Applying Balanced Scorecard to Education

Document Sample
Applying Balanced Scorecard to Education Powered By Docstoc
					      Applying the Balanced Scorecard
                to Education
                                               DEMETRIUS KARATHANOS
                                                PATRICIA KARATHANOS
                                              Southeast Missouri State University
                                                  Cape Girardeau, Missouri

                                                 ABSTRACT. Although the applica-
                                                 tion of the balanced scorecard (BSC)
                                                 in the business sector is well docu-

T     he concept of the balanced score-
      card (BSC) was first introduced by
Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton
                                                 mented, very little research has been
                                                 reported regarding the adaptation or
                                                 application of the BSC in the educa-
                                                                                             financial performance (Kaplan & Norton,
                                                                                             1996). Thus, the BSC enables managers
                                                                                             to monitor and adjust the implementation
(1992) in their now widely cited Har-            tion sector. In this article, the authors   of their strategies and to make fundamen-
                                                 (a) describe how the Baldrige Educa-
vard Business Review article, “The Bal-                                                      tal changes in them.
                                                 tion Criteria for Performance Excel-
anced Scorecard—Measures that Drive              lence has adapted the concept of the
Performance.” The widespread adoption            BSC to education and (b) discuss sig-       The Baldrige National Quality
and use of the BSC is well documented.           nificant differences as well as similar-    Program: An Overview
For example, Kaplan and Norton (2001)            ities between the BSC for business
                                                 and the BSC for education. The                The Baldrige National Quality Pro-
reported that by 2001 about 50% of the
                                                 authors also present examples of the
Fortune 1000 companies in North                                                              gram is the vehicle of implementation of
                                                 BSCs of three Baldrige Education
America and 40% to 45% of companies              Award recipients.                           The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality
in Europe were using the BSC.                                                                Improvement Act of 1987–Public Law
   The basic premise of the BSC is that                                                      100–107. This law was enacted on the
financial results alone cannot capture                                                       basis of a set of “Findings,” one of which
value-creating activities (Kaplan & Nor-      “How should we appear to our cus-              was that
ton, 2001). In other words, financial         tomers?”                                         [T]he leadership of the United States in
measures are lagging indicators and, as          3. Internal business processes per-           product and process quality has been
such, are not effective in identifying the    spective. Measures in this perspective           challenged strongly (and sometimes suc-
                                              should answer the question, “What                cessfully) by foreign competition, and our
drivers or activities that affect financial
                                                                                               Nation’s productivity growth has
results. Kaplan and Norton (1992) sug-        processes must we excel at?”                     improved less than our competitors’ over
gested that organizations, while using           4. Learning and growth perspective.           the last two decades. (Baldrige National
financial measures, should develop a          These measures should answer the                 Quality Program, 2003a, p. 61)
comprehensive set of additional mea-          question, “How can we sustain our abil-
                                                                                                The primary objective of the Baldrige
sures to use as leading indicators, or pre-   ity to change and improve?”
                                                                                             Program is to help American businesses
dictors, of financial performance. They
                                                 A critical factor for an effective BSC is   improve their competitiveness in the
suggested that measures should be devel-
                                              the alignment of all the measures in the       global market. Businesses can improve
oped that address four perspectives:
                                              four perspectives with the company’s           their competitiveness by identifying
   1. The financial perspective. Mea-         vision and strategic objectives. The BSC       role-model organizations, recognizing
sures in this perspective should answer       allows managers to track short-term            them, and disseminating their best prac-
the question, “How should we appear to        financial results while simultaneously         tices throughout the United States.
our shareholders?”                            monitoring their progress in building the         The Baldrige Program is widely recog-
   2. The customer perspective. These         capabilities and acquiring the intangible      nized as a very significant factor in
measures should answer the question,          assets that generate growth for future         strengthening U.S. competitiveness in the

222     Journal of Education for Business
global market. In its 1995 report Building    The measurement system yields results                The Baldrige Education Criteria
on Baldrige: American Quality for the         in the following areas (Baldrige Nation-             for Performance Excellence
21st Century, the Council on Competi-         al Quality Program, 2003a):
tiveness made the following statements:                                                               In 1995, the Baldrige National Quali-
“The Baldrige National Quality Award             1. Customer-focused results                       ty Program began the process of convert-
and its state and local offshoots have been      2. Product and service results                    ing the business criteria for use in the
key to the effort to strengthen U.S. com-        3. Financial and market results                   education sector. This process culminat-
petitiveness” and “The Baldrige Award            4. Human resource results                         ed in the development of the Education
Program, having galvanized U.S. quality          5. Organizational effectiveness results,          Criteria for Performance Excellence and
efforts, is now positioned to become the      including key internal operations perfor-            with Congressional approval of the Mal-
vehicle to stimulate and coordinate efforts   mance measures                                       colm Baldrige National Quality Award
to expand quality as a national priority”        6. Governance and social responsibil-             for Education in 1999. In Figure 2, we
(Council, p. v). The Council (p. 22) also     ity results                                          show the framework of the education cri-
stated that it “is a nonprofit, nonpartisan                                                        teria in a systems perspective. Clearly,
                                                 Clearly, this set of results is consistent
organization of chief executives from                                                              this framework is very similar to that of
                                              with the basic concept of the BSC. The
business, higher education and organized                                                           the business criteria shown in Figure 1.
                                              financial and market results are the only
labor who have joined together to pursue                                                           In 2001, three educational institutions
                                              lagging indicator and cover the BSC’s
a single overriding goal: to improve the                                                           became the first recipients of the
                                              financial perspective. The customer-
ability of American companies and work-                                                            Baldrige Award.
                                              focused results obviously cover the
ers to compete more effectively in world      BSC’s customer perspective. The prod-
markets, while building a rising standard     uct and service results together with the            The BSC in the Education Criteria
of living at home.” In 1995, The Council      organizational effectiveness results                 for Performance Excellence
was chaired by Paul Allaire, CEO, Xerox,      cover the BSC’s internal business per-
with Thomas E. Everhart, President, Cal-      spective. The human resource results                    Although the concept of the BSC has
ifornia Institute of Technology, and Jack     cover the BSC’s learning and growth                  been widely adopted and used in the
Sheinkman, President, Amalgamated             perspective. The governance and social               business sector, the education sector
Clothing and Textile Workers Union,           responsibility results were added in                 apparently has not embraced the BSC
AFL-CIO, CLC, as vice-chairmen.               2003 and represent a new perspective in              concept widely, as indicated by the
   Recipients of the Baldrige Award are       view of the recent, well known collapses             dearth of published research on this
obligated to present their “best prac-        that giant corporations experienced                  topic. A thorough review of the literature
tices” at one national and two regional       owing to unethical practices.                        yielded few significant publications. For
conferences. In addition to these obliga-
tory presentations, there is a great
demand for additional presentations.                                             Organizational profile:
Through 1998, past Baldrige Award                                        Environment, relationships, and challenges
recipients made approximately 30,000
   The centerpiece of the Baldrige Pro-                                        2                              5
gram is the Criteria for Performance                                       Strategic                     Human resource
                                                                           planning                         focus
Excellence. These criteria define a state-
of-the-art management model that inte-
grates the following seven areas into a              1                                                                          Business
comprehensive system: leadership; strate-        Leadership                                                                      results
gic planning; customer and market focus;
measurement, analysis, and knowledge                                          3                                    6
management; human resource focus;                                        Customer and                           Process
process management; and business                                         market focus                         management
results. In Figure 1, we show the frame-
work of the criteria in a systems perspec-
tive. The criteria maintain currency
through annual revisions and improve-
ments that incorporate emerging issues                                                     4
and best practices (Baldrige National                              Measurement, analysis, and knowledge management
Quality Program, 2003a).
   The criteria place heavy emphasis on          FIGURE 1. Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence Framework:
the development of a comprehensive               A systems perspective.
measurement system that is aligned               Source. 2004 Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence.
with the company’s strategic objectives.

                                                                                                                    March/April 2005    223
example, Cullen, Joyce, Hassall, and                     5.   Agility                            formance improvement and change man-
Broadbent (2003) proposed that a bal-                    6.   Focus on the future                agement involves the selection and use of
anced scorecard be used in educational                                                           performance measures and indicators.
                                                         7.   Managing for innovation
institutions for reinforcement of the                                                            The measures or indicators you select
                                                         8.   Management by fact
importance of managing rather than just                                                          should best represent the factors that lead
monitoring performance. Sutherland                       9.   Social responsibility
                                                                                                 to improved student, operational, and
(2000) reported that the Rossier School                10.    Focus on results and creating
                                                                                                 financial performance. A comprehensive
of Education at the University of South-             value
                                                                                                 set of measures or indicators tied to stu-
ern California adopted the balanced                    11.    Systems perspective
                                                                                                 dent, stakeholder, and/or organizational
scorecard approach to assess its academ-                                                         performance requirements represents a
                                                        In the “focus on the future” core
ic program and planning process. Also,                                                           clear basis for aligning all processes with
                                                     value, the criteria state that “a major
Chang and Chow (1999) reported that                                                              your organization’s goals” (Baldrige
                                                     longer-term investment associated
responses in a survey of 69 accounting                                                           National Quality Program, 2003b, p. 4).
                                                     with your organization’s improvement
department heads were generally sup-                                                             The congruence of the portion in italics
                                                     is the investment in creating and sus-
portive of the balanced scorecard’s                                                              with the basic premise and the perspec-
                                                     taining a mission-oriented assessment
applicability and benefits to accounting                                                         tives of the BSC is clear.
                                                     system focused on learning” (Baldrige
                                                     National Quality Program, 2003b, p.            In the “focus on results and creating
   The importance of measurement per-
                                                     3). The criteria recommend that orga-       value” core value, the criteria state that
meates the Baldrige Criteria for Perfor-
                                                     nizations use both (a) formative            “the use of a balanced composite of lead-
mance Excellence. The focus on mea-
                                                     assessment to measure learning early        ing and lagging performance measures
surement in the criteria first appears in
                                                     in the learning process to allow for        offers an effective means to communicate
the set of “Core Values and Concepts.”
                                                     timely intervention, if needed, and (b)     short and longer term priorities, monitor
These factors comprise the philosophi-
                                                     summative assessment to measure             actual performance, and provide a clear
cal foundations of performance excel-
                                                     progress against key relevant external      basis for improving results” (Baldrige
lence and are as follows (Baldrige
                                                     standards and norms regarding the           National Quality Program, 2003b, p. 4).
National Quality Program, 2003b):
                                                     knowledge and skills that students          The criteria make the following state-
    1. Visionary leadership                          have (Baldrige National Quality Pro-        ment in the “systems perspective” core
    2. Learning-centered education                   gram, 2003b).                               value: “Alignment means using key link-
    3. Organizational and personal                      In the “management by fact” core         ages among requirements given in the
learning                                             value, the criteria make the following      Baldrige Categories to ensure consisten-
    4. Valuing faculty, staff, and partners          statement: “A major consideration in per-   cy of plans, processes, measures, and
                                                                                                 actions” (Baldrige National Quality Pro-
                                                                                                 gram, 2003b, p. 5).
                                   Organizational profile:                                          The 11 core values and concepts are
                           Environment, relationships, and challenges                            embodied in the following seven cate-

                                  2                               5                                1. Leadership
                              Strategic                    Faculty and staff                       2. Strategic planning
                              planning                          focus                              3. Student, stakeholder, and market
       1                                                                       Organizational      4. Measurement, analysis, and knowl-
   Leadership                                                                   performance      edge management
                                                                                   results         5. Faculty and staff focus
                                  3                                6                               6. Process management
                               Student,                         Process                            7. Organizational performance results
                           stakeholder, and                   management
                             market focus                                                           In Figure 2, we show the framework
                                                                                                 connecting and integrating these seven
                                                                                                 categories into a comprehensive sys-
                                                                                                 tem. In describing Figure 2, the criteria
                                                                                                 state, in part, that “Measurement,
                     Measurement, analysis, and knowledge management
                                                                                                 Analysis, and Knowledge Management
                                                                                                 (Category 4) are critical to the effective
   FIGURE 2. Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence                              management of your organization and
   Framework: A systems perspective.                                                             to a fact-based system for improving
   Source. 2004 Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence.                          performance. Measurement, analysis,
                                                                                                 and knowledge serve as a foundation

224     Journal of Education for Business
for the performance management sys-              Under the customer perspective, the         educational programs, whereas the cus-
tem” (Baldrige National Quality Pro-          student- and stakeholder-focused results       tomer-focused results focus primarily
gram, 2003b, p. 6).                           focus primarily on satisfaction with           on satisfaction with products and ser-
   Each of the seven categories lists a
set of “requirements” that an organiza-
                                                 TABLE 1. Baldrige Criteria for Education and Business: Comparison of
tion should address in its process of
                                                 Expected Measures
self-assessment. The requirements of
the first six categories address the
approaches, or methods, and the                  Education                                             Business
deployment of these approaches,
which the organization uses in its               1. Student learning results                 1. Customer-focused results
efforts to achieve its overall objectives.          Results should be based on a variety        Customer satisfaction measurements
In Category 7, the organization must             of assessment methods, should reflect       about specific product and service fea-
                                                 the organization’s overall mission and      tures, delivery, relationships, and trans-
specify the results yielded by the               improvement objectives, and together        actions that bear upon the customers’
approaches.                                      should represent holistic appraisals of     future actions
   The following results are provided in         student learning.
Category 7 (Baldrige National Quality            2. Student-and-stakeholder-focused          2. Product and service results
Program, 2003b):                                 results                                        Key measures or indicators of prod-
                                                    Student and stakeholder satisfaction     uct and service performance that are
   1. Student learning results
                                                 measurements about specific educa-          important to the customers
   2. Student- and stakeholder-focused           tional program and service features,
results                                          delivery, interactions, and transactions
   3. Budgetary, financial, and market           that bear upon student development
results                                          and learning and the students’ and
                                                 stakeholders’ future actions
   4. Faculty and staff results
   5. Organizational effectiveness results,      3. Budgetary, financial, and market         3. Financial and market results
including key internal operational perfor-       results                                        Return on investment, asset use,
mance measures                                       Instructional and general administra-   operating margins, profitability, liquid-
                                                 tion expenditures per student, tuition      ity, value added per employee
   6. Governance and social responsibil-
                                                 and fee levels, cost per academic cred-
ity results                                      it, resources redirected to education
                                                 from other areas, scholarship growth
   These results are similar to those that
the Baldrige Criteria require for the busi-      4. Faculty and staff results                4. Human resource results
ness sector and clearly represent a bal-            Innovation and suggestion rates;            Innovation and suggestion rates;
anced scorecard. However, some of the            courses or educational programs com-        courses completed; learning; on-the-
                                                 pleted; learning; on-the-job perfor-        job performance improvements;
perspectives in the education sector are
                                                 mance improvements; crosstraining           crosstraining rates; measures and indi-
clearly different from those in the busi-        rates; collaboration and teamwork;          cators of work system performance and
ness sector. In Table 1, we summarize            knowledge- and skill-sharing across         effectiveness; collaboration and team-
the measures expected in the BSCs in             work functions, units, and locations;       work; knowledge- and skill-sharing
business and in education.                       employee well-being, satisfaction, and      across work functions, units, and loca-
                                                 dissatisfaction                             tions; employee well-being, satisfac-
   Although the financial and market
                                                                                             tion, and dissatisfaction
results are the “bottom line” or lagging
indicator in the business sector, the            5. Organizational effectiveness results,    5. Organizational effectiveness results,
                                                 including key internal operations per-      including key internal operations per-
bottom line or lagging indicator in the          formance measures                           formance measures
education sector is the student learning
                                                    Capacity to improve student perfor-         Productivity, cycle time, supplier
results. All other results are considered        mance, student development, education       and partner performance, key measures
to be leading indicators or drivers of           climate, indicators of responsiveness to    or indicators of accomplishment of
student learning.                                student or stakeholder needs, supplier      organizational strategy and action
   The budgetary, financial, and market          and partner performance, key measures       plans
                                                 or indicators of accomplishment of
results in education differ substantially
                                                 organizational strategy and action plans
from those in the business sector. In
education, the expected measures are             6. Governance and social responsibility     6. Governance and social responsibility
                                                 results                                     results
primarily internal efficiency measures,
                                                    Fiscal accountability, both internal        Fiscal accountability, both internal
whereas in business they are the bottom
                                                 and external; measures or indicators of     and external; measures or indicators of
line or lagging indicators. The remain-          ethical behavior and of stakeholder         ethical behavior and of stakeholder
ing results reflect for the most part the        trust in the governance of the organiza-    trust in the governance of the organiza-
same perspectives in business and in             tion; regulatory and legal compliance;      tion; regulatory and legal compliance;
education, although the specific mea-            organizational citizenship                  organizational citizenship
sures may differ considerably.
                                                                                                            March/April 2005          225
vices. Under the learning and growth         25%. The “shared vision” includes                • Learning is an active process in
perspective, the human resource results      some of the following notable aspects         which students discover and create
in business and the faculty and staff        (Chugach School District, 2001):              knowledge.
results in education would include very                                                       • Tracking academic performance is
                                                • Commitment to developing and
similar measures. Under the internal                                                       a consistent and constant practice.
                                             supporting partnerships with parents,
business perspective, the organizational                                                      • Active involvement by all stake-
                                             community, and businesses that equally
effectiveness results in business would                                                    holders is integral to district operations.
                                             share the responsibility of preparing
use primarily internal efficiency mea-                                                        • District employees are highly val-
                                             students to meet the challenges of the
sures, whereas in education they make                                                      ued resources.
                                             ever-changing world in which they live
use of measures of factors that affect                                                        • The district recognizes the value
                                                • Development of performance stan-
student performance and development.                                                       that it has in the community and the
                                             dards in 10 areas: mathematics, reading,
   The governance and social responsi-                                                     people it serves.
                                             writing, science, technology, social sci-
bility results for both business and edu-                                                     • Our business operations are cost
                                             ences, service learning, career develop-
cation represent a new perspective added                                                   effective while maintaining quality and
                                             ment, cultural awareness and expres-
to the criteria in 2003 in light of the                                                    protecting our program.
                                             sion, and personal and social health
increased importance of ethical practices
                                             development                                   Those involved in creating the mission of
after the recent ethics-related collapses
of giant corporations and the continuing        • The district does not operate with       the Pearl River School District believe
serious ethical violations—primarily in      the typical Carnegie units, or credits        that the district’s success is attributable to
the athletics area—in educational institu-   (i.e., the typical grade levels). Instead,    the fact that everything they do is aligned
tions. Both the business and education       performance standards in the above 10         with three strategic goals:
criteria rely on similar measures.           areas define graduation requirements.
                                                                                              • Improve student academic achieve-
                                                • Student learning profiles (SLP),
                                             individual learning plans (ILP), student
Three Examples of BSCs in                    assessment binders (SAB), and student            • Improve public perception of the
Education                                    life-skills portfolios support and docu-      district
                                             ment individually paced progress in the          • Maintain fiscal stability and
   The first Baldrige Education Awards                                                     improve cost effectiveness
                                             10 standards (some students achieve
were presented in 2001 to three organi-
                                             graduation levels at 14 years of age,         Again, the measures reported by Pearl
zations: Chugach School District, Pearl
                                             whereas others reach them at age 21).         River, provided in Table 2, clearly are
River School District, and University
of Wisconsin–Stout. We present the              • Thirty days of staff development         aligned with the district’s mission, core
detailed measures of the balanced            annually provided to teachers                 values, and strategic goals.
scorecards of these institutions in Table       • Focus on developing school-to-              The University of Wisconsin–Stout,
2. Although the BSCs of these three          work skills                                   designated as a “special mission institu-
institutions cover the same perspec-            • Focus on character development           tion,” provides a distinctive array of
tives, their individual measures differ         • Focus on “hands-on” experiential         programs leading to professional
considerably, reflecting the differences     learning                                      careers focused on the needs of society.
in their individual missions. For exam-         • Focus on technology (through a           Some of its unique characteristics are
ple, the Chugach School District is a        grant from the Melinda and Bill Gates         the following (University of Wiscon-
small rural K–12 district in Alaska          Foundation, each student receives a lap-      sin–Stout, 2001):
populated predominantly by native            top upon reaching a specific level of            • More than half of its 27 undergrad-
Alaskans. The region suffers from very       computer skills)                              uate programs are not offered at any
high unemployment, high homeless-            Clearly, the measures reported by             other campus in the University of Wis-
ness, teenage pregnancy, alcohol and         Chugach School District in Table 2 are        consin system, and several are unique in
drug abuse, and a high crime rate.           closely aligned with the “shared vision”      the nation.
Many students suffer from fetal alco-        of the community.                                • The programs emphasize business
hol syndrome. Ten years ago, that               Pearl River School District, in contrast   relationship processes and stay current
region had the lowest California             with Chugach, is a large, affluent subur-     with fast-changing technology and mar-
Achievement Test (CAT) scores in the         ban New York City K–12 district. Its mis-     ket dynamics.
state. In 1994, school district personnel    sion, “Every child can and will learn,” is       • Traditional instruction is reinforced
convinced the community members to           supported by the following core values        with extensive technology laboratories
become active participants, and togeth-      (Pearl River School District, 2001):          and industry partnerships. This approach
er they developed a “shared vision”                                                        is referred to as “hands-on, minds-on”
that has guided the community into              • Our students are our customers, and      active learning.
becoming a role model district that          the product that we deliver is to allow          • The programs have the following
now is helping many other schools            them to achieve their highest potential.      key student requirements and corre-
improve their performance. Today the            • Educational opportunity is for all       sponding measures or indicators (in
region’s CAT scores are in the top           students.                                     parentheses):

226     Journal of Education for Business
TABLE 2. The Balanced Scorecards of Three Baldrige Education Award Recipients in 2001

Measure                Chugach School District               Pearl River School District          University of Wisconsin–Stout

Student-learning   1. CAT (California Achievement        1. Regents diploma rate                1. Freshman ACT scores
results               Test)                              2. Mastery performance—reading         2. Freshman retention
                   2. WRM (Woodcock Reading              3. Mastery performance—math            3. “At risk” freshman retention
                      Mastery Test)                      4. Regents content exams               4. Active learning
                   3. HSGQ (High School Gradua-             —English                            5. Computer competency
                      tion Qualifying Exam)                 —Math                               6. Skill development
                   4. HSGQE                                 —Earth science                         —Leadership
                   5. HSGQ & BE (High School                —Biology                               —Problem solving
                      Graduation Qualifying &               —Chemistry                             —Conflict resolution
                      Benchmark Exam)                       —U.S. history                          —Communication
                   6. Self-assessment                       —Global history                     7. Diversity appreciation
                      —Spelling                             —Foreign language                   8. Graduation rate
                      —Reading                           5. Final grade-point average           9. Student job placement
                      —Language                          6. Advanced placement (AP)            10. Employment in major field
                      —Math                                 participation rate                 11. Salaries of graduates
                   7. SLP (student learning profile)     7. AP course performance              12. Annual income of alumni
                                                         8. College attendance rate            13. Alumni rating of program
                                                         9. SAT I & II participation rate          effectiveness
                                                        10. SAT I achievement rate             14. Alumni development of active
                                                            —Verbal                                learning skills
                                                            —Math                              15. Alumni appreciation of diver-
                                                        11. Grade 8 ELA proficiency                sity
                                                        12. Grade 8 math proficiency           16. Skill assessment by employers
                                                        13. Grade 4 ELA proficiency                —Basic skills
                                                        14. Grade 4 math proficiency               —Communication
Student- and       1. Stakeholder (student, communi-     1. Overall student satisfaction        1. Freshman ratings of education-
stakeholder-          ty, staff) satisfaction with:         —High school                           al experience
focused results       —Leadership                           —Middle school                      2. Number of transfers “in”
                      —Strategic planning                2. Key satisfaction indicators         3. Numbers that would attend
                      —Stakeholder focus                    —Teachers                              again
                      —Information                          —Technology                         4. Student satisfaction with cam-
                      —Staff                                —Atmosphere                            pus environment
                      —Processes                         3. Drug abuse                          5. Alumni satisfaction with
                      —Results                           4. Dropout rate                           instruction
                   2. Satisfaction of graduates with:    5. Attendance rate                     6. Alumni indication they would
                      —Basic skills                      6. Participation in extracurricular       attend again
                      —Individual needs                     activities                          7. Employer ratings of graduates’
                      —Character development             7. Parent overall satisfaction            preparation
                      —Transition skills                 8. Satisfaction with home              8. Board of Regents satisfaction
                      —Technology                           schooling                              with:
                   3. Average daily attendance           9. Student transportation—com-            —Mission appropriateness
                   4. Student work-based learning           plaints                                —Student outcomes
                      hours                             10. Employer survey on student             —Leadership
                   5. Participation of other district       preparation for employment             —Accountability
                      students in work-based learning   11. Alumni satisfaction                    —Fulfilling mission
                                                            —Preparation for college            9. Community ratings of cus-
                                                            —Guidance services                     tomer service
                                                        12. Student attrition
                                                        13. Budget vote plurality
                                                        14. Prospective homeowner
                                                        15. New family-perceived value of

                                                                                                                    (table continues)

                                                                                                        March/April 2005           227
  TABLE 2 (Continued )

  Measure                 Chugach School District                 Pearl River School District         University of Wisconsin–Stout

  Student- and                                              16. Positive referrals
  focused results
  Budgetary and       1. Revenues                           1. Costs per pupil                      1. Tuition comparisons
  financial results      —Federal                           2. Expenditures for:                    2. On-campus room and board
                         —State                                —Building administration                costs
                         —Grants                               —Plant operations                    3. Tuition revenues
                      2. State funds allocated to:             —Board of Cooperative Edu-           4. Prioritization of funding
                         —Instruction                          cational Services administra-        5. Budget allocation to instruc-
                         —Operations                           tion                                    tion
                      3. Sources of funding allocated to:      —Teacher salaries                    6. Budget allocation to institu-
                         —Individual needs                     —Benefits                               tional support
                         —Technology                        3. Market share (vs. private            7. Expenditures allocated to per-
                         —Transition skills                    schools)                                sonnel
                         —Basic skills                                                              8. Year-end budget variances
                         —Character development                                                        from budget plan
                         —Per-pupil spending                                                        9. University reserves
                         —Federal funds                                                            10. Foundation assets
                         —State funds                                                              11. Dollars awarded to scholar-
                         —Grants                                                                       ships
  Faculty and         1. Staff evaluation of:                1. Workers compensation injuries       1. Key indicators of faculty and
  staff results          —Leadership                         2. Environment factors:                   staff morale, well-being, and
                         —Strategic planning                    —Health                                development
                         —Students/community                    —Safety                             2. Employee satisfaction:
                         —Information                           —Ergonomics                            —All employees
                         —Faculty/staff                      3. Faculty satisfaction                   —Classified employees
                         —Educational and support            4. Staff satisfaction                     —Unclassified employees
                         processes                           5. Staff turnover                      3. Voluntary faculty turnover
                         —Results                            6. Labor grievances                    4. Classified staff grievances
                      2. Staff in-service days               7. Faculty/staff development           5. Diversity:
                      3. Performance-based pay                  —Building leadership team              —Women faculty
                      4. E-mail use                             (satisfaction)                         —Minority faculty
                                                                —Personal growth and devel-         6. Discrimination and harassment
                                                                opment (satisfaction)               7. Faculty with doctorate
                                                                —Faculty training hours             8. Professional development
                                                             8. New employee orientation               expenditures
                                                             9. Staff satisfaction with superin-    9. Satisfaction with opportunities
                                                                tendent’s:                             for training/professional devel-
                                                                —Fall conference day                   opment
                                                                —Spring conference day             10. Evaluation of Microsoft train-
                                                            10. Efficiency of staff development        ing
                                                                programs                           11. Safety training
                                                            11. Communication between grade        12. Injury/accident rates
                                                                levels                             13. Workers compensation claims
                                                                                                   14. Workers compensation experi-
                                                                                                       ence modification factor
                                                            1. Efficiency of educational
  Organizational      1. Performance of high school            design and delivery (percent-        1. Distinctive programs
  effectiveness          graduates in 10 curricular stan-      age meeting proficiency on           2. Undergraduate curriculum
  results                dard areas:                           ELA)                                 3. Federal grant expenditures
                         —Reading                           2. Faculty not meeting perfor-          4. Laboratory-based instruction
                         —Writing                              mance criteria                       5. Enrollment
                         —Mathematics                       3. Student satisfaction with guid-      6. Distance-learning opportunities
                         —Technology                           ance and counseling                  7. Audit compliance
                         —Cultural awareness and            4. Percentage of students in gen-       8. Safety and security perfor-
                         expression                            eral education                          mance
                         —Personal/social/health            5. Percentage of “classified” stu-      9. Support services effectiveness:
                         —Career development                   dents                                   —Current students
                         —Service learning                                                             —Alumni

                                                                                                                         (table continues)

228    Journal of Education for Business
   TABLE 2 (Continued )

   Measure                   Chugach School District                 Pearl River School District               University of Wisconsin–Stout

   Organizational          —Social sciences                     6. Number of scholar athlete               10. Employees’ assessment of bud-
   effectiveness           —Science                                teams                                       get planning process
   results              2. High school credits earned by        7. Cost of student transportation          11. Information technology usage
                           8th graders                          8. Safety of student transportation        12. Student assessment of:
                        3. Contextual education hours           9. Purchase-order cycle time                   —Computer labs
                           offered per student per week        10. Quality of copying                          —Library support services
                        4. Percentage of eligible students     11. Cost of copying                             —Dining services
                           who participate in school-to-       12. Efficiency of technology:                   —Student center services
                           work program                            —”Up” time                                  —Resident life
                        5. Percentage of students who              —Faculty satisfaction                   13. Purchasing transactions
                           access the Internet for increased       —Student satisfaction                   14. Efficient use of electricity
                           productivity                        13. Student enrollment                      15. Trends in energy use
                        6. School site bandwidth               14. Number of teachers
                        7. Percentage of staff assisting       15. Regulatory compliance:
                           other districts                         —Right to know
                                                               16. Legal
                                                                   —Sexual harassment
                                                                   —Policy book
                                                                   —Fire Inspections
                                                               17. Ethical
                                                                   —BOE Code of Ethics
                                                                   —Student Code of Ethics
                                                                   —Athlete Code of Ethics
                                                               18. Public complaints
                                                               19. Adult education and parent
                                                                   university participation                (University of Wisconsin–Stout,
                        (Chugach School District, 2001)        (Pearl River School District, 2001)

  1. Cutting-edge, career-oriented pro-          their self-assessment, organizations                of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quali-
  grams (number of new programs,                 develop and report a comprehensive set              ty Award in Education (see Table 2).
  placement success)                             of measures that comprise both leading              These balanced scorecards show that
  2. High-quality, active-learning edu-          and lagging indicators of performance.              although they cover the same perspec-
  cation (percentage of lab instruction          Such a set of measures is congruent with            tives, the individual measures differ sub-
  and faculty contact)                           the concept of the balanced scorecard               stantially, reflecting the unique missions
  3. Effective student support services          (BSC), which was proposed by Kaplan                 of the three organizations.
  (retention, academic success, student          and Norton (1992). In this article, we
  satisfaction)                                  presented the lagging indicator and the                             REFERENCES
  4. Related employment and academic             leading indicators for the education sec-
  or career growth opportunity (place-           tor (see Table 1). A critical requirement is        Baldrige National Quality Program. (2003a). Cri-
  ment in major, graduate success,                                                                     teria for performance excellence. Gaithersburg,
                                                 that these measures be aligned with the               MD: Author.
  employer satisfaction)                         organization’s strategic objectives. This           Baldrige National Quality Program. (2003b).
                                                 requirement would allow organizations                 Education criteria for performance excellence.
The measures presented in Table 2                                                                      Gaithersburg, MD: Author.
                                                 to track student learning while simulta-
clearly reflect the unique mission of the                                                            Chang, O. H., & Chow, C. W. (1999). The bal-
                                                 neously monitoring their progress in                  anced scorecard: A potential tool for supporting
University of Wisconsin–Stout.
                                                 building the capabilities and acquiring               change and continuous improvement in
                                                                                                       accounting education. Issues in Accounting
                                                 the resources that would affect their                 Education, 14, 395–412.
Summary and Conclusion                           capacity to improve student performance             Chugach School District. (2001). Chugach School
  The Baldrige Criteria for Performance          and development.                                      District 2001 Baldrige application summary. Re
                                                                                                       trieved January 10, 2004, from www.quality. gov/
Excellence for both the business and the            We also presented examples of the bal-             PDF_files/Chugach_Application_Summary.pdf
education sectors require that, as a part of     anced scorecards of three 2001 recipients           Council on Competitiveness. (1995). Building on

                                                                                                                      March/April 2005           229
  Baldrige: American quality for the 21st century.    Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Strategic       Application_Summary.pdf
  Washington, DC: Author.                               learning and the balanced scorecard. Strategy      University of Wisconsin–Stout. (2001). University
Cullen, J., Joyce, J., Hassall, T., & Broadbent, M.     and Leadership, 24, 18–25.                           of Wisconsin–Stout 2001 Baldrige application
  (2003). Quality in higher education: From mon-      Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). On balance.     summary. Retrieved January 10, 2004, from
  itoring to management. Quality Assurance in           CFO, 17, 73–78.                            
  Education, 11, 1–5.                                 Pearl River School District. (2001). Pearl River       Application_Summary.pdf
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced     School District 2001 Baldrige application sum-     Sutherland, T. (2000, Summer). Designing and
  scorecard—Measures that drive performance.            mary. Retrieved January 10, 2004, from               implementing an academic scorecard. Account-
  Harvard Business Review, 70, 71–79.                   ing Education News, 11–13.

230       Journal of Education for Business

Shared By: