Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    Posted 04-17-2009 07:51

    I have used BSC within strategy teaching for some years, and come across BSCs in many companies. My impression is that, whilst it is a valuable extension to standard financial reporting systems, it has some limitations as a tool for managing strategy – limitations that the down-turn has exposed quite sharply. As usually implemented  ...

    -          there is no coverage of competitive conditions or competitor behaviour – nor can I find any suggestion in the BSC or Strategy Maps books that they should do so.

    -          there is no coverage of trends or changes in overall supply/demand conditions – and again, no suggestion they should do so.

    -          there is no attention to prospective performance – i.e. how we are likely to perform on key indicators in coming periods [as distinct from our performance targets].

     

    More seriously, although the causal logic generally seems to make sense to executives [Learning/Growth >> Internal Processes >> Customer Consequences >> Financial Outcomes] there is no rigorous, formal, verifiable structure to that logic – i.e. no solid 'theory' – to ensure the strategy map is robust. Consequently, BSCs seem to reflect what teams think, or would like, some of the causal relationships to be – which may be entirely different from what another team might come up with. [I address this issue and suggest the basics of a more rigorous approach in chapter 4 of my book .. see www.strategydynamics.com/c4 ]

     

    As a result, I can't as yet see how a company's BSC could have led them to anticipate the current crisis, to plan for it, or to work out what to do to survive and escape from it. I imagine many of us would be grateful to hear of cases where BSC has been helpful in coping with current difficulties, and how that has happened.

     

    Kim

     

    Kim Warren

    ... strategy blog latest + RSS

                How companies are coping

                Growth or survival

                Chuck the consultants?

    ... strategy dynamics training from SDS

    ... the strategy dynamics online course and learning materials

    ... order Strategic Management Dynamics, + Wiley instructor registration

     

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Teehankee
    Sent: 14 April 2009 13:55
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    Yes, I find the BSC a promising approach, especially if the system links between the components are really worked out.  I find that many companies who claim to do BSC are still doing MBO with no system links underpinning it.

     

    Regards,

     

    Ben
     

    -------------------------------
    Benito L. Teehankee, DBA
    Sen. Benigno S. Aquino Jr. associate professor in business and governance
    Ramon V. del Rosario Sr. Graduate School of Business
    De La Salle University
    Manila, Philippines
    Office: +632-5234295

     

     


    From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:34:23 AM
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

    

     

    ----- Original Message -----

    Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:18 AM

    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    I think Michael makes a crucially important point about the need to expand objective functions in several important dimensions.  However, students with a practical bent will automatically ask how this is to be done.  I surveyed our MBA curriculum and the tools and problem-solving methods taught are strongly biased for a single objective -- whether it be in management science or management accounting.  What methods can be taught to students which support a multi-stakeholder, mutli-objective perspective?  Has anybody in the list used analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for this, for example?  What about system dynamics as Kim suggests?

    Have you looked at Balanced Scorecard? I do not hold this up as an exemplar but it does deal with N attributes. Of course, Drucker told us years ago that the minimum set is Market Standing, Productivity, Innovation and Liquidity.

     

    The AHP is mathematically flawed (unless you can assure that all options are transitive).

    Better you should consider Bayesian Belief Networks.

     

    Cheers,

    Jack Ring

     



  • 2.  The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    Posted 04-17-2009 09:10
    Kim and all
     
    Has anyone run across the idea of "triple bottom line" ?  At the beginning of 2000, I was teaching in Australia and ran across this idea.  I have it somewhere in my files, but have not done any more with it, or even heard of it again.
     
    Carolyn
     
    Carolyn J. Fausnaugh PhD, CPA
    Asst Professor of Strategy & New Ventures
    Florida Institute of Technology
    Melbourne, Florida 32901
    Phone:  321-674-7375; Fax:  321-674-8896


    From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Kim Warren
    Sent: Fri 4/17/2009 7:51 AM
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    I have used BSC within strategy teaching for some years, and come across BSCs in many companies. My impression is that, whilst it is a valuable extension to standard financial reporting systems, it has some limitations as a tool for managing strategy – limitations that the down-turn has exposed quite sharply. As usually implemented  ...

    -          there is no coverage of competitive conditions or competitor behaviour – nor can I find any suggestion in the BSC or Strategy Maps books that they should do so.

    -          there is no coverage of trends or changes in overall supply/demand conditions – and again, no suggestion they should do so.

    -          there is no attention to prospective performance – i.e. how we are likely to perform on key indicators in coming periods [as distinct from our performance targets].

     

    More seriously, although the causal logic generally seems to make sense to executives [Learning/Growth >> Internal Processes >> Customer Consequences >> Financial Outcomes] there is no rigorous, formal, verifiable structure to that logic – i.e. no solid 'theory' – to ensure the strategy map is robust. Consequently, BSCs seem to reflect what teams think, or would like, some of the causal relationships to be – which may be entirely different from what another team might come up with. [I address this issue and suggest the basics of a more rigorous approach in chapter 4 of my book .. see www.strategydynamics.com/c4 ]

     

    As a result, I can't as yet see how a company's BSC could have led them to anticipate the current crisis, to plan for it, or to work out what to do to survive and escape from it. I imagine many of us would be grateful to hear of cases where BSC has been helpful in coping with current difficulties, and how that has happened.

     

    Kim

     

    Kim Warren

    ... strategy blog latest + RSS Picture of the Feeds button

                How companies are coping

                Growth or survival

                Chuck the consultants?

    ... strategy dynamics training from SDS

    ... the strategy dynamics online course and learning materials

    ... order Strategic Management Dynamics, + Wiley instructor registration

     

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Teehankee
    Sent: 14 April 2009 13:55
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    Yes, I find the BSC a promising approach, especially if the system links between the components are really worked out.  I find that many companies who claim to do BSC are still doing MBO with no system links underpinning it.

     

    Regards,

     

    Ben
     

    -------------------------------
    Benito L. Teehankee, DBA
    Sen. Benigno S. Aquino Jr. associate professor in business and governance
    Ramon V. del Rosario Sr. Graduate School of Business
    De La Salle University
    Manila, Philippines
    Office: +632-5234295

     

     


    From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:34:23 AM
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

    

     

    ----- Original Message -----

    Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:18 AM

    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    I think Michael makes a crucially important point about the need to expand objective functions in several important dimensions.  However, students with a practical bent will automatically ask how this is to be done.  I surveyed our MBA curriculum and the tools and problem-solving methods taught are strongly biased for a single objective -- whether it be in management science or management accounting.  What methods can be taught to students which support a multi-stakeholder, mutli-objective perspective?  Has anybody in the list used analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for this, for example?  What about system dynamics as Kim suggests?

    Have you looked at Balanced Scorecard? I do not hold this up as an exemplar but it does deal with N attributes. Of course, Drucker told us years ago that the minimum set is Market Standing, Productivity, Innovation and Liquidity.

     

    The AHP is mathematically flawed (unless you can assure that all options are transitive).

    Better you should consider Bayesian Belief Networks.

     

    Cheers,

    Jack Ring

     



  • 3.  The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    Posted 04-17-2009 09:57

    Dear Carolyn

     

    The "Triple Bottom Line" idea comes from John Elkington's 1997 book Cannibals With Forks. It has since been adopted by many major companies. A case in point is Shell, which was severely criticized by Elkington's SustainAbility consultancy.

    Newer trends, such as "Bottom of the Pyramid" and "Cradle to Cradle" have build on 'TBL', rather than replaced it.

     

    Best regards,

     

    Joop Remmé

     

    The adresses jhmremme@wxs.nl and jhmremme@planet.nl are no longer operational.

    Please use:

    jhmremme@kpnplanet.nl

    remme@knowdialogue.nl

    remme@msm.nl

     

    071 5212017

    0654761087

     

    www.knowdialogue.nl

    www.msm.nl

    www.synmind.nl

     

    Van: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] Namens Carolyn Fausnaugh
    Verzonden: Friday, April 17, 2009 3:10 PM
    Aan: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Onderwerp: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

     

    Kim and all

     

    Has anyone run across the idea of "triple bottom line" ?  At the beginning of 2000, I was teaching in Australia and ran across this idea.  I have it somewhere in my files, but have not done any more with it, or even heard of it again.

     

    Carolyn

     

    Carolyn J. Fausnaugh PhD, CPA

    Asst Professor of Strategy & New Ventures

    Florida Institute of Technology

    Melbourne, Florida 32901

    Phone:  321-674-7375; Fax:  321-674-8896

    E-mail:  cfausnau@fit.edu

     


    From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Kim Warren
    Sent: Fri 4/17/2009 7:51 AM
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    I have used BSC within strategy teaching for some years, and come across BSCs in many companies. My impression is that, whilst it is a valuable extension to standard financial reporting systems, it has some limitations as a tool for managing strategy – limitations that the down-turn has exposed quite sharply. As usually implemented  ...

    -          there is no coverage of competitive conditions or competitor behaviour – nor can I find any suggestion in the BSC or Strategy Maps books that they should do so.

    -          there is no coverage of trends or changes in overall supply/demand conditions – and again, no suggestion they should do so.

    -          there is no attention to prospective performance – i.e. how we are likely to perform on key indicators in coming periods [as distinct from our performance targets].

     

    More seriously, although the causal logic generally seems to make sense to executives [Learning/Growth >> Internal Processes >> Customer Consequences >> Financial Outcomes] there is no rigorous, formal, verifiable structure to that logic – i.e. no solid 'theory' – to ensure the strategy map is robust. Consequently, BSCs seem to reflect what teams think, or would like, some of the causal relationships to be – which may be entirely different from what another team might come up with. [I address this issue and suggest the basics of a more rigorous approach in chapter 4 of my book .. see www.strategydynamics.com/c4 ]

     

    As a result, I can't as yet see how a company's BSC could have led them to anticipate the current crisis, to plan for it, or to work out what to do to survive and escape from it. I imagine many of us would be grateful to hear of cases where BSC has been helpful in coping with current difficulties, and how that has happened.

     

    Kim

     

    Kim Warren

    ... strategy blog latest + RSS

                How companies are coping

                Growth or survival

                Chuck the consultants?

    ... strategy dynamics training from SDS

    ... the strategy dynamics online course and learning materials

    ... order Strategic Management Dynamics, + Wiley instructor registration

     

     

    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Teehankee
    Sent: 14 April 2009 13:55
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    Yes, I find the BSC a promising approach, especially if the system links between the components are really worked out.  I find that many companies who claim to do BSC are still doing MBO with no system links underpinning it.

     

    Regards,

     

    Ben
     

    -------------------------------
    Benito L. Teehankee, DBA
    Sen. Benigno S. Aquino Jr. associate professor in business and governance
    Ramon V. del Rosario Sr. Graduate School of Business
    De La Salle University
    Manila, Philippines
    Office: +632-5234295

     

     


    From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:34:23 AM
    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

    

     

    ----- Original Message -----

    Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:18 AM

    Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?

     

    I think Michael makes a crucially important point about the need to expand objective functions in several important dimensions.  However, students with a practical bent will automatically ask how this is to be done.  I surveyed our MBA curriculum and the tools and problem-solving methods taught are strongly biased for a single objective -- whether it be in management science or management accounting.  What methods can be taught to students which support a multi-stakeholder, mutli-objective perspective?  Has anybody in the list used analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for this, for example?  What about system dynamics as Kim suggests?

    Have you looked at Balanced Scorecard? I do not hold this up as an exemplar but it does deal with N attributes. Of course, Drucker told us years ago that the minimum set is Market Standing, Productivity, Innovation and Liquidity.

     

    The AHP is mathematically flawed (unless you can assure that all options are transitive).

    Better you should consider Bayesian Belief Networks.

     

    Cheers,

    Jack Ring

     



  • 4.  The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    Posted 04-17-2009 10:04
    People, Planet, Profit.


    --
    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    Managing Partner
    Distance Consulting, LLC
    nickols@att.net
    www.nickols.us

    "Assistance at A Distance"

    -------------- Original message ----------------------
    From: Carolyn Fausnaugh <cfausnau@FIT.EDU>
    >
    > Kim and all
    >
    Has anyone run across the idea of "triple bottom line" ? At the beginning of
    2000, I was teaching in Australia and ran across this idea. I have it somewhere
    > in my files, but have not done any more with it, or even heard of it again.
    >
    > Carolyn
    >
    > Carolyn J. Fausnaugh PhD, CPA
    > Asst Professor of Strategy & New Ventures
    > Florida Institute of Technology
    > Melbourne, Florida 32901
    > Phone: 321-674-7375; Fax: 321-674-8896
    > E-mail: cfausnau@fit.edu
    >
    > ________________________________
    >
    > From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Kim Warren
    > Sent: Fri 4/17/2009 7:51 AM
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution
    >
    >
    >
    I have used BSC within strategy teaching for some years, and come across BSCs in
    many companies. My impression is that, whilst it is a valuable extension to
    standard financial reporting systems, it has some limitations as a tool for
    > managing strategy - limitations that the down-turn has exposed quite sharply. As
    > usually implemented ...
    >
    > - there is no coverage of competitive conditions or competitor
    > behaviour - nor can I find any suggestion in the BSC or Strategy Maps books that
    > they should do so.
    >
    > - there is no coverage of trends or changes in overall supply/demand
    > conditions - and again, no suggestion they should do so.
    >
    > - there is no attention to prospective performance - i.e. how we are
    > likely to perform on key indicators in coming periods [as distinct from our
    > performance targets].
    >
    >
    >
    > More seriously, although the causal logic generally seems to make sense to
    > executives [Learning/Growth >> Internal Processes >> Customer Consequences >>
    > Financial Outcomes] there is no rigorous, formal, verifiable structure to that
    > logic - i.e. no solid 'theory' - to ensure the strategy map is robust.
    > Consequently, BSCs seem to reflect what teams think, or would like, some of the
    > causal relationships to be - which may be entirely different from what another
    > team might come up with. [I address this issue and suggest the basics of a more
    > rigorous approach in chapter 4 of my book .. see www.strategydynamics.com/c4
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/c4> ]
    >
    >
    >
    > As a result, I can't as yet see how a company's BSC could have led them to
    > anticipate the current crisis, to plan for it, or to work out what to do to
    > survive and escape from it. I imagine many of us would be grateful to hear of
    > cases where BSC has been helpful in coping with current difficulties, and how
    > that has happened.
    >
    >
    >
    > Kim
    >
    >
    >
    > Kim Warren
    >
    > ... strategy blog latest + RSS <http://www.kimwarren.com/feed/>
    >
    > How companies are coping
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/how-firms-are-coping/>
    >
    > Growth or survival
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/aims-growth-survival/>
    >
    > Chuck the consultants?
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/chuck-the-consultants/>
    >
    > ... strategy dynamics training from SDS <http://www.sds-uk.com/>
    >
    > ... the strategy dynamics online course
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/products/mastering.asp> and learning materials
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/smdresources>
    >
    > ... order Strategic Management Dynamics <http://www.wiley.com/go/smd> , + Wiley
    > instructor registration
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > From: Management Education and Development Discussion
    > [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Teehankee
    > Sent: 14 April 2009 13:55
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    >
    >
    > Yes, I find the BSC a promising approach, especially if the system links between
    > the components are really worked out. I find that many companies who claim to
    > do BSC are still doing MBO with no system links underpinning it.
    >
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    >
    > Ben
    >
    >
    > -------------------------------
    > Benito L. Teehankee, DBA
    > Sen. Benigno S. Aquino Jr. associate professor in business and governance
    > Ramon V. del Rosario Sr. Graduate School of Business
    > De La Salle University
    > Manila, Philippines
    > Office: +632-5234295
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ________________________________
    >
    > From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:34:23 AM
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    > ?
    >
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    >
    > From: Ben Teehankee <mailto:teehankeeb@YAHOO.COM>
    >
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    >
    > Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:18 AM
    >
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    >
    >
    > I think Michael makes a crucially important point about the need to
    > expand objective functions in several important dimensions. However, students
    > with a practical bent will automatically ask how this is to be done. I surveyed
    > our MBA curriculum and the tools and problem-solving methods taught are strongly
    > biased for a single objective -- whether it be in management science or
    > management accounting. What methods can be taught to students which support a
    > multi-stakeholder, mutli-objective perspective? Has anybody in the list used
    > analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for this, for example? What about system
    > dynamics as Kim suggests?
    >
    > Have you looked at Balanced Scorecard? I do not hold this up as an exemplar but
    > it does deal with N attributes. Of course, Drucker told us years ago that the
    > minimum set is Market Standing, Productivity, Innovation and Liquidity.
    >
    >
    >
    > The AHP is mathematically flawed (unless you can assure that all options are
    > transitive).
    >
    > Better you should consider Bayesian Belief Networks.
    >
    >
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Jack Ring
    >
    >
    >
    >


  • 5.  The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    Posted 04-17-2009 10:18
    See Savitz(2006). The Triple Bottom Line: How Today's Best Run Companies are Achieving Economic, Social and Environmental Success. Jossey-Bass.


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of nickols@att.net
    Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 9:04 AM
    To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution

    People, Planet, Profit.


    --
    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    Managing Partner
    Distance Consulting, LLC
    nickols@att.net
    www.nickols.us

    "Assistance at A Distance"

    -------------- Original message ----------------------
    From: Carolyn Fausnaugh <cfausnau@FIT.EDU>
    >
    > Kim and all
    >
    Has anyone run across the idea of "triple bottom line" ? At the beginning of
    2000, I was teaching in Australia and ran across this idea. I have it somewhere
    > in my files, but have not done any more with it, or even heard of it again.
    >
    > Carolyn
    >
    > Carolyn J. Fausnaugh PhD, CPA
    > Asst Professor of Strategy & New Ventures
    > Florida Institute of Technology
    > Melbourne, Florida 32901
    > Phone: 321-674-7375; Fax: 321-674-8896
    > E-mail: cfausnau@fit.edu
    >
    > ________________________________
    >
    > From: Management Education and Development Discussion on behalf of Kim Warren
    > Sent: Fri 4/17/2009 7:51 AM
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - balanced scorecard contribution
    >
    >
    >
    I have used BSC within strategy teaching for some years, and come across BSCs in
    many companies. My impression is that, whilst it is a valuable extension to
    standard financial reporting systems, it has some limitations as a tool for
    > managing strategy - limitations that the down-turn has exposed quite sharply. As
    > usually implemented ...
    >
    > - there is no coverage of competitive conditions or competitor
    > behaviour - nor can I find any suggestion in the BSC or Strategy Maps books that
    > they should do so.
    >
    > - there is no coverage of trends or changes in overall supply/demand
    > conditions - and again, no suggestion they should do so.
    >
    > - there is no attention to prospective performance - i.e. how we are
    > likely to perform on key indicators in coming periods [as distinct from our
    > performance targets].
    >
    >
    >
    > More seriously, although the causal logic generally seems to make sense to
    > executives [Learning/Growth >> Internal Processes >> Customer Consequences >>
    > Financial Outcomes] there is no rigorous, formal, verifiable structure to that
    > logic - i.e. no solid 'theory' - to ensure the strategy map is robust.
    > Consequently, BSCs seem to reflect what teams think, or would like, some of the
    > causal relationships to be - which may be entirely different from what another
    > team might come up with. [I address this issue and suggest the basics of a more
    > rigorous approach in chapter 4 of my book .. see www.strategydynamics.com/c4
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/c4> ]
    >
    >
    >
    > As a result, I can't as yet see how a company's BSC could have led them to
    > anticipate the current crisis, to plan for it, or to work out what to do to
    > survive and escape from it. I imagine many of us would be grateful to hear of
    > cases where BSC has been helpful in coping with current difficulties, and how
    > that has happened.
    >
    >
    >
    > Kim
    >
    >
    >
    > Kim Warren
    >
    > ... strategy blog latest + RSS <http://www.kimwarren.com/feed/>
    >
    > How companies are coping
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/how-firms-are-coping/>
    >
    > Growth or survival
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/aims-growth-survival/>
    >
    > Chuck the consultants?
    > <http://www.kimwarren.com/2009/03/chuck-the-consultants/>
    >
    > ... strategy dynamics training from SDS <http://www.sds-uk.com/>
    >
    > ... the strategy dynamics online course
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/products/mastering.asp> and learning materials
    > <http://www.strategydynamics.com/smdresources>
    >
    > ... order Strategic Management Dynamics <http://www.wiley.com/go/smd> , + Wiley
    > instructor registration
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > From: Management Education and Development Discussion
    > [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Teehankee
    > Sent: 14 April 2009 13:55
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    >
    >
    > Yes, I find the BSC a promising approach, especially if the system links between
    > the components are really worked out. I find that many companies who claim to
    > do BSC are still doing MBO with no system links underpinning it.
    >
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    >
    > Ben
    >
    >
    > -------------------------------
    > Benito L. Teehankee, DBA
    > Sen. Benigno S. Aquino Jr. associate professor in business and governance
    > Ramon V. del Rosario Sr. Graduate School of Business
    > De La Salle University
    > Manila, Philippines
    > Office: +632-5234295
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ________________________________
    >
    > From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:34:23 AM
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    > ?
    >
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    >
    > From: Ben Teehankee <mailto:teehankeeb@YAHOO.COM>
    >
    > To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    >
    > Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:18 AM
    >
    > Subject: Re: The crisis - ethics or competence?
    >
    >
    >
    > I think Michael makes a crucially important point about the need to
    > expand objective functions in several important dimensions. However, students
    > with a practical bent will automatically ask how this is to be done. I surveyed
    > our MBA curriculum and the tools and problem-solving methods taught are strongly
    > biased for a single objective -- whether it be in management science or
    > management accounting. What methods can be taught to students which support a
    > multi-stakeholder, mutli-objective perspective? Has anybody in the list used
    > analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for this, for example? What about system
    > dynamics as Kim suggests?
    >
    > Have you looked at Balanced Scorecard? I do not hold this up as an exemplar but
    > it does deal with N attributes. Of course, Drucker told us years ago that the
    > minimum set is Market Standing, Productivity, Innovation and Liquidity.
    >
    >
    >
    > The AHP is mathematically flawed (unless you can assure that all options are
    > transitive).
    >
    > Better you should consider Bayesian Belief Networks.
    >
    >
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Jack Ring
    >
    >
    >
    >