MANAGEMENT CONTROL, MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING 45
Norton’s Balanced Scorecard. He argued that traditional performance measure-
ment systems don’t work as they track what happens within not across functions.
The few cross-functional ‘results measures’ are financial. In contrast, ‘process
measures’ monitor the activities that produce given results.
Innes (1996) described thetableaux de bordthat had been developed by ‘sub-
departments’ in French factories. These comprise non-financial measures that
managers identify as critical to success and that are developed and monitored
locally, rather than being part of the formal reporting process.
There have been other efforts at Balanced Scorecard-type models, such as
thePerformance Pyramidof Lynch and Cross (1991). Although the initial concern
of most Balanced Scorecard-type systems was with manufacturing businesses,
Fitzgeraldet al.(1991) emphasized the needs of service businesses and developed
aResults and Determinants Frameworkcontaining six performance dimensions
divided into two different categories. Competitiveness and financial performance
as ‘ends’ reflected the success of the chosen strategy, while the others, the
‘means’, determined competitive success. They applied this model to three ‘service
archetypes’ – professional services, service shops and mass services – using the
number of customers handled as the differentiating factor. Figure 4.6 shows the
Results and Determinants Framework.
A further model, reflected in the practitioner rather than the academic litera-
ture, is the ‘Business Excellence’ model developed by the European Foundation
Figure 4.6 Results and Determinants Framework
Reprinted from Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R., Brignall, S., Silvestro, R. and Voss, C. (1991).Performance
Measurement in Service Businesses. London: Chartered Institute of Management Accountants.
[Image not available in this electronic edtion.]