3.9 Review

The balanced scorecard in the education sector: A literature review

期刊

COGENT EDUCATION
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2160120

关键词

Balanced Scorecard; Performance Management; Performance Measurement; Education Sector; Literature Review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several studies have been conducted to explore the application of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in the educational sector, but a comprehensive overview is lacking. This research conducted a systematic literature review to fill this gap. The research identified the diversity of BSC in education, strategic management with BSC, statistical methods for BSC management, and the strategy map of BSC as the most discussed topics. The results provide insights for further research development.
Several studies with quantitative, qualitative or theoretical approaches have been carried out, focusing on the application of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in the educational sector. However, despite the literature on the subject, it is difficult to draw an overview of the use of the BSC in this sector. In order to fill this gap, our research carried out a systematic literature review (SLR) on the BSC methodology implemented in the educational sector. The Web of Science and Scopus databases are used as a source of article collection. A bibliometric analysis was performed using 65 articles extracted from these databases. The results suggest that the most discussed topics within the study are: 1) the diversity of the BSC in the education sector; 2) strategic management with the BSC; 3) statistical methods to manage the BSC and 4) the strategy map of the BSC. The qualitative approach was dominant in the analysed studies, but the reasonable number of studies with quantitative approaches is worth attention. The study contributes to the literature by reviewing prominent cited references and documents that cited them and the results provide the landscapes and research gaps for the main lines of research for further development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据