution. Although the number of objectives in each perspective cited in this paper is not conclusive, we believe the model is a beginning of a change in thinking in that direction.

New methods of evaluating the performance of an organization have emerged by replacing traditional methods that placed emphasis on short-term measures such as financial and operational outcomes. This approach of relying on short-term measures resulted in overlooking other important dimensions of performance which also contributed to a firm’s success or failure. Given the need to balance the short-term measures with long-term goals, researchers and consultants were in search for measures that took care of both short- and long-term requirements. The emergence of different models to measure an organization’s performance created a whole new paradigm of accountability. Not to take the credit away from the earlier attempts of creating a framework for performance measurement, it may be noted that it was in the year 1987 that Art Schneiderman at analog devices1 created the first generation Balanced Scorecard (BSC). This was followed by another research by Kaplan and Norton (1992) which resulted in a more comprehensive model that widely became famous as the BSC. Though many other models were designed subsequently, the model created by Kaplan and Norton remains the most popular. An article in the Fortune by Kurtzman2 reported that 64% of the companies questioned in a survey were measuring performance from a number of perspectives in a way similar to the BSC. The BSC received widespread recognition with its adoption in different forms of organizations like non-government agencies, military and schools. A strategy map “describes the logic of the strategy showing clearly the objectives for critical internal processes that create value and intangible assets required to support them” (Kaplan and Norton). The objective of this paper is to highlight the significance and importance of the BSC and its role in evaluating the performance of academic institutions.

We are all aware that education—both at the primary and higher level—lays the actual foundation for a nation’s future and educational institutions play a crucial role in this transformation. In such a scenario, it is but evident that there is a need for a comprehensive measure to assess the institutional performance. The BSC, due to its broad scope, can be used in a variety of settings and not just restricted to business organizations. In the following sections, we begin with a review of selected literature on the subject and follow it up by listing a set of objectives that fit each of the four perspectives—financial, customer, internal process and learning. This is then followed by suggesting how each of these perspectives can be connected and be meaningful to an educational institution. The model is just a prescription and makes no comparison to any existing models or scorecards already available.

Business Strategy Journal, A Strategy Map, Balanced Scorecard, Academic Institutions, Performance Improvement, Balanced Scorecard, Art Schneiderman.