Balanced scorecard metrics and specific supply chain roles
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
There is little survey evidence regarding key practical aspects of BSCs, such as the characteristics of the models tested, the information generated or the combinations of metrics that should be used (Chenhall, 2005). Limitations of BSC frameworks designed for SC performance measurement include their top-down approach, lack of formal implementation methodology and subjectivity of metrics selection (Abu-Suleiman et al., 2003). The identification of the appropriate set of metrics to be applied by multiple individual companies across a SC structure is not an easy task and there is insufficient literature about the selection of suitable metrics (Chan et al., 2003). The design of specific approaches addressing this issue could provide a significant contribution to this field of study (Lambert and Pohlen, 2001).
The objective of this research note is to identify whether particular metrics used in BSCs relate to specific supply chain roles in ASCs. The overarching question to this investigation is whether common BSCs are possible between partners in supply networks. From data gathered in Brazil, customer satisfaction was the single common metric used by all roles (input suppliers, producers, distributors and retailers). In addition, the set of metrics and their distribution across the four perspectives of a BSC are different for each SC role. These findings suggest that it may be very difficult to achieve, in practice, a common BSC framework for all supply chain participants and that other alternatives should be investigated.
|Journal||International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management|
|Early online date||7 Jan 2015|
|Publication status||Published - 7 Jan 2015|
- JACK_2015_cright_IJPPM_Balanced scorecard metrics and specific supply chain roles
Rights statement: This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here http://eprints.port.ac.uk. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Accepted author manuscript (Post-print), 257 KB, PDF document