Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dspace.dtu.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/repository/17108
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSOOD, SAHIL-
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-11T06:52:25Z-
dc.date.available2019-12-11T06:52:25Z-
dc.date.issued2016-05-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.dtu.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/repository/17108-
dc.description.abstractThe balanced scorecard revolutionized conventional thinking about performance metrics. When Kaplan and Norton first introduced the concept, in 1992, companies were busy transforming themselves to compete in the world of information; their ability to exploit intangible assets was becoming more decisive than their ability to manage physical assets. The scorecard allowed companies to track financial results while monitoring progress in building the capabilities needed for growth. The tool was not intended to be a replacement for financial measures but rather a complement—and that’s just how most companies treated it. Some companies went a step further, however, and discovered the scorecard’s value as the cornerstone of a new strategic management system. In this article from 1996, the authors describe how the balanced scorecard can address a serious deficiency in traditional management systems: the inability to link a company’s long-term strategy with its shortterm financial goals. The scorecard lets managers introduce four new processes that help companies make that important link.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTD2280;-
dc.subjectSBIen_US
dc.subjectPSBsen_US
dc.titlePERFORMANCE COMPARISION OF SBI AND ITS ASSOCIATES WITH OTHER PSBS USING BALANCED SCORECARDen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Appears in Collections:MBA

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Final Dissertation Report.pdf1.94 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.