Effect of Balance Scored Cards on Organizational ...indusedu.org/pdfs/IJRMEC/IJRMEC_1883_19173.pdf · Case Study : Bank Populaire ... customer satisfaction ; which in turn leads to

UWERA RITAH et al., International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,

ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 08 Issue 05, May 2018, Page 166-182

http://indusedu.org Page 166

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Effect of Balance Scored Cards on

Organizational Performance in Rwanda

Case Study : Bank Populaire

Du Rwanda

UWERA RITAH1, Patrick MULYUNGI2 and Dr. OLUOCH3 (Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kigali, Rwanda)

ABSTRACT : The balanced scorecard (BSC) and other multi-perspective systems have become popular in

recent times because of problems with management systems (Errol, Iselin, & John, 2008). The general objective

of the study is to analyze the effect of balance scored card on organizational performance in Rwanda Specific

Objectives are to assess the challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR, to examine how

internal operations affect the performance of BPR, to analyze the influences of learning and growth

perspective to the performance of BPR and to measure the contribution of customer perspective to the

performance of BPR. It is expected that this study would provide an indication of how the balance scored card

looks like in Rwanda’s’ commercial banks. It would also provide a guide for further studies on balance scored

card and other performance measurement tool. This research was designed under case study of BPR There are

323 employees at BPR head office, these employees are working under the following departments, CEO's office,

commercial, risk and operations. From a target population of 323, a sample size of 76 people were obtained ;

each group was considered as strata, and a sample size was taken from each stratum using simple random

sampling method. The analysis of the data was done using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS),

this helped to summarize the data in tables. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the perception of

respondents on the research topic. While inferential statistics were used to establish relationship. The

correlation between learning & growth and performance is 0 .860, customer perspective and performance is

0.840, internal operations and performance is 0.942. Therefore, there is a positive relationship between balance

scored card and organizational performance. The study also indicates the regression analysis equation is

performance -0.248 + 0.808* Learning & growth + 0.939* Customer perspective + 1.355* Internal operations.

This implies that the transition from balance scorecard requires more focus on learning & growth perspective,

customer perspective, internal operations. This requires the managers to have increased competencies related

to strategic efforts over tactical skills which can be delegated. The management team, ideally with prior

managerial competencies, is expected to have excellent organizational performance. A manager with strong

core competencies in balance scored card and process management is able to lead between and across multiple

organization successfully. This study recommended that the Government, as regulator, needs to take measures

towards improving and promoting balance score card policy in all workplaces.

Key Terms : Balance scored card, customer, growth of organization and organizational performance.

I. INTRODUCTION The balance scored cards (BSC) is the most widely applied performance management system today. It

was originally developed as a performance measurement system in 1992 by Robert Kaplan and David Norton at

the Harvard Business School and later developed into a performance management tool. The basic idea of a BSC

is that learning is necessary to improve internal business processes ; this improvement is necessary to improve

customer satisfaction ; which in turn leads to improved financial results. The BSC emphasizes improvement and

not just attainment of certain objectives and if an organization does not continually improve, it will eventually

lose out to competitors that do (Kaplan, 2010).

With the BSC in United States of America (USA), company executives can measure and manage how

their business units create value for current and future customers, how they must build and enhance internal

capabilities, and the investment in people, systems, and procedures necessary to improve future performance

(Amanah et al., 2016). In United Kingdom (UK), Public sector organizations use BSC because it received many

pressures from both internal and external sources to improve its performance. As a result of this, the

implementation of BSC in public sector became more common. 18% papers related to implementation of BSC

from 1990 to 2010 were implemented in the public sector (Hoque, 2014).

In the developing countries, especially in Asian countries, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) was initially

created to be implemented in companies of the private sector. However, in its development, the implementation

of BSC was extended to non-profit and public sector organizations (Kaplan, 2010).

http://indusedu.org/





Even though BSC has its advantages, yet there are several challenges in measuring performance

management. According to Arnaboldi, Lapsley and Steccolini (2015), several things to be considered to measure

performance were : Morale of human capital ; changing the executing ideas from manager to be everyday task ;

renumeration, reward and incentives for exceptional performance needs careful evaluation ; era of rapid

technological development. One thing that was interesting from these challenges is the impact of Information

and Communication Technology (ICT).

The East African community with its own common market which involves the free movement of labor,

capital, goods and services within the East African Community (EAC) has also led companies to develop and

implement human resources development strategic plans in order to expand and take advantage of the wide

market. Kenyan firms are a good example of this expansion in the region (Bruce Musalika, 2016). The

overarching vision of the Government of Rwanda is to develop a stable and sound financial sector that is

sufficiently deep and broad, capable of efficiently mobilizing and allocating resources to address the

development needs of the economy and reduce poverty. It should be recognized that when financial services

reach out to the population broadly and efficiently, they accelerate economic growth, efficient allocation of

resources and improved wealth distribution, although Rwanda’s financial sector highlighted that even though

the sector has made remarkable achievement, it still faces major challenges that need addressing to enable the

financial sector to contribute meaningfully to the overall performance of the country’s economy and another

challenge facing Rwanda is the country’s inability to mobilize long term stable financing given that Rwanda’s

capital market is small and underdeveloped to enable public and private sector access long term financing, so

use financial ratios analysis play important role for measuring profitability of Rwanda commercial Bank and for

improvement of decision making (Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning [MINECOFINE], 2013). In

2008, UBPR transformed to become a commercial bank but while retaining its cooperative roots. Today Atlas

Mara Mauritius Limited has 62.1% of the shares, strategic partner Rabobank has 14.6% and 23.3% retained by

Local Shareholders (Banque Populaire du Rwanda [BPR], 2016).

Statement of the problem

The balanced scorecard (BSC) and other multi-perspective systems have become popular in recent

times because of problems with management systems (Errol, Iselin, & John, 2008). The BSC is a strategic

management system involving strategic goal setting and performance reporting across four perspectives :

financial, customer, internal business processes, learning and growth. Kaplan and Norton (1996), the creators of

the BSC, argue that the performance reporting system must be aligned with the strategic goals. Although these

systems are important, research in the area is still at an embryonic stage (Amanah et al., 2016). The study of

Esther (2013) revealed that non-financial criteria are as important as financial criteria in measurement systems

and when both measures are integrated in the system, they lead to superior results. Although, the main goal for

all businesses is to manage their overall performance so that they can make a good performance, most of firms

do not know how to measure up to their own goals and standards, and the BSC can give them the advantage

they need to evaluate themselves accurately and, as a result, place themselves in a better position to compete

(Okwo & Marire, 2012). According to the research of Amanah, Gilang, Reza, and Dermawan (2016), the

observation resulted that allover the world 40% of organizations in the reviewed papers still using financial

perspective as highest outcome. Another finding from this survey is that learning and growth perspective

considered important because 93.3% of reviewed organizations using this perspective. According to Khalad and

Mazila, (2011), there are other performance measurement tools focus on the results that reflect the owners’

perspective, whereas the Balanced Scoredcard focuses on financial and nonfinancial results So they found that

Balanced Scoredcard is not an adequate method by which to evaluate the overall performance of an

organization. Even though BSC has its advantages, yet there are several challenges in measuring performance

management as indicated in the background of the study above (Arnaboldi, Lapsley & Steccolini,2015).

Moreover, from the above diffrent views and findings, the researcher is an unbalanced academic position, and

the researcher was motivated to carry out this research related to balance scored card and organization

performance.

Specific Objectives

• To assess the challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR

• To examine how internal operations affect the performance of BPR.

• To analyze the influences of learning and growth perspective to the performance of BPR

• To measure the contribution of customer perspective to the performance of BPR ;

II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This section presents the methods that the researcher used when carrying out the research ; the research

design, target population and sample size are presented. The chapter further presents the methods through which

data were collected from both primary and secondary sources. Data presentation and analysis methods are also

suggested.






Research Design

This research was designed under case study of BPR, where both quantitative and qualitative methods

were used on the basis of descriptive and inferential statistics.

Target population

Population is the study object, which may be individuals, group, organizations human and events, or

the conditions to which they are exposed. There are 323 employees at BPR head office, these employees are

working under the following departments, CEO's office, commercial, risk and operations.

Sample design

In this section of sampling design ; the researcher mainly set three strategies for easy access to right

data from respondents. Firstly in order to know about the balance scored card and performance.

Sample size determination

From a target population of 323, a sample size of 76 people were obtained ; each group was considered

as strata, and a sample size was taken from each stratum using simple random sampling method.

In practice, the sample size to be used in the study was determined based on the expense of data collection, and

the need to have sufficient statistical power. The level of precision or sampling error is 5% and 95% confidence

level, total population(N) is 323, the sample size is selected using the Yamane formula = 323/

1+323(0.1)2 = and then, n= 76 employees.

Sampling techniques

Random sampling occurs when each sampling unit in a clearly defined population has an equal chance

of being included in the sample. Stratified sampling occurs when the researcher divides the population into

subgroups (or strata) such that each unit belongs to a single stratum. The researcher categorized BPR employees

into strata according to the departments. The respondents were randomly selected from their different

department in the selected group. Therefore, the researcher used both stratified sampling method to formulate

group or strata and simple random sampling to select the respondents.

Data collection instrument

Questionnaires were the major instruments in data collection, self-administered questionnaires with

clear, simple and short ended questions were used to check and ensure consistency of respondents.

Administration of Data Collection Instruments

The researcher distributed the questionnaires to the respondents and wait for them for enough time. And then the

researcher made sure the number of questionnaire distributed has been filled by suffficient number of

respondents.

Reliability and validity of the study

Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and consistent results. Validity

refers to how well a test measures what is purported to measure. Reliability demonstrates that the operations of

the study such as the data collection procedures can be repeated and reach to equal result (Creswell, 2003). The

researcher that repeats the exact same procedure and research as described by an earlier researcher should arrive

at the same result and draw the same conclusions with the same techniques. The researcher carried out a pilot

study by testing questionnaires to 5 members from the respondents in BPR in order to verify the study

reliability. The Cronbach Alpha Coeficient was 0.907. This value confirms the reliability of questionnaires.

Data analysis methods

The analysis of the data was done using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS), this helped to

summarize the data in tables. In addition, Microsoft excel was used to regress the research variables in order to

determine the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. Data were presented

according to research findings after processing mainly in form of tables. Descriptive statistics were used to

describe the perception of respondents on the research topic. While inferential statistics were used to establish

relationship.

Editing of data were the first task in data processing which consisted of examining errors and omission

in collecting data and making necessary corrections. This was done to ensure that the questions were answered

to avoid unnecessary and unclear responses. This is a method of presenting the data provided by the

respondents into tables including the numbers of frequencies and percentages of response to particular

questions. The researcher used tables to show the dominance of important ideas presented or provided by

respondents in response to particular question and interpreting the given information into calculated

percentages.

III. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Demographic characteristics of respondents

This subsection focused on age and gender of respondents in order to know whether respondents were

mature enough to participate in the study, it also focuses on education and experience of respondents in order to

get accurate information.






Table 4.1: Gender of Respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Male 52 70.3 70.3 70.3

Female 22 29.7 29.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.1 presents gender of respondents, where out of 74 respondents contacted, 70.3 were male and

29.7% were female.

Table 4.2: Highest level of education


Valid University 68 91.9 91.9 91.9

Diploma 4 5.4 5.4 97.3

Other certificates 2 2.7 2.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

This table presents highest level of education of respondents, out of 74 respondents, 91.9% have

University level, 5,4% have diploma and 2.7% have other professional certificate. The level of education

indicates that the respondents were able to deal with the research questions, whereby they gave accurate

information regarding research objectives.

Table 4.3: Age bracket of Respondents


Valid 21- 25 5 6.8 6.8 6.8

26-30 10 13.5 13.5 20.3

31-35 7 9.5 9.5 29.7

36-40 35 47.3 47.3 77.0

41+ 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

This table presents age bracket of Respondents, out of 74 respondents 6.8 were 21- 25, 13.5% were 26-

30, 9.5% were 31-35, 47.3% weere above 41 years. Hence, because taking into consideration of different age the

researcher realized that the contacted respondents were of reasonable age and in position to give careful and

well analyzed information that could facilitate making of necessary and relevant conclusions.

Table 4.4: Experience of Respondents


Valid 1-2 years 12 16.2 16.2 16.2

3-4 years 26 35.1 35.1 51.4

5+ years 36 48.6 48.6 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Source : Primary Data, 2018

Table 4.4 presents distribution of respondents by experience, out of 74 respondents 16.2% were 1-2

years of experiences, 35.1% were 3-4 years while 48.6 were above 5 years of experiences. Employees who are

gaining skills and experience early in their career path are not very loyal. Moreover, turnover is expensive for

companies. Experienced employees tend to want to remain in their positions or with the company for longer

periods of time. In this case, experienced employees save companies money by stabilizing turnover rates.

Research Findings

This subsection focuses on the analysis of questions related to the research findings : The challenges of

BSC in measuring performance management of BPR, examination of how internal operations affect the

performance of BPR, the influences of learning and growth perspective to the performance of BPR, the

contribution of customer perspective to the performance of BPR.






The challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR

This subsectionfocuses on the challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR. This

study analyzed lack of clear objective, lack of risk assessment ability, milestones management, task

dependencies, lack of communication, lack of skill discovery and problem anticipation.

Table 4.5: Lack of clear objective


Valid Strongly disagree 6 8.1 8.1 8.1

Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 20.3

Not sure 7 9.5 9.5 29.7

Agree 30 40.5 40.5 70.3

Strongly agree 22 29.7 29.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.5 presents lack of clear objectives as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance

management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 12.2% disagree, 9.5 % not sure, 40.5%

agree, and 29.7% strongly agree.

Table 4.6: Lack of risk Assessment


Valid Strongly Disagree 6 8.1 8.1 8.1

Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 20.3

Not sure 8 10.8 10.8 31.1

Agree 30 40.5 40.5 71.6

Strongly agree 21 28.4 28.4 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.6 presents lack of risk assessment as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance



Table 4.7: Milestones management



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 17.6

Not sure 9 12.2 12.2 29.7

Agree 32 43.2 43.2 73.0

Strongly agree 20 27.0 27.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.7 presents milestones management as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance



Table 4.8: Lack of resources allocation



Disagree 14 18.9 18.9 29.7

Not Sure 9 12.2 12.2 41.9

Agree 18 24.3 24.3 66.2

Strongly agree 25 33.8 33.8 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0







Table 4.8 presents lack of resources allocation as among the challenges of BSC in measuring

performance management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 10.8% strongly disagree, 18.9% disagree, 12.2 % not

sure, 24.3% agree, and 33.8 % strongly agree.

Table 4.9: Task dependencies



Disagree 7 9.5 9.5 17.6

Not Sure 9 12.2 12.2 29.7

Agree 30 40.5 40.5 70.3

Strongly agree 22 29.7 29.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.9 presents task dependencies as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance

management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 9.5% disagree, 12.2% were not sure,

40.5% agree, and 29.7% strongly agree.

Table 4.10: Lack of effective communication



Disagree 7 9.5 9.5 16.2

Not Sure 6 8.1 8.1 24.3

Agree 36 48.6 48.6 73.0

Strongly Agree 20 27.0 27.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.10 presents lack of effective communication as among the challenges of BSC in measuring

performance management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 6.8% strongly disagree, 9.5% disagree, 8.1 % not

sure, 48.6% agree, and 27.0 % strongly agree.

Table 4.11: Lack of skill discovery



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 21.6

Not Sure 12 16.2 16.2 37.8

Agree 29 39.2 39.2 77.0

Strongly agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.11 presents lack of skill discovery as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance



Table 4.12: Problem anticipation



Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 21.6

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 35.1

Agree 16 21.6 21.6 56.8

Strongly Agree 32 43.2 43.2 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.12 presents problem anticipation as among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance

management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 9.5% strongly disagree, 12.2% disagree, 13.5 % not sure,







How internal operations affects the performance

This bubsection focuses on the assesment of how internal operations affects the performance. The study

assessed how it defines how the operations are executed, it defines how the operations are monitored, it

defines how the operations are controlled , it defines process for preparing a detailed scope statement, it defines

process to enable the creation of new activities, it defines process to establish how the operations will be

managed, it defines formal acceptance criteria of deliverables, it defines how change requests will be applied to

goals, it defines how requirements activities will be planned, it defines configuration management activities , it

defines requirements prioritization process and how it defines product metrics.

Table 4.13: Internal operations define how the operations are executed



Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 18.9

Not Sure 9 12.2 12.2 31.1

Agree 26 35.1 35.1 66.2

Strongly agree 25 33.8 33.8 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.13 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define how the operations are

executed. Out of 74 respondents, 6.8% strongly disagree, 12.2% disagree, 12.2% not sure, 35.1% agree, and

33.8% strongly agree.

Table 4.14: Internal operations define how the activities are monitored



Disagree 6 8.1 8.1 16.2

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 27.0

Agree 29 39.2 39.2 66.2

Strongly Agree 25 33.8 33.8 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.14 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define how the activities are

monitored. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 8.1% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 39.2% agree, and

33.8% strongly agree.

Table 4.15: Internal operations defines how the operations are controlled



Disagree 7 9.5 9.5 17.6

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 28.4

Agree 20 27.0 27.0 55.4

Strongly Agree 33 44.6 44.6 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.15 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define how the activities are

monitored. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 9.5% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 27.0% agree, and

44.6 % strongly agree.

Table 4.16: Internal operations defines process for preparing a detailed scope statement



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 23.0

Not Sure 5 6.8 6.8 29.7

Agree 29 39.2 39.2 68.9

Strongly Agree 23 31.1 31.1 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0






Table 4.16 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations defines process for preparing a

detailed scope statement. Out of 74 respondents, 9.5% strongly disagree, 13.5% disagree, 6.8 % not sure,


Table 4.17: Internal operations defines process to enable the creation of new activities



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 21.6

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 32.4

Agree 32 43.2 43.2 75.7

Strongly Agree 18 24.3 24.3 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.17 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations defines process to enable the

creation of new activities. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 13.5% disagree, 10.8 % not sure,

43.2% agree, and 24.3 % strongly agree.

Table 4.18: Internal operations establish how the activities may be managed



Disagree 11 14.9 14.9 23.0

Not Sure 14 18.9 18.9 41.9

Agree 26 35.1 35.1 77.0

Strongly Agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.18 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations establish how the activities may

be managed. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 14.9% disagree, 18.9 % not sure, 35.1% agree,

and 23.0 % strongly agree.

Table 4.19: Internal operations define formal acceptance criteria of deliverables



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 20.3

Not Sure 11 14.9 14.9 35.1

Agree 21 28.4 28.4 63.5

Strongly agree 27 36.5 36.5 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.19 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define formal acceptance

criteria of deliverables. Out of 74 respondents, 6.8% strongly disagree, 13.5% disagree, 14.9 % not sure, 28.4%

agree, and 36.5 % strongly agree.

Table 4.20: Internal operations define how change requests will be applied to goals



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 16.2

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 29.7

Agree 27 36.5 36.5 66.2

Strongly Agree 25 33.8 33.8 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.20 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define how change requests

will be applied to goals. Out of 74 respondents, 5.4% strongly disagree, 10.8% disagree, 13.5 % not sure, 36.5

% agree, and 33.8% strongly agree.






Table 4.21: Internal operations define how requirements activities will be planned



Disagree 11 14.9 14.9 20.3

Not Sure 5 6.8 6.8 27.0

Agree 31 41.9 41.9 68.9

Strongly Agree 23 31.1 31.1 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.21 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define how requirements

activities will be planned. Out of 74 respondents, 5.4% strongly disagree, 14.9 % disagree, 6.8 % not sure,

41.9% agree and 31.1 % strongly agree.

Table 4.22: Internal operations define configuration management activities



Disagree 7 9.5 9.5 10.8

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 21.6

Agree 33 44.6 44.6 66.2

Strongly Agree 25 33.8 33.8 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.22 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define configuration

management activities. Out of 74 respondents, 1.4% strongly disagree, 9.5 % disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 44.6%


Table 4.23: Internal operations define requirements prioritization process



Disagree 11 14.9 14.9 29.7

Not sure 8 10.8 10.8 40.5

Agree 18 24.3 24.3 64.9

Strongly Agree 26 35.1 35.1 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.23 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define requirements

prioritization process. Out of 74 respondents, 14.9% strongly disagree, 14.9% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 24.3%


Table 4.24: Internal operations define product metrics



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 20.3

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 33.8

Agree 32 43.2 43.2 77.0

Strongly Agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.24 presents the views of respondents on the internal operations define product metrics. Out of

74 respondents, 9.5% strongly disagree, 10.8% disagree, 13.5 % not sure, 43.2% agree, and 23.0 % strongly

agree.

4.2.3 The influences of learning and growth perspectives to the performance

This subsection focuses on the influences of learning and growth perspective to the performance. The

study analysis if learning and growth increase knowledge on how to quantify benefits, facilitate goals

achievement, influence job satisfaction, improve future organization development efforts, improved

understanding and accountability of employees, improve effectiveness of the organization by enhancing its






credibility, facilitate better investment decisions on future phase and provide stakeholders with measures of

success.

Table 4.25: Learning and growth perspectives increase knowledge on how to quantify benefits



Disagree 7 9.5 9.5 16.2

Not Sure 6 8.1 8.1 24.3

Agree 36 48.6 48.6 73.0

Strongly Agree 20 27.0 27.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.25 presents the views of respondents on learning and growth perspective increases knowledge

on how to quantify benefits. Out of 74 respondents, 6.8% strongly disagree, 9.5% disagree, 8.1 % not sure,

48.6% agree, and 27.0 % strongly agree.

Table 4.26: Learning and growth perspectives facilitate goals achievement



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 14.9

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 28.4

Agree 35 47.3 47.3 75.7

Strongly Agree 18 24.3 24.3 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0


Table 4.26 presents the views of respondents on learning and growth perspectives facilitate goals

achievement. Out of 74 respondents, 4.1% strongly disagree, 10.8% disagree, 13.5 % not sure, 47.3% agree,

and 24.3 % strongly agree.

Table 4.27: Learning and growth perspectives influence job satisfaction



Disagree 6 8.1 8.1 16.2

Not Sure 12 16.2 16.2 32.4

Agree 13 17.6 17.6 50.0

Strongly Agree 37 50.0 50.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.27 presents the views of respondents on learning and growth perspectives influence job

satisfaction. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 8.1% disagree, 16.2 % not sure, 17.6% agree, and


Table 4.28: Learning and growth perspectives improve future organization development efforts



Disagree 3 4.1 4.1 6.8

Not Sure 6 8.1 8.1 14.9

Agree 34 45.9 45.9 60.8

Strongly Agree 29 39.2 39.2 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.28 presents the views of respondents on Learning and growth perspectives improve future

organization development efforts. Out of 74 respondents, 2.7% strongly disagree, 4.1% disagree, 8.1 % not

sure, 45.9% agree, and 39.2% strongly agree.






Table 4.29: Learning and growth perspectives improved understanding and accountability of employees



Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 17.6

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 28.4

Agree 26 35.1 35.1 63.5

Strongly Agree 27 36.5 36.5 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.29 presents the views of respondents on Learning and growth perspectives improved

understanding and accountability of employees. Out of 74 respondents, 5.4% strongly disagree, 12.2%

disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 35.1% agree, and 36.5 % strongly agree.

Table 4.30: Learning and growth perspectives improved effectiveness of the organization by enhancing its

credibility



Disagree 4 5.4 5.4 9.5

Not Sure 6 8.1 8.1 17.6

Agree 32 43.2 43.2 60.8

Strongly Agree 29 39.2 39.2 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.30 presents the views of respondents on learning and growth perspectives improved

effectiveness of the organization by enhancing its credibility. Out of 74 respondents, 4.1% strongly disagree,

5.4% disagree, 8.1 % not sure, 43.2% agree, and 39.2 % strongly agree.

Table 4.31: Learning and growth perspectives facilitate better investment decisions on future phase



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 31.1

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 44.6

Agree 14 18.9 18.9 63.5

Strongly Agree 27 36.5 36.5 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.31 presents the views of respondents on learning and growth perspectives facilitate better

investment decisions on future phase. Out of 74 respondents, 17.6% strongly disagree, 13.5% disagree, 13.5 %

not sure, 18.9% agree, and 36.5 % strongly agree.

Table 4.32: Learning and growth perspectives provide stakeholders with measures of success



Disagree 11 14.9 14.9 23.0

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 33.8

Strongly agree 32 43.2 43.2 77.0

Strongly agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.32 presents the views of respondents on Learning and growth perspectives provide

stakeholders with measures of success. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 14.9% disagree, 10.8 %

not sure, 43.2% agree, and 23.0 % strongly agree.

The contribution of customer perspectives to the performance

This subsection focuses on the contribution of customer perspectives to the performance. The study

analysis if customer perspectives increase customers’ satisfaction, increase customers’ loyalty, contribute to

customer care and other services, contribute to fight competition, facilitate variance analysis, facilitate scope






management plan, contribure to change management plan, conribute to source of work performance data and

contribute to work performance information.

Table 4.33: Customer perspectives increase satisfaction



Disagree 12 16.2 16.2 24.3

Agree 7 9.5 9.5 33.8

Not Sure 32 43.2 43.2 77.0

Strongly agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.33 presents the views of respondents on Customer perspectives increase satisfaction. Out of 74

respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 16.2% disagree, 9.5 % not sure, 43.2% agree, and 23.0 % strongly agree.

Table 4.34: Customer perspectives increase its loyalty



Disagree 10 13.5 13.5 18.9

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 29.7

Agree 36 48.6 48.6 78.4

Strongly Agree 16 21.6 21.6 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.34 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives increase its loyalty. Out of 74

respondents, 5.4% strongly disagree, 13.5% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 48.6% agree, and 21.6 % strongly

agree.

Table 4.35: Customer perspectives contribute to quality of services



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 18.9

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 32.4

Agree 15 20.3 20.3 52.7

Strongly Agree 35 47.3 47.3 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.35 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives contribute to quality of services.

Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 10.8% disagree, 13.5 % not sure, 20.3% agree, and 47.3 %

strongly agree.

Table 4.36: Customer perspectives contribute to fight of competition



Disagree 11 14.9 14.9 23.0

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 33.8

Agree 32 43.2 43.2 77.0

Strongly Agree 17 23.0 23.0 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.36 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives contribute to fight of

competition. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 14.9% disagree, 10.8% not sure, 43.2% agree, and







Table 4.37: Customer perspectives contribure to variance analysis



Disagree 9 12.2 12.2 20.3

Not Sure 6 8.1 8.1 28.4

Agree 31 41.9 41.9 70.3

Strongly Agree 22 29.7 29.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.37 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives contribure to variance analysis.

Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 12.2% disagree, 8.1 % not sure, 41.9% agree, and 29.7 %

strongly agree.

Table 4.38: Customer perspectives contribute to scope management plan



Disagree 8 10.8 10.8 14.9

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 25.7

Agree 36 48.6 48.6 74.3

Strongly Agree 19 25.7 25.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.38 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives to scope management plan. Out

of 74 respondents, 4.1% strongly disagree, 10.8% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 48.6% agree, and 25.7 % strongly

agree.

Table 4.39: Customer perspectives contribute to change management plan



Disagree 13 17.6 17.6 32.4

Not Sure 8 10.8 10.8 43.2

Agree 21 28.4 28.4 71.6

Strongly Agree 21 28.4 28.4 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.39 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives contribute to change

management plan. Out of 74 respondents, 14.9% strongly disagree, 17.6% disagree, 10.8 % not sure, 28.4%


Table 4.40: Customer perspectives is a Source of work performance data



Disagree 5 6.8 6.8 14.9

Not Sure 10 13.5 13.5 28.4

Agree 34 45.9 45.9 74.3

Strongly Agree 19 25.7 25.7 100.0

Total 74 100.0 100.0

Table 4.40 presents the views of respondents on customer perspectives is a Source of work

performance data. Out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree, 6.8% disagree, 13.5 % not sure, 45.9%







Table 4.41: Correlations

Learning and

Growth

Customer

Perspective

Internal

Operations Performance

Learning and

Growth

Pearson Correlation 1 .941** .932** .860**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 74 74 74 74

Customer

Perspective

Pearson Correlation .941** 1 .907** .840**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 74 74 74 74

Internal Operations Pearson Correlation .932** .907** 1 .942**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 74 74 74 74

Performance Pearson Correlation .860** .840** .942** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 74 74 74 74

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.41 presents correlationsof variables under study, such as learning & growth, customer

perspective, internal operations and performance. The correlation between learning & growth and performance

is 0 .860, customer perspective and performance is 0.840, internal operations and performance is 0.942.

Therefore, there is a positive relationship between balance scored card and organizational performance.

Table 4.42 indicates the effect of independent variables on the dependent variable. The variables under

study are learning & growth perspective, customer perspective, internal operations and performance.

Table 4.42: Regression Model

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) -.248 .214 -1.161 .249

Learning & growth .808 .234 .188 3.451 .001

Customer

perspective .939 .196 .292 4.787 .000

Internal operations 1.355 .239 .527 5.676 .000

a. Dependent Variable: performance

Table 4.42 indicates the effect of learning & growth perspective, customer perspective, internal

operations to the performance, the study used SPSS and found that the regression analysis equation is

performance = -0.248 + 0.808* Learning & growth + 0.939* Customer perspective + 1.355* Internal operations.

This implies that the transition from balance scorecard requires more focus on learning & growth perspective,

customer perspective, internal operations. This requires the manager to have increased competencies related to

strategic efforts over tactical skills which can be delegated. The management team, ideally with prior managerial

competencies, is expected to have excellent organizational performance. A manager with strong core






competencies in balance scored card and process management is able to lead between and across multiple

organization successfully.

IV. SUMMARY AND RECOMMANDATIONS

Summary of Findings

This subsection focuses on the summary of findings in relation to the research objectives. The

challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR, examination of how internal operations

affect the performance of BPR, the influences of learning and growth perspective to the performance of BPR,

the contribution of customer perspective to the performance of BPR.

The challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR

This subsection focuses on the summary of findings related to the challenges of BSC in measuring

performance management of BPR. This study analyzed lack of clear objective, lack of risk assessment ability,

milestones management, task dependencies, lack of communication, lack of skill discovery and problem

anticipation. The study found lack of clear objectives as among the challenges of BSC in measuring

performance management of BPR. Out of 74 respondents, 40.5% agree, and 29.7% strongly agree. The result

also indicates lack of risk assessment as among the challenges where, out of 74 respondents, 40.5% agree and

28.4% strongly agree. In relation to milestones management as among the challenges, out of 74 respondents,

43.2% agree and 27.0% strongly agree. The study analyzed other challenges, where lack of resources allocation

is also among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance management, out of 74 respondents, 24.3%

agree and 33.8 % strongly agree. In relation to the task dependencies as among the challenges, out of 74

respondents 40.5% agree and 29.7% strongly agree. The study also provide lack of effective communication a

among the challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR, where out of 74 respondents,

48.6% agree and 27.0 % strongly agree. Lastly, the study revealed that problem anticipation is among the

challenges of BSC in measuring performance management of BPR, where out of 74 respondents, 21.6% agree

and 43.2% strongly agree.

The influences of learning and growth perspective to the performance

This subsection focuses on the summary of findings related to the influences of learning and growth

perspective to the organizational performance. The study analysis if learning and growth increase knowledge on

how to quantify benefits, facilitate goals achievement, influence job satisfaction, improve future organization

development efforts, improved understanding and accountability of employees, improve effectiveness of the

organization by enhancing its credibility, facilitate better investment decisions on future phases and provide

stakeholders with measures of success.

The study analyzed the views of respondents on how learning and growth perspective increases

knowledge to quantify benefits, out of 74 respondents 48.6% agree, and 27.0 % strongly agree. The study also

analyzed how learning and growth perspectives facilitate goals achievement, out of 74 respondents 47.3% agree

and 24.3 % strongly agree. The result of the study also indicates that learning and growth perspectives

influence job satisfaction, where out of 74 respondents 17.6% agree and 50.0 % strongly agree. The study also

found that learning and growth perspectives improve future organization development efforts, where out of 74

respondents 45.9% agree, and 39.2% strongly agree. Out of 74 respondents, 535.1% agree, and 36.5 %

strongly agree that learning and growth perspectives improved understanding and accountability of employees.

While, Out of 74 respondents, 4.1% strongly disagree and 5.4% disagree that learning and growth perspectives

improved effectiveness of the organization by enhancing its credibility. The study revealed that learning and

growth perspectives facilitate better investment decisions on future phases, where, out of 74 respondents, 18.9%

agree, and 36.5 % strongly agree. Out of 74 respondents, 43.2% agree and 23.0 % strongly agree that learning

and growth perspectives provide stakeholders with measures of success.

The contribution of customer perspective to the performance of BPR

This subsection focuses on the summary of findings related to the contribution of customer

perspectives to the organizational performance. The study analysis if customer perspectives increase customers’

satisfaction, increase customers’ loyalty, contribute to customer care and other services, contribute to fight

competition, facilitate variance analysis, facilitate scope management plan, contribure to change management

plan, conribute to source of work performance data and contribute to work performance information.

This study revealed that customer perspectives increase its satisfaction, where out of 74 respondents,

43.2% agree, and 23.0 % strongly agree. It also shows that customer perspectives increase its loyalty, where, out

of 74 respondents 48.6% agree and 21.6 % strongly agree. The study also revealed that customer perspectives

contribute to quality of services, where out of 74 respondents 20.3% agree, and 47.3 % strongly agree. It is also

confirmed that customer perspectives contribute to fight of competition, where out of 74 respondents 43.2%

agree and 23.0 % strongly agree. Out of 74 respondents, 41.9% agree and 29.7 % strongly agree that customer

perspectives contribute to variance analysis. Out of 74 respondents, 48.6% agree and 25.7 % strongly agree that

customer perspectives contibute to scope management plan. The result indicates that customer perspectives

contribute to change management plan, where out of 74 respondents, 28.4% agree, and 28.4 % strongly agree






with the statement. Lastly, out of 74 respondents, 8.1% strongly disagree and 6.8% disagree that customer

perspectives is a Source of work performance data

Recommendations

The recommendations made after the study and which need to be taken into consideration in

emphasizing the relationship between balance scorecard and organizztional performance in commercial banks

and sector in Rwanda. To begin with, the Government, as regulator, needs to take measures towards improving

and promoting balance score card policy in all workplaces. It is necessary to focus on the importance of building

a strong and good relationship between the employer, customer and employees for a better performance of the

employees. This would improve on performance of organization and building a satisfied work force.

BPR

BPR needs to embark on building/gaining its competitive advantage by emphasizing Excellence in

providing unbeatable services. This would be achieved if the employees were facilitated to acquire the necessary

knowledge related to the balance score card. The culture of employees Performance & Evaluation and the

agreement concluded between both parties enhances employees’ performance and therefore recommendable

service delivery at BPR. The researcher recommends BPR to further improve the dialogue with employees so

that employees provide feedback and participate in formulating balance score card policies that aim at

improving the employee-customer-employer relationship. This would lead to improved performance and thus

gaining competitive advantage.

Other Commercial Banks

The researcher recommends to other commercial banks in Rwanda to learn from BPR experience and

develop the culture balance score card and useful employees so as to improve their performance thus to be able

to increase the competitiveness in the banking sector.

Other Employers

Employers as a party in the balance score card policies formulation process play an important role in the

organizational performance. The Researcher therefore recommends them to observe legal provisions relating to

Employee development and balance score card as provided and implementing orders that clearly promote social

dialogue within their organizations. Improvement of social dialogue will enhance organizational performance

thus the competitive advantage.

Government of Rwanda

The Government of Rwanda can intervene in balance score card policy as a regulator of employment.

As employer, recommendations made to other employers will apply. Government is doing a lot but needs to

embark on putting in place more concrete plans towards balance score card and act as catalyst of organizational

performance policies in all work places, all sectors across the country.

Suggestions for Further Study

The study did not exhaust all the variables that influence the balance score card and organizational

performance, so there is a need for other researchers to carry out further studies in this area.

V. REFERENCES [1] Amanah, P.M., Gilang, D. A., Reza, R., & Dermawan, W. (2016). A Review Of Performance Management Using The

Balanced Scorecard In Public Sector. Asia Pacific Journal of Business and social Studies , 2(2), 91 - 102.

[2] Armstrong, M. (2006). Strategic Human Resource Management: A Guide to Action, Third edition. Kogan Pages:

London and Philadelphia [3] Armstrong, M.A. (2009). A Handbook of Human Resources Management. (11th ed.).London: Kogan Page.

[4] Armstrong, M. & Baron,A. (2004). Managing performance: Performance Management in Action. London: CIPD.

[5] Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I. &Steccolini, I.,. (2015). Performance Management in the Public Sector: The Ultimate Challenge. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(1), 1-22.

[6] Atkinson, A.A. & Kaplan, R. S. (2003). Management Accounting. New Delhi: Prentice - Hall of India.

[7] Barney, J. (2001).Is resource-based view a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review. 26(1), 41-56.

[8] Barney,J.(1995). Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management Executive.9(4),49-61.

[9] Becker, B.E., Huselid, M.A., & Urich, D. (2010). The Human Resource Scorecard: linking People, Strategy and Performance. oston: Harvard Business School Press.

[10] Bourne, M. (2002). The emperor’s new scorecard Financial World. USA: Financial World.

[11] Bruce Musalika. (2016). Impact of Strategic Plan Implementation on Organizational Performance in Rwanda. The International Journal Of Business & Management, 4(5), 156 - 167.

[12] Boxall, P F (1994) Placing HR strategy at the heart of the business, Personnel Management, July, pp 32–35 [13] Boxall, P. (1991). The Strategic HRM Debate and the Resource-Based View of the Firm. Human Resource

Management Journal, 6(3): 59-75.

[14] Boxall, P.,& Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and Human Resource Management. London: Macmillan [15] Bulla, D.N. and Scott, P.M. (1994). Manpower requirements forecasting: a case example, in Human Resource

Forecasting and Modelling, ed D Ward, T P Bechet and R Tripp, Human Resource Planning Society, New York

[16] Chaudron, D. (2003). The Balanced Scorecard & Performance Improvement: Using the balanced scorecard to combine viewpoints of company success. Fruitvale, East Oakland : organized change consultancy.

[17] Daily, C., Dalton, D. & Cannella, J., A. (2003). Corporate Governance: Decades Of Dialogue & Data. Journal Of

Management, Vol.28(3), Pp.371-382.






[18] Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions‖,. Academy of Management Journal,

Vol.39(4), pp. 802-835

[19] Dyer, L. & Reeves, M. (1995). Studying human resource strategy: an approach and an agenda, Industrial Relations, 23 (2), pp 156–69

[20] Dyer, L. & Reeves, T. (2003). Human resource strategies and firm performance. The International Journal of Human

Resource Management. 6(3), 650-670. [21] Errol, R., Iselin, L., & John, S. (2008). The effects of the balanced scorecard on performance: The impact of the

alignment of the strategic goals and performance reporting . Journal of General Management, 33(4), 71-85.

[22] Esther, W. M. (2013). Effects of balanced scorecard on performance of firms in the service sector. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(9), 81-88.

[23] Evans, J (1998). HR strategy in practice, Presentation at CIPD National Conference, October

[24] Gekonge, C. O. (2005). What a System! The Professional Journal of KASNEB, 4(4), 1-10. [25] Grant, R. (2008). Contemporary Strategy Analysis. (6th ed.) Oxford : Blackwell

[26] Heath, J. (N.D.). The Uses & Abuses Of Agency Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol.19(4), Pp.497-528.

[27] Hoque, Z. (2014). 20 Years of Studies On the Balanced Scorecard: Trends, Accomplishments, Gaps and Opportunities for Future Research. The journal of British Accounting , 46(1), pp. 33-59.

[28] Johnson, H. (1981). Toward a new understanding of nineteenth-century cost accounting. Journal of Accounting ,

56(3), 510-518. [29] Kaplan, R. (2010). Conceptual Foundations of the Balanced Scorecard. USA: Harvard Business School.

[30] Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. (1992). The balanced scorecard – measures that drive performance. Harvard Business,

1(1), 71-79. [31] Kassahun, T. (2010). Rethinking institutional excellence in Ethiopia: adapting and adopting the balanced scorecard

(BSC) model. JBAS, 2(1), 22-53.

[32] Lan, L. & Heracleous, L. (2010). Rethinking Agency Theory: The View From Law. Academy Of Management Review, Vol.35(2), Pp.294-314.

[33] MacDuffie, J. P. (2005). Human Resource bundles And Manufacturing Performance. Industrial Relations Review. 48(2), 199-221.

[34] Okwo, I. M. & Marire, I. M. (2012). Performance measurement in business organizations: An empirical analysis of

the financial performance of some breweries in Nigeria. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 3(11), pp.48-57.

[35] Purcell, J (1994). Personnel earns a place on the board, Personnel Management, February, pp 26-29

[36] Purcell, J (1999). Personnel earns a place on the board, Personnel Management, February, pp 26-29 [37] Purcell, J., Hutchinson, S. (2007). Frontline managers as agents in the HRM-performance causal chain: theory

analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal. 17(1), 3-20.

[38] Purcell, J., Hutchinson, S., Kinnie, S. (2003). Understanding the Role and Performance Link: Unlocking the Black Box. London: CIPD.

[39] Purcell,J.(2001). The Meaning of Strategy in Human Resource Management: A Critical Text. (2nd ed.). London:

Thompson Learning [40] Spraakman, G. (2005). The impact of enterprise resource planning systems on management accounting: some

Canadian findings and suggestions for future research. Toronto: York University.

[41] Zizlavsky, O. (2014). The Balanced Scorecard: Innovative Performance Measurement and Management Control System. J. Technol. Manag. Innov, 9(3), 210 - 222.


Documents

Effect of Balance Scored Cards on Organizational ...indusedu.org/pdfs/IJRMEC/IJRMEC_1883_19173.pdf · Case Study : Bank Populaire ... customer satisfaction ; which in turn leads to