 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Balanced Scorecard
|
Balanced Scorecard bears strong similarities to Hoshin Kanri.
Both seek breakthrough performance, alignment, and integrated targets for all levels; however, the Balanced Scorecard specifically suggests which areas should be measured for a balanced picture. Rather than a contradiction to Hoshin Kanri planning, Balanced Scorecard represents a refinement of the approach that provides additional focus to the Hoshin Kanri method.
The Balanced Scorecard provides answers to four basic questions:
- How do customers see us? (customer perspective)
- What must we excel at? (internal perspective)
- Can we continue to improve and create value? (innovation andlearning perspective)
- How do we look to shareholders? (financial perspective)
Emphasizing these four key areas, the Balanced Scorecard approach not only monitors present performance, but also tries to capture information about how well the organization is positioned to perform well in the future.
Kaplan and Norton cite the following benefits of using the balanced scorecard:
- Focusing the whole organization on the few key things needed to create breakthrough performance.
- Helping to integrate various corporate programs, such as quality, reengineering, and customer service initiatives.
- Breaking down strategic measures to local levels so that unit managers, operators, and employees can see what’s required at their level to roll into excellent performance overall.
Compellingly, these are the same attributes of Hoshin Kanri that first attracted MPI to the method. Recognizing that Balanced Scorecard offered some new dimensions to the Hoshin Kanri process, MPI developed an approach it calls Master Planning.
