Balanced Scorecard (BSC)
The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a performance measurement and management system that translates a company’s strategy into concrete goals, metrics and actions across several balanced perspectives – typically finance, customers, processes and learning/growth.
The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a strategic performance measurement and management system that translates a company’s vision and strategy into a balanced set of goals and metrics. Instead of steering the business on financial results alone, the BSC looks at the organisation from four interconnected angles: the financial perspective, the customer perspective, the internal process perspective, and the learning and growth perspective. For each perspective, the company defines strategic objectives, matching metrics, target values and concrete initiatives.
The concept was developed in the early 1990s by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton. Their core idea: financial metrics only show the past and ignore the drivers of future success – satisfied customers, efficient processes, and qualified, motivated employees. The Balanced Scorecard therefore combines lagging outcome measures (lag indicators) with forward-looking early indicators (lead indicators), making visible how day-to-day action contributes to the strategy.
At a glance
- Strategy execution and performance measurement system by Kaplan/Norton (1992)
- Four perspectives: finance, customers, internal processes, learning & growth
- Combines financial outcome measures with non-financial early indicators
- Cause-and-effect chains make strategy measurable and manageable
- Complements pure financial steering but does not replace metrics
How does the Balanced Scorecard work?
The Balanced Scorecard translates an abstract strategy step by step into measurable variables. The starting point is vision and strategy, which are broken down into a few strategic objectives for each of the four perspectives. For every objective, management defines one or more metrics (KPIs), a target value, and strategic initiatives designed to reach that target. What matters is balance: short- and long-term goals, financial and non-financial measures, and internal and external viewpoints all sit side by side on an equal footing.
The four perspectives
The financial perspective asks how the company wants to appear to owners and investors – typical metrics are revenue growth, profitability, contribution margin or cash flow. The customer perspective describes how the company wants to be perceived by customers, measured for example by market share, customer satisfaction, customer retention or complaint rate. The internal process perspective looks at which processes the company must excel in – such as cycle time, on-time delivery, scrap rate or order lead time. The learning and growth perspective (also called the potential perspective) focuses on the foundations of future success: employee qualification, staff turnover, innovation rate, or the availability of strategic information systems.
Cause-and-effect chains and the strategy map
The real value of the BSC comes from linking the perspectives into cause-and-effect chains. The logic runs from the bottom up: qualified employees (learning) improve processes, efficient processes raise customer satisfaction, satisfied customers drive financial success. These relationships are often visualised in a so-called strategy map – a map of the strategic objectives and their causal links. It makes assumptions explicit and testable: if an improved early indicator does not feed through to the financial result as expected, the strategy must be questioned.
Why the Balanced Scorecard matters
The central benefit of the Balanced Scorecard lies in strategy execution. Many companies formulate a plausible strategy but fail to embed it in day-to-day operations. The BSC bridges this gap by translating strategic objectives into concrete, measurable metrics and actions and communicating them across all levels. Employees see how their contribution feeds into the overarching goals, and management no longer steers solely by looking in the rear-view mirror of financial figures.
A second advantage is the balance itself. Purely financial steering tempts companies to optimise short-term results at the expense of customer retention, process quality or staff development. The BSC forces these drivers to be considered on an equal footing and thus guards against short-sighted decisions. At the same time, it is a tool for communication and focus: because only a few, genuinely strategy-relevant metrics are deliberately chosen, a good BSC prevents drowning in graveyards of metrics. This does, however, require the underlying data to be reliable, up to date and consistently defined.
The Balanced Scorecard in the ERP system
An ERP system supplies most of the raw data that brings a Balanced Scorecard to life. Financial metrics come from accounting and cost accounting, process metrics such as cycle time or on-time delivery from the order, warehouse and production modules, and customer metrics from CRM and sales. Because these data streams already converge in an integrated ERP, it is the obvious source for automatically determining the BSC measures.
The BSC itself, however, is rarely maintained in the ERP core. In practice, the required metrics are extracted from the ERP via reporting, BI or dashboard tools and consolidated there into the scorecard. Some ERP systems come with configurable dashboards that can represent a simple scorecard view; for pronounced cause-and-effect models and a fully fledged strategy map, companies tend to reach for dedicated BI or controlling software that connects to the ERP via an API or an ETL process. In every case, clean master data and metric definitions are decisive, so that the same variable is calculated identically everywhere.
Distinction: BSC vs. KPI system and metrics dashboard
The Balanced Scorecard is often confused with a pure metrics system or a dashboard, but it differs from them fundamentally. A KPI dashboard collects and visualises measures but says nothing about why those metrics were chosen or how they relate to one another. The BSC, by contrast, is strategy-driven: every metric derives from a strategic objective and is linked to others through cause-and-effect relationships.
Not every dashboard is a Balanced Scorecard
A common misconception is to simply sort an existing set of metrics into four boxes and call it a “Balanced Scorecard”. Without the link to strategy, without target values, initiatives and tested impact hypotheses, that remains a neatly grouped dashboard but is no management system. Conversely, the BSC is not a replacement for operational reporting or classic financial steering – it builds on them and focuses them on the strategically decisive variables. Reporting provides the numbers, the BSC gives them strategic direction.
The Balanced Scorecard in the DACH mid-market
In German-speaking countries, the Balanced Scorecard has been a fixed part of the controlling toolkit since the late 1990s and is widely taught in academia and practice. Larger mid-sized companies use it for structured strategy execution, often supplemented by an explicit strategy map. For smaller companies it is often pragmatically slimmed down – with fewer metrics per perspective and without elaborate software.
It is worth noting that the BSC is a leadership project, not an IT project: its success depends less on the tool than on the quality of the strategy and the discipline with which metrics are regularly reviewed and actions followed up. If employee-related metrics such as turnover or individual performance measures are included in a scorecard, data protection (GDPR) and – in Germany and Austria – the co-determination rights of the works or staff council must be taken into account in the DACH region. It is also important to keep the scorecard lean: if too many metrics are included, the strategic focus the instrument is meant to create becomes diluted.
Example
Balanced Scorecard at a mid-sized online retailer
An online retailer with around 60 employees is growing strongly but struggling with a falling margin and a rising return rate. Until now, management has steered almost exclusively by monthly revenue and only spots problems once they show up in the financial figures. To make the strategy “profitable growth through delighted repeat customers” tangible, the company introduces a Balanced Scorecard with two to three metrics per perspective.
The financial perspective covers contribution margin per order and gross profit margin, the customer perspective repeat purchase rate and return rate, the process perspective order lead time and on-time delivery, and the learning perspective the training rate in customer service. The metrics are loaded monthly from the ERP and the shop system into a BI dashboard. After two quarters, the cause-and-effect chain takes effect: shorter lead times and better-trained service staff lower the return rate, the repeat purchase rate rises – and with it the contribution margin per order.
Frequently asked questions
Matching ERP systems
Related services
Sources
Questions about Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in your ERP project?
We advise vendor-neutrally – and implement it ourselves on request.