Key aspects of balanced scorecard system for scientific organisations

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17072/1994-9960-2017-4-665-685

Abstract

The strategic development, which is influenced by competence-based strategic management, efficiency of business processes, human capital, the ability to retain and attract consumers, innovative development, has the greatest importance at the market of scientific and educational services, where the ability of a research organization to respond quickly to changes in the external environment becomes its competitive advantage. Currently one of the leading strategic analytical tools for management of a scientific organization can be a balanced scorecard, allowing us to consider the mission and overall strategy of a scientific organization through a system of clear goals and indicators that determine the degree of their achievement. In this regard the relevance of the research topic is determined by the need to develop sound scientific approaches to the implementation of the balanced scorecard as one of the scientific organization’s management methods. The purpose of this article is to create a concept of formation and use of the balanced scorecard in management of scientific organizations. The mechanism of applying the balanced scorecard for scientific organizations as a research object draws an attention both to its practical and theoretical aspects due the lack of studies devoted to the issue in question with the respect to the Russian economy. It is shown that the balanced scorecard in the organizations of science can be used both for assessment of their overall activities and some of its aspects, and also for the effective implementation of strategic objectives. However in that case the system of performance indicators needs to be tailored to the specificity of functioning of scientific organizations in the modern socio-economic conditions. Within the structure of the balanced scorecard five interrelated and balanced perspectives, which characterize the activity of scientific organization, are identified. They are public concern, finances, consumers, human resources and development. But the high significance has the prospect of “public concern”, which was additionally designed. The authors prove indicators that can be include in the system and determine the degree of achievement of the key objectives of a scientific organization. The approaches proposed in the article for solving the problems of assessing the effectiveness of activities and the application of the balanced scorecard can be used in practice. However for each scientific organization it is required to refine the basic methodology taking into account the specifics of the functioning and a specific target vector of development. In future the balanced scorecard may become a basis for the development of key indices of the efficiency of organization departments and particular workers including a flexible system of material encouragement (an effective contract).

Keywords

research organization, mission, strategic management, balanced scorecard, strategic objectives, strategic goals, factors, effectiveness

For citation

Maltseva A.A., Barsukova N.E. Key aspects of balanced scorecard system for scientific organisations. Perm University Herald. Economy. 2017, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 665–685. DOI 10.17072/1994-9960-2017-4-665-685

Acknowledgements

The article is the result of the research funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation within the research project «Change and development management of scientific organizations in the context of the state policy of their restructuring» given to Tver State University.

References

1. Maltseva A.A., Monakhov I.A. Rol' osobogo statusa v razvitii nauchnykh organizatsii (na primere gosudarstvennykh nauchnykh tsentrov RF) [The role of a special status in the development of scientific organizations (in the case study of the RF state research centers)]. Problemy teorii i praktiki upravleniya [Problems of Theory and Practice of Management], 2016, no. 1, pp. 40–47. (In Russian).
2. Maltseva A.A. Gosudarstvennye nauchnye tsentry Rossiiskoi Federatsii: sovremennoe sostoyanie i perspektivy [State scientific centers of the Russian Federation: Current condition and prospects]. Drukerovskii vestnik [Drucker’s Bulletin], 2016, no. 1 (9), pp. 15–28. doi: 10.17213/2312-6469-2016-1-15-28. (In Russian).
3. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. The balanced scorecard – Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, January–February 1992, no. 70 (1), p. 71–80.
4. Mal'tseva G.I., Lugovoi R.A., Soldatova Yu.A. Primenenie sistemy sbalansirovannykh pokazatelei v protsesse strategicheskogo planirovaniya vuza (na primere Vladivostokskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta ekonomiki i servisa) [Application of a balanced scorecard during strategic planning of a university (in the case study of Vladivostok State University of Economics and Service). Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz [University Management: Practice and Analysis], 2004, no. 5-6, pp. 96–103. (In Russian).
5. Fin'ko S.S. Modelirovanie sistemy strategicheskogo upravleniya ustoichivym razvitiem predpriyatiya na osnove sistemy sbalansirovannykh pokazatelei [Modeling of strategic management system for sustainable development of a company based on a balanced scorecard system]. Vestnik Povolzhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta servisa. Seriya: Ekonomika [Bulletin of Volga Region State University of Service. Series: Economy], 2014, no. 6 (38), pp. 135–139. (In Russian).
6. Kazantseva G.G., Petrova T.V. Povyshenie effektivnosti sistemy upravleniya ugol'noi kompaniei na osnove sbalansirovannoi sistemy pokazatelei [Increase of efficiency of a management system of the coal company on the basis of the balanced scorecard]. Organizator proizvodstva [Organizer of Production], 2008, no. 2, pp. 49–53. (In Russian).
7. Shneiderman A.M. Kak sozdat' sbalansirovannuyu sistemu pokazatelei (chast' 1) [How to create a balanced scorecard (part 1)]. Strategicheskii menedzhment [Strategic Management], 2009, no. 2, pp. 96–120. (In Russian).
8. Shneiderman A.M. Kak sozdat' sbalansirovannuyu sistemu pokazatelei (chast' 2) [How to create a balanced scorecard (part 2)]. Strategicheskii menedzhment [Strategic Management], 2009, no. 3, pp. 184–193. (In Russian).
9. Tyutyunnik A.V., Mashonskaya K.I. Sistema sbalansirovannykh pokazatelei v banke – mif ili neobkhodimost'? [Is a balanced scorecard system in a bank a myth or a necessity?] Upravlenie v kreditnoi organizatsii [Management in a Credit Institution], 2009, no. 3. (In Russian) Available at: http://www.reglament.net/bank/mng/2009_3_article.htm (accessed 21.08.2017).
10. Semenov D.V. Primenenie sistemy sbalansirovannykh pokazatelei vo vnutrennem korporativnom kontrole banka [Application of the balanced scorecard system in the framework of internal corporate control in a bank]. Nauchnye vedomosti BelGU. Seriya Istoriya. Politologiya. Ekonomika. Informatika [Scientific Statements of BelGU. Series History. Political Science. Economy. Computer Science], 2010, vol. 15/1, no. 13 (84), pp. 46–55. (In Russian).
11. Bilalova E.M., Kichikhanova P.M. Primenenie sistemy sbalansirovannykh pokazatelei v vuze (na primere Dagestanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta) [Application of balanced scorecard in high school (example of Dagestan State University)]. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya [Fundamental Research], 2016, no. 2–3, pp. 472–476. (In Russian).
12. Maltseva A.A. Kontseptual'nye osnovy organizatsii i funktsioni-rovaniya upravlyayushchikh kompanii tekhnoparkov [Conceptual basis of organization and functioning of management companies of techno-parks], Kursk, Yugo-Zapadnyi Gosudarstvennyi universitet Publ., 2011. 226 p. (In Russian).
13. Niven P.R. Sbalansirovannaya sistema pokazatelei – shag za shagom: maksimal'noe povyshenie ehffektivnosti i zakreplenie poluchennyh rezul'tatov [Balanced scorecard. Step by step. Maximizing performance and maintaining results], Dnepropetrovsk, Balans-Klub Publ., 2003. 328 p. (In Russian).
14. Cozzens S. U.S. Research assessment: Recent developments. Scientometrics, November 1995, vol. 34, iss. 3, pp. 351–362.
15. Whitley R. Changing governance of the public sciences. The consequences of establishing research evaluation systems for knowledge production in different countries and scientific fields. In book: The changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems. Ed. by R. Whitley, J. Gläser. Dordrecht, the Netherlands, Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2007. 271 p.
16. Pipiya L.K., Dorogokupets V.S. K voprosu ob otsenke rezul'tatov nauchnoi deyatel'nosti [Some comments on the evaluation of research productivity]. Innovatsii [Innovations], 2017, no. 1 (219), pp. 39–45. (In Russian).
17. Gittelman M. Mapping national knowledge networks: Scientists, firms, and institutions in biotechnology in the United States and France. Ph.D. Dissertation, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 2000. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9976426/ (accessed 21.08.2017).
18. Mindeli L.E., Chernykh S.I. Raskhody na nauku: mify i real'nost' [R&D expenditures: Myths and facts]. Obshchestvo i ekonomika [Society and Economics], 2016, no. 2, pp. 104–115. (In Russian).
19. Ivanov V.V., Libkind A.N., Markusova V.A. Publikatsionnaya aktivnost' i nauchnoe sotrudnichestvo vuzov i RAN [Publication activity and scientific cooperation of universities and RAS]. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk [Herald of Russian Academy of Sciences], 2014, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 32–38. doi: 10.7868/S0869587314010046. (In Russian).
20. Archibugi D., Coco A. A new indicator of technological capabilities for developed and developing countries (ArCo). World Development, 2004, vol. 32, iss. 4, pp. 629–654.
21. Koshkareva O.A., Mindeli L.E., Ostapyuk S.F. Sistemnye aspekty protsedury vybora i aktualizatsii prioritetov razvitiya nauki [System aspects of procedure for selecting and actualization of science priorities]. Innovatsii [Innovations], 2015, no. 6, pp. 20–31. (In Russian).
22. Mindeli L.I., Ivanov V.V., Libkind A.N., Markusova V.A. Bibliometricheskii podkhod k analizu natsional'nogo nauchnogo sotrudnichestva na osnove soavtorstva: Web of Science za 2006–2013 gg. [Bibliometric approach to the analysis of national scientific cooperation on the basis of co-authorship: Web of Science for 2006–2013]. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Seriya 1. Organizatsiya i metodika informatsionnoi raboty [Scientific and Technical Information. Series 1. Organization and Methodology of Information Work], 2016, no. 8, pp. 13–23. (In Russian).
23. Coccia M., Wang L.L. Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 2016, vol. 113, no. 8, pp. 2057–2061.
24. Mindeli L.E., Chernykh S.I. Finansirovanie fundamental'nykh issledovanii v Rossii: sovremennye realii i formirovanie prognoznykh otsenok [Funding of fundamental research in Russia: Modern realities and generation of forecast estimates]. Problemy prognozirovaniya [Studies on Russian Economic Development], 2016, no. 3 (156), pp. 111–122. (In Russian).
25. Razvadovskaya Yu.V., Shevchenko I.K. Finansovoe upravlenie v vuzakh Rossii: monitoring osnovnykh tendentsii i perspektiv razvitiya [Financial management in universities in Russian: Monitoring of the main trends and prospects]. Inzhenernyi vestnik Dona [Engineering Journal of Don], 2014, no. 4, pp. 135–142. (In Russian).
26. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. Measuring the strategic readiness of intangible assets. Harvard Business Review, February 2004, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 52–63.
27. Hammer M., Champy J. Reengineering the corporation. A manifesto for business revolution, New York, Harper Collins Inc. Publ., 1993. 223 p.
28. Repin V.V. Biznes-processy. Modelirovanie, vnedrenie, upravlenie. [Business processes. Modeling, implementation, management], Moscow, Mann, Ivanov i Ferber Publ., 2013. 512 p. (In Russian).
29. Kleeva L.P., Kleev I.V., Nikitova A.N., Krotov A.Yu. Resursnoe obespechenie sovremennoi otechestvennoi fundamental'noi nauki [Resource support of modern domestic fundamental science]. Energiya: ekonomika, tekhnika, ekologiya [Energy: Economics, Technology, Ecology], 2015, no. 1, pp. 2–9. (In Russian).
30. Kleeva L.P., Kleev I.V., Nikitova A.N., Krotov A.Yu. Resursnoe obespechenie sovremennoi otechestvennoi fundamental'noi nauki [Resource support of modern domestic fundamental science]. Energiya: ekonomika, tekhnika, ekologiya [Energy: Economics, Technology, Ecology], 2015, no. 2, pp. 22–29. (In Russian).
31. Vasil'eva A.N. Spetsifika i struktura chelovecheskogo kapitala organizatsii [Specific character and structure of an organization’s human capital]. Izvestiya Irkutskoi gosudarstvennoi ekonomicheskoi akademii [Bulletin of Irkutsk State Academy of Economics], 2009, no. 6 (68), pp. 110–114. (In Russian).
32. Maslow A.H. Motivation and Personality. NY, Harper and Row Publ. Inc., 1954. 399 p.
33. Bordons M., Gomez I. Collaboration networks in science. In book: The web of knowledge: A festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield. Ed. by B. Cronin, H.B. Atkins. Medford, NJ, ASIS Monograph Series, 2000, pp. 197–214.

Show full text

Information about the Authors

  • Anna A. Maltseva, Tver State University

    Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Director of Lurye Scientific and Methodological Center for Higher School Innovative Activity

  • Natalya E. Barsukova, Tver State University

    Senior Researcher at the Department of Scientific Research

Downloads

Published

2017-12-28

Issue

Section

Enterprise economy and management of industrial enterprises, organizations, branches, complexes