BALANCED SCORECARD

The balanced scorecard is a strategic planning and management system that is used extensively in business and industry, government, and nonprofit organizations worldwide to align business activities to the vision and strategy of the organization, improve internal and external communications, and monitor organization performance against strategic goals. It was originated by Drs. Robert Kaplan (Harvard Business School) and David Norton as a performance measurement framework that added strategic non-financial performance measures to traditional financial metrics to give managers and executives a more 'balanced' view of organizational performance. While the phrase balanced scorecard was coined in the early 1990s, the roots of the this type of approach are deep, and include the pioneering work of General Electric on performance measurement reporting in the 1950s and the work of French process engineers (who created the Tableau de Bord literally, a "dashboard" of performance measures) in the early part of the 20th century. The balanced scorecard has evolved from its early use as a simple performance measurement framework to a full strategic planning and management system. The new balanced scorecard transforms an organizations strategic plan from an attractive but passive document into the "marching orders" for the organization on a daily basis. It provides a framework that not only provides performance measurements, but helps planners identify what should be done and measured. It enables executives to truly execute their strategies. This new approach to strategic management was first detailed in a series of articles and books by Drs. Kaplan and Norton. Recognizing some of the weaknesses and vagueness of previous management approaches, the balanced scorecard approach provides a clear prescription as to what companies should measure in order to 'balance' the financial perspective. The balanced scorecard is a management system (not only a measurement system) that enables organizations to clarify their vision and strategy and translate them into action. It provides feedback around both the internal business processes and external outcomes in order to continuously improve strategic performance and results. When fully deployed, the balanced scorecard transforms strategic planning from an academic exercise into the nerve center of an enterprise. Kaplan and Norton describe the innovation of the balanced scorecard as follows: "The balanced scorecard retains traditional financial measures. But financial measures tell the story of past events, an adequate story for industrial age companies for which investments in long-term capabilities and customer relationships were not critical for success. These financial measures are

inadequate, however, for guiding and evaluating the journey that information age companies must make to create future value through investment in customers, suppliers, employees, processes, technology, and innovation."

Adapted from Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System, Harvard Business Review (January-February 1996): 76. Perspectives The balanced scorecard suggests that we view the organization from four perspectives, and to develop metrics, collect data and analyze it relative to each of these perspectives: The Learning & Growth Perspective This perspective includes employee training and corporate cultural attitudes related to both individual and corporate self-improvement. In a knowledgeworker organization, people -- the only repository of knowledge -- are the main resource. In the current climate of rapid technological change, it is becoming necessary for knowledge workers to be in a continuous learning mode. Metrics can be put into place to guide managers in focusing training

funds where they can help the most. In any case, learning and growth constitute the essential foundation for success of any knowledge-worker organization. Kaplan and Norton emphasize that 'learning' is more than 'training'; it also includes things like mentors and tutors within the organization, as well as that ease of communication among workers that allows them to readily get help on a problem when it is needed. It also includes technological tools; what the Baldrige criteria call "high performance work systems."

The Business Process Perspective This perspective refers to internal business processes. Metrics based on this perspective allow the managers to know how well their business is running, and whether its products and services conform to customer requirements (the mission). These metrics have to be carefully designed by those who know these processes most intimately; with our unique missions these are not something that can be developed by outside consultants. The Customer Perspective Recent management philosophy has shown an increasing realization of the importance of customer focus and customer satisfaction in any business. These are leading indicators: if customers are not satisfied, they will eventually find other suppliers that will meet their needs. Poor performance from this perspective is thus a leading indicator of future decline, even though the current financial picture may look good. In developing metrics for satisfaction, customers should be analyzed in terms of kinds of customers and the kinds of processes for which we are providing a product or service to those customer groups. The Financial Perspective Kaplan and Norton do not disregard the traditional need for financial data. Timely and accurate funding data will always be a priority, and managers will do whatever necessary to provide it. In fact, often there is more than enough handling and processing of financial data. With the implementation of a corporate database, it is hoped that more of the processing can be centralized and automated. But the point is that the current emphasis on financials leads to the "unbalanced" situation with regard to other

perspectives. There is perhaps a need to include additional financial-related data, such as risk assessment and cost-benefit data, in this category. Strategy Mapping Strategy maps are communication tools used to tell a story of how value is created for the organization. They show a logical, step-by-step connection between strategic objectives (shown as ovals on the map) in the form of a cause-and-effect chain. Generally speaking, improving performance in the objectives found in the Learning & Growth perspective (the bottom row) enables the organization to improve its Internal Process perspective Objectives (the next row up), which in turn enables the organization to create desirable results in the Customer and Financial perspectives (the top two rows). Balanced Scorecard Software The balanced scorecard is not a piece of software. Unfortunately, many people believe that implementing software amounts to implementing a balanced scorecard. Once a scorecard has been developed and implemented, however, performance management software can be used to get the right performance information to the right people at the right time. Automation adds structure and discipline to implementing the Balanced Scorecard system, helps transform disparate corporate data into information and knowledge, and helps communicate performance information. The Balanced Scorecard Institute formally recommends the QuickScore Performance Information System developed by Spider Strategies and comarketed by the Institute.

ERGONOMICS
Ergonomics is a term thrown around by health professionals and marketing mavens with a cavalier attitude. For some it has a very specific meaning. For others it covers everything under the sun. With all this different verbiage flying at you, you are probably starting to wonder, What is Ergonomics? Definition of Ergonomics Ergonomics derives from two Greek words: ergon, meaning work, and nomoi, meaning natural laws, to create a word that means the science of work and a persons relationship to that work. The International Ergonomics Association has adopted this technical definition: ergonomics (orhuman factors) is the scientific discipline

concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance. That is not the most efficient definition of what ergonomics is. Let us keep things simple. Ergonomics is the science of making things comfy. It also makes things efficient. And when you think about it, comfy just another way of making things efficient. However for simplicity, ergonomics makes things comfortable and efficient.

What is Ergonomics? At its simplest definition ergonomics literally means the science of work. So ergonomists, i.e. the practitioners of ergonomics, study work, how work is done and how to work better. It is the attempt to make work better that ergonomics becomes so useful. And that is also where making things comfortable and efficient comes into play. Ergonomics is commonly thought of in terms of products. But it can be equally useful in the design of services or processes. It is used in design in many complex ways. However, what you, or the user, is most concerned with is, How can I use the product or service, will it meet my needs, and will I like using it? Ergonomics helps define how it is used, how it meets you needs, and most importantly if you like it. It makes things comfy and efficient. What is Comfort? Comfort is much more than a soft handle. Comfort is one of the greatest aspects of a designs effectiveness. Comfort in the human-machine interface and the mental aspects of the product or service is a primary ergonomic design concern. Comfort in the human-machine interface is usually noticed first. Physical comfort in how an item feels is pleasing to the

user. If you do not like to touch it you won't. If you do not touch it you will not operate it. If you do not operate it, then it is useless. The utility of an item is the only true measure of the quality of its design. The job of any designer is to find innovative ways to increase the utility of a product. Making an item intuitive and comfortable to use will ensure its success in the marketplace. Physical comfort while using an item increases its utility. The mental aspect of comfort in the human-machine interface is found in feedback. You have preconceived notions of certain things. A quality product should feel like it is made out of quality materials. If it is light weight and flimsy you will not feel that comfortable using it. The look, feel, use and durability of a product help you make a mental determination about a product or service. Basically it lets you evaluate the quality of the item and compare that to the cost. Better ergonomics mean better quality which means you will be more comfortable with the value of the item.

What is Efficiency? Efficiency is quite simply making something easier to do. Efficiency comes in many forms however. Reducing the strength required makes a process more physically efficient. Reducing the number of steps in a task makes it quicker (i.e. efficient) to complete. Reducing the number of parts makes repairs more efficient. Reducing the amount of training needed, i.e. making it more intuitive, gives you a larger number of people who are qualified to perform the task. Imagine how in-efficient trash disposal would be if your teenage child wasn't capable of taking out the garbage. What? They're not? Have you tried an ergonomic trash bag?

Efficiency can be found almost everywhere. If something is easier to do you are more likely to do it. If you do it more, then it is more useful. Again, utility is the only true measure of the quality of a design.

And if you willingly do something more often you have a greater chance of liking it. If you like doing it you will be more comfortable doing it. So the next time you hear the term ergonomics you will know what it means to you. And I hope that is a comforting thought. More on Ergonomic Basics The Benefits of Ergonomics: Time Savings The Benefits of Ergonomics: Improving Communication What is Usability Using Ergonomics to Improve Your Life Organization Through Ergonomics The Essentials of Habits Ergonomic Organization

GLASS CEILING CONCEPT

In economics, the glass ceiling is "the unseen, yet unbreachable barrier that keeps minorities and women from rising to the upper rungs of the corporate ladder, regardless of their qualifications or achievements. Initially, the metaphor applied to barriers in the careers of women but was quickly extended to refer to obstacles hindering the advancement of minority men, as well as women.

Definition David Cotter et al. defined four distinctive characteristics that must be met to conclude that a glass ceiling exists. A glass ceiling inequality represents: 1. "A gender or racial difference that is not explained by other jobrelevant characteristics of the employee." 2. "A gender or racial difference that is greater at higher levels of an outcome than at lower levels of an outcome. 3. "A gender or racial inequality in the chances of advancement into higher levels, not merely the proportions of each gender or race currently at those higher levels." 4. "A gender or racial inequality that increases over the course of a career."

Cotter and his colleagues found that glass ceilings are a distinctively gender phenomenon. Both white and African-American women face a glass ceiling in the course of their careers. In contrast, the researchers did not find evidence of a glass ceiling for African-American men. The glass ceiling metaphor has often been used to describe invisible barriers ("glass") through which women can see elite positions but cannot reach them ("ceiling"). These barriers prevent large numbers of women and ethnic minorities from obtaining and securing the most powerful, prestigious, and highest-grossing jobs in the workforce. Moreover, this barrier can make many women feel as they are not worthy enough to have these high-ranking positions, but also they feel as if their bosses do not take them seriously or actually see them as potential candidates. The glass ceiling continues to exist although there are no explicit obstacles keeping women and minorities from acquiring advanced job positions there are no advertisements that specifically say "no minorities hired at this establishment", nor are there any formal orders that say "minorities are not qualified" (equal employment opportunity laws forbid this kind of discrimination) but they do lie beneath the surface. When a company exercises this type of discrimination they typically look for the most plausible explanation they can find to justify their decision. Most often this is done by citing qualities that are highly subjective or by retrospectively emphasizing/de-emphasizing specific criteria that gives the chosen candidate the edge. Mainly this invisible barrier seems to exist in more of the developing countries, in whose businesses this effect is highly "visible".

Levels and types of glass ceiling barriers

Societal barriers
The Federal Glass Ceiling Commission of the United States Department of Labor identified two major societal barriers that cause and reinforce a glass ceiling. One societal barrier is with reference to the quantity barrier and the other is with reference to the difference barrier.

Internal business barriers

The following business-based barriers were identified:

Outreach and recruitment practices that fail to seek out or recruit women and minorities Prevailing culture of many businesses is a white male culture and such corporate climates alienate and isolate minorities and women

Initial placement and clustering in staff jobs or in highly technical and professional jobs that are not on the career track to the top

Initial placement and clustering in entry position and under-representation in higher responsibility positions

Lack of mentoring and management training Lack of opportunities for career development, tailored training, and rotational job assignments that are on the revenue-producing side of the business

Little or no access to critical developmental assignments such as memberships on highly visible task forces and committees

Special or different standards for performance evaluation Biased rating and testing systems Little or no access to informal networks of communication Counterproductive behavior and harassment by colleagues

The Federal Glass Ceiling Commission suggest that the underlying cause of the glass ceiling is the perception of many white males that as a group they are losing control of their advancement opportunities.

Governmental barriers
The Federal Glass Ceiling Commission pinpointed three governmental barriers to the elimination of the glass ceiling. They are:

Lack of vigorous and consistent monitoring and law enforcement Weaknesses in the collection of employment-related data which makes it difficult to ascertain the status of groups at the managerial level and to disaggregate the data

Inadequate reporting and dissemination of information relevant to glass ceiling issues

Other barriers

Different pay for comparable work. Sexual, ethnic, racial, religious discrimination or harassment in the workplace

Lack of family-friendly workplace policies (or, on the flipside, policies that discriminate against gay people, non-parents, or single parents)

Exclusion from informal networks; Stereotyping and preconceptions of women's roles and abilities; Failure of senior leadership to assume accountability for women's advancement; Lack of role models; Lack of mentoring [19]

Requiring long hours for advancement, sometimes called the hour-glass ceiling.

The glass ceiling and disclosure of sexual orientation

In order to excel in the workplace it is important that people are familiar with a worker's strong attributes. This may present obstacles for the LGBT community because their sexual orientation may be a large factor that plays in to how they identify themselves. In a study done by Ragins in 2004, disclosure of sexual orientation has been found to have some positive, some negative, and nonsignificant effects on work attitudes, psychological strain, and compensation. Ragins, Singh and Cornwell in 2007, found that in some cases disclosure of sexual orientation has been found to result in reports of verbal harassment, job termination, and even physical assault. (D'Augelli & Grossman, 2001; Friskopp & Silverstein, 1996). In their study, Ragins, Singh and Cornwell examined fear of disclosure only among LGBT employees who had not disclosed, or had not fully disclosed their sexual identity at work. Promotion rate and compensation were used to measure career outcomes. Promotions were defined as involving two or more of the following criteria that may occur within or between organizations: significant increases in salary; significant increases in scope of responsibility; changes in job level or rank; or becoming eligible for bonuses, incentives, and stock plans. Given this definition, respondents were asked how many promotions they had received over the past 10 years. Respondents also reported their current annual compensation, which included salary, bonuses, commissions, stock options, and profit sharing. The findings showed that those who feared more negative consequences to disclosure reported less job satisfaction, organizational commitment, satisfaction with opportunities for promotion, career commitment, and organization-based self-esteem and greater turnover intentions than those who feared less negative consequences.

The glass ceiling in developing countries

The glass ceiling phenomenon is one not specific to the U.S.; other women also experience barriers similar to the glass ceiling. In many developing countries improving the number of educated women has decreased the number of hours a woman works in a household. In countries such as Mexico, India, and South Africa, women work substantially more hours than

men. On average women work one hour and nine minutes more. With this gap women would be able to provide more money than the men if they were in paid positions. However, because women's wages are roughly twenty percent lower than that of men, it is more difficult for them to make a substantial contribution even if they did work outside the household. Statistics also show that 90% of people countries surveyed in East Africa, the Pacific, Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and other transition economies thought that both husbands and wives should contribute to the household income. The glass ceiling comes into play when these women do want to go out to find work and support their family but are stopped because of lack of experience. The glass ceiling affects women and the workplace in countries all around the world.