This paper reviews developments in the balanced scorecard (BSC) since its inception in the year 1992. The BSC has become one of the most popular performance measurement tools and mechanisms for executing business strategies among senior executives and managers globally. The BSC was developed by Kaplan & Norton to solve the industry-wide challenge of performance measurement. It incorporated four diverse elements to create overall performance tool. These were mainly financial measures, operational measures, internal processes and innovations. These perspectives focused on areas that an organisation could improve, create value on, excel at and shareholders and customers’ views. Although the original BSC was widely accepted, it was never perfect. Its measures, for instance, could not accommodate all measures as demonstrated by Rexam Custom Europe in 1996. In addition, Kaplan and Norton had stated that vision and strategy was the core of the BSC. However, it was difficult to relate the measures with overall strategy of a company. Hence, results from the BSC were always segregated. In 1996, Kaplan and Norton showed that the BSC introduced four management processes that enhanced the relations to long-term strategic objectives with short-term actions. Between 1996 and 2000, Kaplan and Norton started to address some challenges identified in the existing model. The initial stage involved explaining the vision to assist executives to create agreement and comprehend institutional vision, strategy and corporate goals. Consequently, they could communicate such long-term strategic goals to all employees. Employees could see their individual performance and contributions against their organisational strategies. Second, the business planning strived to establish milestone and targets and then it aimed to align strategic incentives with targets. Lastly, managers could monitor and evaluate employee performance through feedback and learning perspectives of the BSC. In 2000, Kaplan and Norton released an article that showed a clear link between strategy and perspectives based on mapping. Through mapping, the strategy map linked various items of organisational BSC into a cause-and-effect relationship to show preferred outcomes alongside their drivers. Given the constant improvements, the BSC has become easier to implement and is equally astute. Mapping, for instance, ensures creation of logical links to demonstrate relations between measures. For instance, employee training affects customer satisfaction, which in turn improves customer loyalty and increases the overall financial performance. Although notable improvements have been noted, the BSC has continued to be rigid with regard to design. On this note, Kaplan and Norton had clarified that organisations have unique attributes and thus could follow their own methods to create BSC. Currently, the four elements of the BSC are widely used, but with greater flexibility and slight changes in names. Some organisations, for instance, refer to ‘Internal Business’ as ‘Internal Process’. In addition, the issue of shareholders has raised new questions as public sector organisations have started to adopt the BSC. A study conducted in 1996 in three companies in Europe showed marked variations in designs of the BSC. It is imperative to