Talk:Balanced scorecard

message: I think one of the redirected links that brings you here is typed wrong.  It leaves of the letter "d" in the word "Balanced".  Even the article is named "Balanced Scorecard".  Searching for "Balanced Score Card" does not bring you here directly.  Instead you have to find "Balance Score Card".  If someone does not type "scorecard" as one word, they may miss this article.
There is nothing mentioned about Hoshin Kanri.  A link to a whole article on Hoshin Kanri would be nice.
The first two paragraphs are taken almost verbatim from http://www.balancedscorecard.org/basics/bsc1.html: one word has been changed, and the order of the paragraphs switched. --194.73.107.129 13:52, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have removed them adding a link to the site you have identified - thank you--Andrew Gardner 16:04, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The customer perspective comment on operational excellence, customer intimacy or product leadership, which are the 3 value disciplines define by TGreacy and Wiersema, without reference. Further, value disciplines could be mapped to the other perspectives as well.
Bmarcoux (talk) 21:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treacy and Wiersema 

message: This article seems to draw heavily from business jargon, and quite alot of it is informal speech inside quotation marks. it could stand to be much more academic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.254.91.170 (talk) 07:50, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overuse of Jargon 

message: In the following woring paper Kaplan gives an overview of the history of ideas that finally led to the BSC. On p.18 he gives a reference to Schneidermann and points out the improvements he added to Schneidermanns system.
==> http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/10-074.pdf
  @Techreport{Kaplan2009a,
  author      = {Kaplan, Robert.},
  institution = {Harvard Business School},
  title       = {Conceptual Foundation of the Balanced Scorecard},
  year        = {2009},
  type        = {Working Paper},
  number      = {10-074},
  url         = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/10-074.pdf},
  urldate     = {2016.05.07},
  note        = {Paper originally prepared for C. Chapman, A. Hopwood, and M. Shields (eds.), Handbook of Management Accounting Research: Volume 3 (Elsevier, 2009)},
  file        = {Kaplan2010.pdf:Uni-FOM\\Strategy\\Kaplan2010.pdf:PDF},
  owner       = {belmart},
  timestamp   = {2016.05.08},
  }
--85.177.224.3 (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arthur M. Schneiderman mentioned by Kaplan 

message: I have re-ordered the list of companies in the Software Tools section to be alphabetical. I know that puts my company first (at the moment) but I couldn't think of any other way to avoid disputes about what the order should be.
--Matthew C. Clarke 01:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how a random list of software helps understand the topic.  We're writing an encyclopedic article about the balanced scorecard, not building a software directory.  Please see WP:NOT.  If you'd like to add highly referenced material about notable software that is related, feel free to draft something. Kuru talk 
12:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software vendors 

message: I am deleting or reverting any contributions I have previously made to this article for the following reason.  I work for a company that practices and teaches Strategic Planning methodologies thus making my contribution to any article related to Strategy topics a conflict of interest an in violation of Wikipedia Conflict of Interest guidelines WP:COI --Mike Cline 13:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleting Mike Cline Contributions

message: There was a "Warning" posted in the article section comparing balanced scorecard to AIE:
:WARNING: Applied Information Economics is not as established as balanced scorecards. This section may have been added as an attempt to market this methodology which was developed by a consulting group. An automated bot prevents deletion of a complete section of material, so this remains, but please keep this caveat in mind.
Such notes do not belong within the article text.  Perhaps a COI tag would have been more appropriate.
However, I checked the references and it seems like a simply factual explanation of an independent government study comparing the two methods.  Whether balanced scorecard is more "established" has no bearing on the validity of this section.  I don't disagree with the original author's point that balanced scorecard lacks any theoretical foundation so being "established" apparently just means "more widely used".  I changed a comment in that section to reflect that but I think it needs a citation.
By the way, if being more widely used make balanced scorecard more "established" than AIE, then atrology is more established than either one of these.BillGosset 13:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "warning" that belonged in talk 

message: I think that this article substantially misses the point of the balanced scorecard in that it is, essentially, a tool for strategic conversation and one that encourages a systemic view of strategy.  Later work by Norton and Kaplan make that very clear. It is also a deeply educative tool in that it requires careful thinking about outcomes and drivers, lagging and leading measures, and it requires the development and practice of disciplines - e.g. the choice of few amongst many possible options. 
This point seems to be misunderstood in many implementations of the BSC - leading to inappropriate expectations and a process managed as if it were a measuring, rather than learning one.  
I think that the addition of these points would improve both the conceptual depth and the tutility of the article.
Fosterp 20:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conceptual limitations in the article 

message: I atttempted to add a link to "www.bscol.org", the Balanced Scorecard Collaborative. This is the company that Drs. David P. Norton and Robert S. Kaplan started in 1992 to provide Balanced Scorecard consulting, education, and strategy. Since David Norton and Robert Kaplan are the founders of the Balanced Scorecard Methodology, and are still on the board and active in the running of this company, it seems that this article is incomplete without a link to this site.
Moreover, this site does contain a link to a competing site "www.balancescorecard.org" (The Balanced Scorecard Institute) - Misleading anyone reading this article to believe not only that the company behind the Balanced Scorecard Metholodogy is the "Balanced Scorecard Institute", but that they are the leading experts in this field.Afarkas 23:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to legitimate Balanced Scorecard Site 

message: I would like to add a link to "bscwiki.com" and "bsccommunity.com," both of which are resources to help connect global Balanced Scorecard users and advance the knowledge of the community.  The community and wiki are managed by people with over 10 years of experience in the Balanced Scorecard field and open to everyone with no cost or advertising associated with it.  I believe these external links would help deepen the understanding of the concept and improve the page.Dmiyake  —Preceding comment was added at 13:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry.  They both appear to be mostly empty, low content, branded sites.  I don't see how they add significant value to the article.  Please read our external link guidelines when you get an opportunity.  Thanks. Kuru talk 23:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Balanced Scorecard Resources 

message: I added aditional link www.vjsolucoes.com.br (site in english and portuguese). It is a fantastic site with a lot of free material. They are fixing the site but provides a lot cases. Very good site to acquire some tools. Dejunior13 (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not seeing much there, sorry.  Lots of promotional junk at the moment - could you be specific as to what you think it is providing? Kuru talk 01:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dejunior. Please read up on the wikipedia external linking policy WP:EL, and note that linking to any of your own sites (or articles) is considered a conflict of interest. You could propose a link or citation on the talk pages, but if everyone else disagrees, then its best not to fight the consensus. SteveLoughran (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional External Links

message: Have deleted the following 
It was developed and first used at Analog Devices in 1987.
 as it is a) unreferenced and b) chronologically inconsistent. If it can be referenced accordingly, please stick it back in. --Technopat (talk) 15:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted inconsistency 

message: Are there really the four named generations of the BSC?
e.g. I didn't find any proof for the following part of the article:
In 2007, the 4th Generation was evolved in the work by Hannabarger, Buchman and Economy. They created linkages between the Strategic, Operational and Tactical levels within organizations through Scorecards and Dashboards that provide drill down / up capability to identify sources and root causes for under-performing scorecard metrics. Soon after this work, Kaplan and Norton revised their approach and acknowledged it had lacked the ability to give focus on measures to the here and now, day-to-day operational and tactical levels within organizations that the Hannabarger, Buchman and Economy work provides.
I don't see anything meaningful in the "generations" talk except marketing.  These authors are promoting their book here. Parveson  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parveson (talk • contribs) 16:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As it states that survey respondents were 'self-selected', one can presume that 'the company uses a scorecard' is a precept for the 'study'.  Concur that a random sample would produce radically different results, and I question the validity of any research using self-selected samples. Kuru talk 15:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Generations of the Balanced Scorecard 

message: Is the David Norton here the same as the one quoted here.  70.247.164.14 (talk) 21:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No - two different individuals. Kuru (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Norton Quote 

message: i am going to use BSC approach to measure the relationship between corporate environmental responsibility and organizational performance but I couldnot found questionnaire that can be used in such issues. could some one please help me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.133.3.89 (talk) 11:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  student needs help 

message: Substituted at 08:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This article appears to contain original research by editors. I removed one egregious example of this. Sbelknap (talk) 13:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment