Strategic Performance Measurement Systems in Financial Services

Question: Discuss about the Strategic Performance Measurement Systems in Financial Services Organisations. Answer: Introduction Financial service organization or the banking sector has a crucial role in the current economy. They usually administer the households savings, firms as well as located credit amongst different potential individuals. In additions, banking sector or the financial service organization play a significant role in balancing risk in a given market by enabling the households and organizations to cope with all economic uncertainties. Determinant of their performance is crucial in determining allocation of capital, their growth, competiveness as well as financial stability. With these and in the current business environment, new competitive landscape has brought about technological revolution; hence, the increasing globalization present fundamental challenges to capacity of an entity in maintaining their competitiveness (Silvi, Bartolini, Raffoni Visani, 2015). With such severe challenges or complexities, financial service organizations needs to have some new means and strategies which would be requiring or necessitating them to utilize the latest technological development, actively taking part in the global market, building the long-term vision as well as structuring themselves in gaining advantages which in turn permits managers in balancing short-term performance with the long-term requirements. The new strategies and new market demand different and new performance measures with choice of performance measure being the most crucial challenges facing the entities (Aranda Arellano, 2010). In essence, SPMS are usually the core of the control systems and usually play some crucial role in developing the strategic plans, assessing achievement of the organizational goals in the banking industry. Hence, based on these facts, this paper aims to present analysis of the major issues during implementation of the SPMS such as balance scorecard in the financial service organizations. It will also present analysis of how successful implementation of the SPMS could assist financial service entities improve their performance. It will also present assessment of some of the benefits, issues related to the implementation of the SPMS in the financial institutions as well as some of the common obstacles to a successful balance scorecard implementation in the banking industry. The report will be organized in numerous sections; that is, definition of the SPMS as well as points on the primary issues related to implementation of the SPMS in different banks that wish to correct the level of sustainability and their social and environmental responsibility outcomes. It would also entails a benefit section of the SPMS based on the features or characteristics of the SPMS and offer detailed discussion on the manner in which SPMS is in a position to assist an entity to improve its social and environmental outcomes. SPMS are defined as that system that utilizes information in producing some changes to the organizational culture, processes and systems. SPMS is also described in key information feature of integrativeness a feature with two components, that is, the generic aspects comprising of information which offers comprehension of cause-effect linkages in between strategies, objectives and operations and in between numerous aspects of value chain (Burney, Henle Widener, 2006). The second is the measurement component concerning the provision of some measures in financial, business processes, customers as well as long-term innovation. In addition, SPMS is the assessment of an entitys performance including measurement of the productivity of different banks which quantifies inputs and outputs of an entity as a ratio (Bento White, 2006). The most common definition of the SPMS is that SPMS is the procedure of measuring effectiveness or competence of the previous arrangements of specific banks thro ugh sorting, collation, interpretation and analysis of appropriate data (Chenhall, 2005). Thus, SPMS is defined in terms of purpose emphasizing evaluation of how well the firm is managed and value delivered for the shareholders. Function/benefits of SPMSs clear to every aspects SPMS is considered as the system in implementing and reformulating strategies, communicating key goals as well as priorities, providing strategic alignment as well as encouraging incremental innovation (Bento, Bento White, 2014). In addition, SPMS is believed to play crucial role in the financial service firms in ensuring availability of well-managed and reliable banks that does not at any point jeopardize interests of the depositors. Furthermore, SPMS assist in improving banks capacity to be competitive in terms of specific strategic priorities. SPMS has a greater role in making sure that banking sector learn in order to enable it maintain its competitiveness in future (Burney, Henle Widener, 2006). SPMS is also being utilized by financial service firms in supporting performance planning, control and measurement. SPMS are also beneficial since assist financial service firm in managing their costs better, deepening their relationship with its clients as well as enhancing pricing de cisions as well as product mix (Nurisyal Sofiah, 2016). In spite of numerous forms in which SPMS have been executed, the system has three common features; that is, they supplement the financial measures with the non-financial measures which shows operational accomplishment likely driving the future of banks, they comprises of the financial measures which captures short-term outcomes of the management decisions regarding issues like asset utilization, cash flow as well as revenue growth. Further, they are designed in fulfilling multiple purposes, from the simple cost determination to the complicated value creation. SPMS are usually designed in presenting management of the banking sector with both non-financial as well as financial measures wrapping diverse perspective which could deliver a means of converting the strategies into intelligible or clear set of the performance measures (Nurisyal, Md Auzair, Mohd Amir Md Daud, 2016). It also include measurement of effectiveness of banks which determines relationship of the banks output to what the bank is intended to achieve, quality which assesses output or process by which the output is produced as well as the timeliness which assesses time involved in producing outputs. There are numerous types of SPMS; these include the balanced scorecard, the six sigma, Performance Prisim and so forth (Bento, Bento White, 2014). Nonetheless, in this case, the researcher would concentrate on the balanced scorecard, its application, advantages and disadvantages if applied incorrectly. Balanced scorecard was mainly developed by 1992 which was aimed at including both the financial measures which report outcomes of the actions already undertaken as well as the operational measures on the internal process, improvement activities as well as customer satisfaction in the banking sector (Talha, Nuhu Emmanuel, 2014). It is an innovative dimensional corporate performance approach which offers an accounting framework for selecting several key performance indicators which could be used in supplementing traditional financial measures with the operating measures of the consumers satisfaction, learning and growth activities as well as internal business processes. Basically, BSC takes into account of the non-financial signals plus the financial one as the prerequisite for the future performance and drive these aspects and assisted the financial institutions in implementing such strategies. It assists banks to identify some strategies as well as make them executable. This model d oes not only take into account of the firm performance internally, but numerous shareholders and investors, are in a position to monitor outcomes of the firms. It considers value of the intangible assets alongside with the tangible assets and enhances performance management systems in reaching its objectives. It turned financial institutions strategies and visions into action. It is usually viewed as the strategic management measurement system which links the strategic objectives of an organization to comprehensive range of the chief performance indicators in providing balanced view. To be more specific, balanced scorecard is mostly based on four main perspectives; that is, customer perspective, learning and growth, financial perspective as well as internal business processes (Petera, Wagner Mensk, 2012). As financial institutions or banking industry try to increase it competitive advantage, BSC is viewed as a comprehensive evaluation strategy for performance of the industry. In essence, the BSC is considered to cover both long and short-term plans as well as internal and external control of the financial institutions. This is based on the fact that BSC considered aspects of customer, learning and growth, financial as well as internal processes in these institutions. Under balanced score card, managers are able to identify primary performances for the metrics and goals within the four primary perspectives. Here, they usually record, discuss as well as analyse numerous metrics in determining performance of the banks to accomplish their main strategic objectives (Wu, Lin Tsai, 2011). With the effects of the latest global financial crisis, implementation of the BSC in the financial service institutions has been significant since it has assisted different financial institutions to accomplish better financial objectives by combining all its perspectives to organizations strategy. Implementation of the BSC has also been beneficial since it has provided a framework for assessing specific programs, objectives as well as strategies in different banks. It has enhanced or enabled external benchmarking processes in the banking industry as well as enabled business processes in ensuring health of the banks. It has also assisted in assessing where the growth objectives are relatively successful and in defining better initiative (Bento, Bento White, 2014). Further, with the aftermath of the global financial crisis, implementation of the balanced scorecard has been beneficial since it has assisted the banks management in tracking financial results in different banks while moni toring capacity needed for growth (Micheli Manzoni, 2010). In addition, balanced scorecard has also provided a basic overview of current condition of the banks. These are crucial success aspect for sustainability and success of the banking sector. Hence, implementation of the better balanced scorecards has been of greater importance in measuring performance in the banks. According to ngel Caldern Molina, et al (2014), balanced scorecard is beneficial since it is viewed as a core management system that assists in improvement and management of performance with well-defined goals and strategies. In addition, balanced scorecard is usually a successful tracking system of effective or competent improvement in the banking sector as well as for better strategic planning. Thus, its implementation in the financial institutions has been beneficial since it has helped personnel working in a given bank to understand value of their duties or roles and how they should relate to the strategic goals of the bank (Rapiah, Wee Shu, Kamal, Rahman Rozainun, 2009). In general, balanced scorecard is crucial and more important since its multi-dimensional focus has been viewed as a positive mean for the banking sector firms or banks in addressing their accountability and governance issues. It has also been beneficial since it offers significant framework for the business elements in implementing and describing their own strategies (Micheli Manzoni, 2010). Implementation of the BSC has also been of greater importance to financial institutions since it assist in making performance adjustments which would help in better position the institutions to engage, retain and attract top talented employees over long-term which assisting in satisfying various shareholders expectations and demands. Disadvantages if implement incorrectly Financial crisis has created negative condition from the BSC point of view, thus, even though balanced scorecard is found to benefit most firms, there are few drawbacks associated with the BSC, especially when it is implemented incorrectly. As balances scorecard is said to link performance measures with the banks strategic plans, lack of proper communication within the firm could lead to weaknesses in some areas. Further, balanced scorecard at times appears as stakeholder approach which is not the case since stakeholders are the dominant group (Bento White, 2006). Thus, this could have some severe effects on the balanced scorecard efficiency and could probably results in numerous issues when this system is not used correctly or in the most appropriate manner. Further, there is some issues in accomplishing desired performance in the banking sectors or in numerous financial institutions which defines level of attention by the management. Hence, there is need to look at the target area s while implementing the balanced scorecard in banking sector that need attention of the management (Mohamed, Wee, Abdul Rahman Abdul Aziz, 2010). The management needs to pay more attention or to be more cautious on area of the performance measurement since it is quite tricky to execute performance based on original measures presented. Furthermore, balanced scorecard cannot be used alone since it requires some links with the other systems (Pinheiro et al., 2009). Nonetheless, some firms utilize few measures, failing to acquire some balance between the results. Others include numerous measures and fail to find the most significant ones. This makes it a bit tricky for the banks to survive with only balanced scorecard. In addition, numerous banks focus on evaluating financial performance and their effectiveness (Micheli Manzoni, 2010). Nonetheless, growth and customer satisfaction are of greater importance since whenever balanced scorecard is unbalanced, one or more perspective is said not to acquire attention it deserve, which could in turn create some negative effect in the banking sector. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that all the four perspective of balanced scorecard are kept in balance. Implementation barriers of SPMSs Even though SPMS is said to be beneficial in improvement of performance of different financial service institutions, there are some primary issues identified which might be affecting its implementation in financial services institutions which are looking forward in improving their sustainability level (Kasurinen, 2002). Some of the most issues that might be hindering implementation of the SPMS in financial institutions are usually poor banking process. In essence, in the present business environment, different nature of an entity with numerous departments could bring some issues while implementing the SPMs (Baird Baird, 2017). Basically, performance measurement could not be applicable to all financial institutions; likewise, not all financial service institutions are in a position of adopting performance management system. Another issue is the extents of employees level of skills in the financial service institutions or in the banking industry, whereby during implementation of the S PMs, high level of training and skills amongst employees is required. In addition, during implementation of the SPMs, there is usually lack of competencies in the early stages within the banking industry. In this case, the management try to focus more on the financial measures; resulting in some difficulties while incorporating components of the outcomes. This could result in very huge amount being spent and at times could result in destructive outcomes in the financial institutions. Thus, it is important to understand how SPMs are implemented in the banking sector to enable the banks become sustainable in in future. In order to overcome these barriers, there is need to ensure that the nature of the financial service institutions or banking sector is not diverse which could help in reducing difficulties of executing the system. Further, to resolve these barriers, there is need to ensure that all employees working in the banking sector are fully aware and clearly understands SPMs. The barriers can also be resolved by ensuring that there is presence of executive sponsorship during implementation of the SPMs in the financial institutions (Kasurinen, 2002). With full support from the top management, implementation of the SPMS would be successful. There is also need to ensure that all employees working in the banking industry are fully trained and educated about the SPMs and its importance before the system is implemented in the banking sector. This would mean that employees would be enhanced with relevant skills before the SPMs is implemented. Furthermore, to resolve or to overcome such barriers duri ng implementation of the SPMs, enhancement of adequate IT support in the banking sector would have been very crucial. This would include continually updating of the operationally and current relevant information of the SPMs. In addition, to overcome those barriers during implementation of the SPMs, enhancement of proper planning and communication in the overall banking industry would be of great importance (Muhamad, Auzair, Amir Ismail, 2016). This is based on the fact that, enhancement of proper planning and communication would make implementation of the system in different financial service institutions more easy, time saving and could make employees more satisfied. If success, the Advantages to Financial Service Institutions Performance As financial institutions or banking industry try to increase it competitive advantage, SPMs is a comprehensive evaluation strategy for performance of the industry (Wu, Lin Tsai, 2011). With the effects of the latest global financial crisis, implementation of the SPMs in the financial service institutions has been significant since it has assisted different financial institutions to accomplish better financial objectives by combining all its perspectives to organizations strategy. Successful implementation of the SPMs has also been beneficial since it has provided a framework for assessing specific programs, objectives as well as strategies in different banks. In addition, successful implementation of the SPMs has been beneficial especially in curbing some of the negative effects of the global financial crisis since it has enhanced or enabled external benchmarking processes in the banking industry as well as enabled business processes in ensuring health of the banks (Bento, Bento W hite, 2014). Further, with the aftermath of the global financial crisis, successful implementation of the SPMs has been beneficial since it has assisted the banks management in tracking financial results in different banks while monitoring capacity needed for growth. Hence, successful implementation of the better SPMs has been of greater importance in measuring performance in the banks. With the fact that SPMs is viewed as a successful tracking system of effective or competent improvement in the banking sector as well as for better strategic planning, successful implementation of SPMs in the financial institutions has been beneficial since it has helped personnel working in a given bank to understand value of their duties or roles and how they should relate to the strategic goals of the bank. In essence, successful implementation of the SPMS has been beneficial to financial service institutions since it has helped them in interpreting, diffusing, acquiring as well as storing information and results of the organizational experience (Baird Baird, 2017). Successful implementation of the SPMs has been of greater importance in financial service institutions performance since it has assisted in assessing whether the growth objectives are relatively successful and in defining better initiative in these institutions (Muhamad et al., 2016). Furthermore, successful implementation of the SPMs after the latest global financial crisis has had some advantages in improvement of performance especially in financial service firms since it has assisted in ensuring that there is suitable and sustainable external environment which is crucial in accomplishment of performance success in these firms. It has also been significant since it has provided the probability of identifying cause-and-effect between numerous measures and performance of different banks (Pinheiro et al., 2009). Further, successful implementation of the SPMs in the financial service institutions has been beneficial in performance improvement since it has offered greater support in development and sustainment of competitive strategic results in these institutions. Successful implementation of the SPMs has also been important in financial service institutions performance since it have strategic orientation which focuses mostly on provision of the financial information which has helped with identification as well as achievement of the strategic goals in these firms (Kasurinen, 2002). In addition, successful implementation of the SPMs has been crucial in financial service institutions performance improvement after the great financial crisis since it has enhanced future growth in these firms and enhanced innovation and operational, growth and learning perspectives which assisted in highlighting some of the places an entity require to place more emphasis on in creating value for its stockholders (Bento White, 2006). Therefore, successful implementation of the SPMs has been very crucial in financial service entities since it has assisted them in accomplishment of improved performance by reducing possibility dysfunctional impacts linked with dependence on the accounting performance measurement. Conclusion In conclusion, use of the SPMS and particularly balanced scorecard has been promoted in evaluating organizational strategic performance and as crucial instruments in communicating strategic priorities which could facilitate strategic implementation process. Balanced scorecard is said to be beneficial as valuable tool in providing some means to have more complete picture of the banking sector. Furthermore, use of balanced scorecard in an banks in facilitates improved or smooth performance in that it facilitates working together of personnel in search of some common goals. This enhances improved attitude of employees which in turn renders better as well as positive results like improved employees performance or higher job satisfaction. Further, it can be concluded that SPMS play crucial role in helping banks gain as well as sustain their competitive advantages. On the other hand, though numerous researchers agreed that SPMS has to be designed based on the non-financial and financial me asures, performance impact of such choices has remained uncertain. With these the literature on SPMS, especially its capacity in enhancing banks competitiveness require no more evidence. References ngel Caldern Molina, M., Manuel Hurtado Gonzlez, J., Palacios Florencio, B., Luis Galn Gonzlez, J. (2014). Does the balanced scorecard adoption enhance the levels of organizational climate, employees commitment, job satisfaction and job dedication?. Management Decision, 52(5), 983-1010. Aranda, C., Arellano, J. (2010). Strategic performance measurement systems and managers' understanding of the strategy: A field research in a financial institution. Journal of Accounting Organizational Change, 6(3), 330-358. Baird, K., Baird, K. (2017). The effectiveness of strategic performance measurement systems. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(1), 3-21. Bento, A., White, F., L. (2006). Strategic Performance Measurement System Characteristics, Outcomes, and Performance. 6th Global Conference on Business Economics. MD 21201-5779. Bento, A., Bento, R., White, L. F. (2014). Strategic performance management systems: Impact on business results. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(3), 25-33. Burney, L. L., Henle, C. A., Widener, S. K. (2009). A path model examining the relations among strategic performance measurement system characteristics, organizational justice, and extra-and in-role performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3), 305-321. Burney, L., Henle, C., Widener, S. (2006). Do characteristics of strategic performance measurement systems used in incentives enhance organizational fairness. Rice University working paper. Chenhall, R. H. (2005). Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: an exploratory study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(5), 395-422. Kasurinen, T. (2002). Exploring management accounting change: the case of balanced scorecard implementation. Management accounting research, 13(3), 323-343. Micheli, P., Manzoni, J. F. (2010). Strategic performance measurement: Benefits, limitations and paradoxes. Long Range Planning, 43(4), 465-476. Mohamed, R., Wee, S. H., Abdul Rahman, I. K., Abdul Aziz, R. (2010). Strategic performance measurement system, organisational capabilities and competitive advantage. Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance, 1, 27-50. Muhamad, N., Auzair, S. M., Amir, A. M., Ismail, M. D. (2016). Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System. Acta Universitatis Danubius: Oeconomica, 12(3). Nurisyal, M., Sofiah, M. A. (2016). Sustainability performance measurement system implementation: a preliminary finding. Nurisyal, M., Md Auzair, S., Mohd Amir, A., Md Daud, I. (2016). Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System Acta Universitatis Danubius. conomica. Acta Universitatis Danubius. conomica, 12(3). Petera, P., Wagner, J., Mensk, M. (2012). Strategic performance measurement systems implemented in the biggest Czech companies with focus on balanced scorecard-an empirical study. Journal of Competitiveness, 4(4). Pinheiro de Lima, E., Gouvea da Costa, S. E., Angelis, J. J. (2009). Strategic performance measurement systems: a discussion about their roles. Measuring Business Excellence, 13(3), 39-48. Rapiah, M., Wee Shu, H., Kamal, I., Rahman, A., Rozainun, A. A. (2009). Strategic performance measurement system design and organisational capabilities. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, 4(1), 35-63. Silvi, R., Bartolini, M., Raffoni, A., Visani, F. (2015). The practice of strategic performance measurement systems: Models, drivers and information effectiveness. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(2), 194-227. Talha, M., Nuhu, N. A., Emmanuel, E. U. (2014). Do Integrative Strategic Performance Measurement Systems Foster Corporate Entrepreneurship?. Science International, 26(5). Wu, C. R., Lin, C. T., Tsai, P. H. (2011). Financial service sector performance measurement model: AHP sensitivity analysis and balanced scorecard approach. The Service Industries Journal, 31(5), 695-711.