Academic Scorecard
The Academic Scorecard is a variant of the Balanced Scorecard , in which the special aspects of universities and colleges are taken into account in the strategy management process.
Essentially, the Academic Scorecard (ASC) corresponds to the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and only "translates" the terminology to the university (= academic) level. However, the ASC is usually formed with only three perspective levels and dispenses with the highest target level of the BSC. The financial perspective is therefore usually left out when setting goals, since at least in the area of state universities no actual goal perspectives can be derived here. Typically, the conflict between private and state universities becomes clear here, since the private universities also very clearly pursue financial goals (e.g. turnover, profit, return).
Areas of application and examples
The Academic Scorecard is widely used internationally and is used by universities, including the University of Leeds, University of California, San Diego, RheinMain University and Münster University of Applied Sciences.
In Germany in particular, the higher education landscape has been set in motion by deregulation and reforms. The federal and state governments give the state universities more creative freedom and thus more personal responsibility. The increase and subsequently expected decrease in the number of students pose additional challenges for universities. At the same time, the number and quality of private universities are increasing significantly. As a result, technical colleges, academies and universities in Germany are facing increasing competitive pressure. Instead of full academic coverage, universities therefore focus on differentiating and expanding their individual strengths. The Academic Scorecard can be used to develop attractive profiles.
With the emerging system accreditation of German universities, the Academic Scorecard has been given a further task in addition to its classic role as an instrument of strategy management. It is used as an instrument to prepare the university for system accreditation and, due to its integrating effect, forms common structures in the university's quality management system.
Typically, academic scorecards are introduced with the support of external consultants. The consultants have the task of moderating the process and resolving conflicts as part of the change management associated with the introduction. The consultant also has methodological competence and, as an independent third party, acts as a neutral mediator between the administration, the departments and other stakeholders in the process.
criticism
The Academic Scorecard is indeed an instrument of strategy management and also a tool for successful system accreditation, but it requires considerable effort and can only be designed with the support of the management of a university. In addition, in most cases it requires the involvement of external consultants as moderators and expert experts on the method.
In practice, finding suitable key figures (see also KPIs) and fine-tuning the definition of ambitious but feasible goals is particularly difficult. Permanent monitoring via corresponding review meetings is essential here.
With a view to the future of the Academic Scorecard, the question is whether the restriction to only 3 perspective levels and the waiver of the financial level will last in the long term. Because as a result of notoriously scarce financial resources in the public university sector, topics such as:
- efficient budget management,
- Development of alternative sources of finance
- Focus on potential financial risks
definitely focus more on the financial level and also make this perspective level appear sensible at state universities. Then in the end the ASC would be identical to the classic BSC again.
literature
- Robert Kaplan, David Norton: The Effective Strategy Process, 2009, ISBN 3-593-38795-6 .
- Robert Kaplan, David Norton: Balanced Scorecard. Implementing strategies successfully, 1997, ISBN 3-7910-1203-7 .
- Financial Times Deutschland, November 16, 2012, p. 15.