Using Balanced Scorecard in ENOC

Using Balanced Scorecard in ENOC Introduction First developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton at Harvard University, the Balanced Scorecard BSC approach has become a major method for corporations to improve their performance, with studies indicating that more than 66% of the companies that implemented the approach realized a significant increase in profitability (Kaplan Norton, 2011).Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Using Balanced Scorecard in ENOC specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In addition, a number of local governments, military and national civil organizations have been using a BSC approach to improve their performances. In the UAE, Emirates National Oil Company (ENOC) is one of the best examples of corporations that are applying the BSC to set its goals and achieve the desired objectives. The company has rolled out several programs to apply BSC in line with its goals and objectives with an aim of promoting human capital development by focu sing on the young UAE nationals with their careers for the better future. The company started adopting the concept of BSC in 2009 on a number of levels, with about 35 scorecards implemented in all business units. According to analysts, the company has attained some impressive milestones with BSC. For instance, customer satisfaction, enhancing efficiency in operations and promoting Emiratization is some of the significant outcomes of the approach. Nevertheless, a comprehensive understanding of the outcomes of using BSC need be studied every year to determine the progress. There is a need for additional studies show how the company has achieved the desired goals using the BSC. The results of the study are applicable not only in academics, but also in management and policy making in order to provide analysts, policy makers and corporate leaders utilize the information to enhance the quality of their professional decisions. Aims and objectives The purpose of this study is to develop a c omprehensive analysis of BSC application and use at ENOC. The research uses a qualitative approach to describe the level of outcomes of BSC at the company since the approach was adopted in 2009. The research aims to interview some professionals and executive individuals at the company in order to determine the level of BSC as well as the outcomes of the approach.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Key Research questions What strategies has ENOC employed in applying and using BSC? What are the corporate expectations of using the BSC At what levels are BSC approach applied at ENOC? What are the outcomes of using ENOC in terms of corporate performance? Review of literature Although it is a recent approach, balanced scorecard has become popular with most organizational leaders in the modern context. By definition, the BSC is a methodological tool composed of a set of b oth financial and non-financial measures regarding to the success factors of a given company or organization (Kaplan Norton, 2011). It reflects that need for strong and effective organizational activities used to create value. Since its development, BSC has widely been studied from a practical perspective where case studies are used to examine its effectiveness as well as differences in corporate performance between the organizations that adopt and those that fail to adopt the concepts of BSC (Akkermans von Oorschot, 2002). In addition, it has been studied by examining the differences in performance or outcomes between the departments that adopt and those that fail to adopt the concepts. From these studies, a number of observations have been made, most of which provide a clear indication that BSC is an important tool in measuring and enhancing performance in organizations. According to Ashurst and Doherty (2013), it has been shown that BSC ensures that strategic initiatives that f ollow best practices are cascaded throughout the entire organization, which helps in increasing creativity and other ideas that are not expected prior to the adoption of the concept. The author further indicates that BSC helps organizational leaders to overcome three foundational problems that cause challenges in the work of management- performance measurement, strategic implementation and rise of intangible assets. According to Kaplan and Norton (2010), the traditional methods of measuring financial performance fail to reflect critical aspects of the modern business environment and fails to encourage thinking on a long-term basis. Thus, BSC is set to deal with this problem. Secondly, it has been shown that intangible assets have the capacity to create more than 75% of the value that organizations achieve per given time (Kaplan Norton, 2010). With the traditional methods, it was not possible to measure and use these assets.Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Using Balanced Scorecard in ENOC specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More On the other hand, the concept of BSC is effective in providing the metrics required to measure and use these assets effectively (Abushaia Zainuddin, 2012). Moreover, BSC deals with the problem of successfully implementing strategies by working with vision, people and management of resources and barriers to development. In this context, BSC helps in measuring the strategy and the process of executing the strategy. It describes the strategy in s consistent manner throughout the company (Kaplan, Norton HorvÐ ±th, 2006). According to Inamdar, Kaplan and Bower (2012), BSC articulates how an organization creates value for its owners or shareholders by displaying the key priorities as well as relationships between the outcomes and the factors that enable performance. In other words, it displays the relationships between cause and effects in an organization in order to measure pe rformance and create value for the shareholders (Frost, 2012). Methodology Study design A qualitative study was developed to examine the effects of balanced scorecard BSC at ENOC. In this case, ENOC was used as a case study in order to examine how organizations adopt the concept of BSC and the benefits that come along with the idea. The idea was to interview leading corporate managers and leaders at the company in order to draw information from their experiences with the company and the concept of BSC used therein. Study sample The study focused on interviewing two managers at ENOC. The managers were chosen because they have been involved in the implementation and maintenance of the BSC concept since it was adopted in 2009. Secondly, six employees were interviewed to determine their perceptions and experience with the idea of BSC at their workplace. The idea is to determine the outcomes of the BSC concept at the workplaces. The inclusion criterion was to interview individuals who ha d been at the company for at least 5 years since 2009.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Data collection Interviews were used to collect information from the target corporate leaders and employees. Each interview took a maximum period of 15 minutes. Structured interview questions were used, with the interviewers playing the role of directing the mood of the discussion. Results Saeed Khoory, the CEO of ENOC, said that the company used the BSC to help it uphold the highest values across all the aspects of the organization. In addition, the CEO said that using BSC was aimed at promoting excellence across all the entities by focusing on continuous improvement and adopting BSC as one of the best international tools for management. He further notes that the tool is a gold standard against which benchmarking of the company’s growth goals id done. Salah Galadari, the director of business planning and performance management at the company, reported that adopting the BSC concept was aimed at streamlining the company’s strategic growth. The six employees reported tha t they were satisfied with the new methodology because it encouraged them to work for the good of the organization as well as personal development as an employee. It provides them with an opportunity to be part of the organization process. Conclusion From the interview, it was found that ENOC uses several initiatives to implement BSC. The idea of Emiratisation program is developed and implemented through five levels that are supported by BSC- Mahaweb, Tadreeb, Ajyaa, Imtiaz and Tatweer. They focus on developing behavioral, managerial, professional and leadership skills for the national workforce. The results indicate that BSC has huge benefits for the organization because it aids in aligning people, processes and resources towards enhancing production and performance. BSC has helped the company integrate employees, processes and customers in the vital focus on development and growth. Therefore, the company has attained some impressive milestones with BSC. For instance, customer sati sfaction, enhancing efficiency in operations and promoting Emiratization is some of the significant outcomes of the approach. The company uses balanced scorecard to articulate how it creates value for the government and the public by displaying some key priorities as well as relationships between the outcomes and the factors that enable performance. References Abushaia, J. A., Zainuddin, I. (2012). Performance measurement system design, competitive capability, and performance consequences – A conceptual like. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 3(11), 184-193. Akkermans, H., von Oorschot, K. (2002). Developing a Balanced Scorecard with System Dynamics. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 12(2), 349-352. Ashurst, C., Doherty, N. F. (2013). Towards the formulation of â€Å"a best practice† framework for benefits realization in IT projects. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 6(3), 1-10 Frost, B. (2012). Measuring performan ce: Seven good reasons to use a scorecard. Performance perspective series, 3(2), 214-251. Inamdar, N., Kaplan, R. S., Bower, M. (2012). Applying the balanced scorecard in healthcare provider organizations. Journal of healthcare management/American College of Healthcare Executives, 47(3), 179-95. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (2010). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (2011). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management. Accounting horizons, 15(1), 87-104. Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P., HorvÐ ±th, P. (2006). The balanced scorecard. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Why Brainstorming Doesnt Work

Why Brainstorming Doesnt Work Brainstorming doesnt work. It leads to ideas that conform to each other, and not to novel new ways of thinking.  The idea of brainstorming in a group seems to make sense, but the end result, the final product, is less than it could have been if group brainstorming could have been avoided. Sounds sacrilegious to say that, doesnt it? Why Do We Brainstorm? You have a blank screen in front of you. Youre pretty  desperate for an idea. Youre not sure about where to  find something to write about. Your project or product is in need of something and youre not sure where to go. It seems that you cant come up with the idea on your own, so you turn to the group and brainstorm. Brainstorming originates from Alex F. Osborn who, in the 1940s, wrote a book sharing the creative secrets he used at his advertising agency, Batten, Barton, Durstine Osborn. He called his book Your Creative Power and it became a runaway success. His idea of   getting a group together and storming the problem with your brain caught on and pretty soon the idea of brainstorming was the standard way for business, education, government, and the military to solve problems. The concept behind Osborns idea is that brainstorming was a method that would free participants from inhibition, self-criticism, and criticism by others so that a specific problem might receive the maximum ideas possible. For years, no one questioned the validity of the concept.  Brainstorming seems like the best way to apply the idea that we are stronger as a group than we are if we are alone. It seems logical to bring in your whole team, start throwing around ideas, and building on them. The best will rise to the top and youll get ideas that one person alone could not have come up with. We assumed that the group, and not the individual, can achieve more success with each persons creativity springboarding off of anothers. We were wrong. Brainstorming is where the ideas are born before reality sets in.In A Brainstorming Group, We Think Alike Strong personalities rule the show. Leadership unconsciously steers ideas towards preferred conclusions, or asks questions that beg a specific kind of answer. Team members fear negative evaluation from those higher up and their input is limited and the ideas they share are only the ones they deem reasonable. Why does group brainstorming so consistently fail despite the protestations of those who swear by it? How could they miss seeing whats happening? 1. We see what we expect to see. The end of a brainstorming session will leave us with exactly what we intended it to: lots of ideas to choose from.  From all appearances, it looks like a success. Clearly, the group can come up with more ideas in total than an individual person can. (Taylor, Berry, Block; Administrative Science Quarterly 1958, PDF) But mere quantity doesnt answer the question: does group participation help or hurt creative thinking? You dont know about all the ideas that were stifled in the process. In fact, if youve ever heard a team member say, weeks or months down the road of a project when something needs changing, I thought of that but didnt want to say anything you can bet your brainstorming session didnt work. A full whiteboard doesnt mean your brainstorming session gave you the best possible results. It might have only given you lots of output. 2. Personalities that dont mix. Any time you get a group of people together, you quickly see who is dominant, who is vocal, who is quiet, who is meek, who is extroverted, who is introverted, who is passive, and who is aggressive. To expect this group to provide creative ideas unfettered and freely is a foolish assumption. Personalities are always at work (and sometimes at war) in a group. Our ideas are a personal thing. We all naturally have a tendency to both want to get along with others, and to not appear foolish in front of others. Asking certain personality types to be willing to temporarily throw these driving forces to the wind is asking too much. Consider the introvert, whose creative energy is derived by not being around other people. Putting him or her in a group with extroverts and expecting a great performance is asking too much. The introverts best ideas often come when people are not around to distract and wear on them. A passive person might prefer to not have conflict, while an aggressive person requires it as fuel for their engine. Who do you think will speak up and who will quietly acquiesce to the popular idea? 3. The rise of the lowest common denominator. Brainstorming curtails creativity unconsciously. We all want to get along. Few people actually like conflict (though some do). A kind of equilibrium is reached, to the detriment of the group. Brainstorming also makes us lazy. When in a group focused on being creative, the idea is that you will feed off of each other, and springboard even further with the help of ideas that you would not have come up with.  The reality is that brainstorming allows for social loafing, a term used in a 2010 Applied Cognitive Psychology study by Nicholas W. Kohn and Steven M. Smith. According to Kohn and Smith, group brainstorming means that the participants compare themselves to the others, leading to social loafing and social matching. Social loafing occurs when individuals give less effort in a group because responsibility is diffused. Social matching is a tendency to conform to peers. According to Latanà ©s (1981) social impact theory, larger groups lead to greater conformity and greater downward performance matching. The larger the group, the more they conform to each other and actually match their input and performance to the lowest common denominator. In other words, group brainstorming participants are less productive than they would be on their own. 4. Idea plagiarism and fixation is rampant. Kohn and Smith continued their exploration of groups and the creation of ideas, explaining that we are unconsciously influenced by the ideas around us. Using Dunckers candle problem as an example, they showed how the ideas of others infect our own ideas in such a way that we cannot even discern when flaws that were present in the original idea are carried over into our own ideas. We create a solution built on the flaws of another. If we are left to come up with ideas without the input of others, our ideas tend to truly be unique and not merely derivative. The moment we are surrounded by the ideas of others, we absorb them as our own. Sometimes the idea of another unconsciously becomes our idea. This ties into fixation, or how, in a group, we become fixated on a solution and though we might generate many ideas, they are all fixated on a relatively narrow set. In other words: you might end up with lots of quantity after a brainstorming session, but did you ever have that feeling that not a single idea even came close? That they were all off in the same way? You had a group of people who absorbed each others ideas, flaws and all, and the solution became a too-narrow one despite the number of ideas that surrounded it. Brainstorming works best on your own. A group weakens the results.Solving The Group Brainstorming Problem Re-injecting anonymity to the procedure will directly reduce several of the barriers that make group brainstorming fail. It removes the fear of being judged by fellow team members and by leaders for possible silly ideas or suggestions. It allows voices to be heard that would otherwise be drowned out by others in a verbal-dominant meeting. These methods dont, however, address the social loafing aspect and the problem that comes with wanting our ideas to fit together and conform to levels perceived as appropriate or acceptable. Brainstorming, One Person At A Time The idea of brainstorming, a no-holds creative attack at a problem, isnt wrong. We cant rely purely on passive luck and gestalt to solve all of our problems. There are times we have to run hard at a problem from any and all directions to find a chip in its armor. Its when we mix this brainstorming with a group that those group dynamics are put into play and the creative power of individuals is actually lessened. Thats where singular brainstorming comes into play.  You can brainstorm on your own, as one person, without a group. The same rules apply regarding the removal of inhibition and self-criticism.  When brainstorming on my own, I use a few basic techniques as I attack a problem: 1. Get The Obvious Out Of The Way There will always be one or two ideas that immediately pop into your head. Just write them down. Get the obvious solutions out of the way so you can move on from them. I find that I free up thinking space once I write down all of the obvious solutions and ideas. Its one way I get past the self-criticism and inhibition problem that brainstorming is meant to avoid.  I tell myself that, if all else fails, I can always come back and revisit those initial sensible solutions.