安达信咨询方法与工具资料库COMPARN.DOCVIP

COMPARISON OF QUANTUM PERFORMANCE MODEL AND BALANCED SCORECARD PAGE 8 Performance Measurement: A Comparison in Approaches Performance measurement (PM) is an issue many of our clients are facing and need assistance with. In the market place, there are several approaches to performance measurement. The first approach and possibly the most widely known one is the Balanced Scorecard approach, developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton. Due to the market awareness of this approach, our clients often have asked the differences between Arthur Andersen’s approach, the Quantum Performance Measurement Approach (QPM, also known as the Vital Signs model), and the Balanced Scorecard approach. This article compares the two approaches. Background and Summary In addition to two previous articles on the Balanced Scorecard in the Harvard Business Review, Kaplan and Norton published an article on the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in the Jan. - Feb. 1996 issue of HBR, “Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System.” This most recent article highlights many similarities to concepts presented in our QPM approach, concepts not presented in their two previous articles. However, the main weakness to the BSC approach is still in the area of implementation. The following summarizes the main differences between the QPM and BSC approaches: The BSC approach uses different terminology and structures than QPM to describe PM concepts. There is no clear structure, tools or methodology to implement the BSC. The only known guideline to implementing the BSC is a 26-month timeline chart, which can be used as a workplan and multiple graphics representing the Scorecard that companies can use. In a recent seminar sponsored by Kaplan and Norton, it was clear that each participant needed to come up with their own approach and interpretations of the BSC concepts. With the QPM, there is a full complement of tools, training and methodology for implementation, which are included in th