Strategic Planning for a Sustainable Development Centre …
207
Table 2 BSC Greens Group
Dimensions
Guiding questions
Scientific research perspective
How do we want to be seen by our maintainers
and the academic community?
Academic community perspective
What scientific means should be present for the
dissemination of our research?
Enabling internal processes perspective
To satisfy our stakeholders and the academic
community, which internal processes should we
perform optimally?
Staff learning and development perspective For the best results in our processes, how will we
align and develop our human, information and
organizational capital?
Source Authors (2020)
In the traditional BSC model, the economic-financial perspective aims to maximize shareholder value, that is, to evaluate the contribution of the implementation
and execution of the company’s strategy, being measured by the financial results with
the aid of other perspectives (Huang 2009). According to Kaplan and Norton (2000)
the financial perspective reflects the shareholder’s point of view. For companies to
be financially successful, they must satisfy their shareholders, so it is placed at the
top of the BSC hierarchy. Therefore, this is an aspect that cannot be disregarded
from the context, quite the opposite. However, the purpose of this paper is to make
it a “perspective” that is supporting the process and not the protagonist, since the
purpose here is to offer a mechanism where the main result to be sought is to promote
sustainability through excellence on research, contributing to science and citizens’
lives.
For this purpose it was decided to create the Scientific Research Perspective
being the first, and having as its guiding question “How do we want to be seen by
our maintainers and the academic community?”, where their objectives will succeed
when the objectives of the other perspectives were achieved, in a cause and effect relationship. For the fulfillment of this process, the Academic Community Perspective
was put in support of the first perspective, having as a guiding question, “What scientific means should be present with a view to disseminating our research?”, Customer
Perspective, in the original BSC, is identified as companies meeting their customers’
needs through a value proposition (Kaplan and Norton 1996). The second perspective will aim to clarify the key and relevant issues that will highlight the new value
proposition and high impact publications.
Next, in place of the Internal Process Perspective (original BSC) where,
according to Kaplan and Norton (2000), allows managers to identify processes
that are critical to meeting customer and stakeholder goals, we have the Enabling
Internal Processes Perspective with the following research question: “To satisfy
our stakeholders and the academic community, which internal processes should we
perform optimally?” where similarly to the original BSC, the group should identify
which internal processes to be able to perform. to provide high impact research.
207
Table 2 BSC Greens Group
Dimensions
Guiding questions
Scientific research perspective
How do we want to be seen by our maintainers
and the academic community?
Academic community perspective
What scientific means should be present for the
dissemination of our research?
Enabling internal processes perspective
To satisfy our stakeholders and the academic
community, which internal processes should we
perform optimally?
Staff learning and development perspective For the best results in our processes, how will we
align and develop our human, information and
organizational capital?
Source Authors (2020)
In the traditional BSC model, the economic-financial perspective aims to maximize shareholder value, that is, to evaluate the contribution of the implementation
and execution of the company’s strategy, being measured by the financial results with
the aid of other perspectives (Huang 2009). According to Kaplan and Norton (2000)
the financial perspective reflects the shareholder’s point of view. For companies to
be financially successful, they must satisfy their shareholders, so it is placed at the
top of the BSC hierarchy. Therefore, this is an aspect that cannot be disregarded
from the context, quite the opposite. However, the purpose of this paper is to make
it a “perspective” that is supporting the process and not the protagonist, since the
purpose here is to offer a mechanism where the main result to be sought is to promote
sustainability through excellence on research, contributing to science and citizens’
lives.
For this purpose it was decided to create the Scientific Research Perspective
being the first, and having as its guiding question “How do we want to be seen by
our maintainers and the academic community?”, where their objectives will succeed
when the objectives of the other perspectives were achieved, in a cause and effect relationship. For the fulfillment of this process, the Academic Community Perspective
was put in support of the first perspective, having as a guiding question, “What scientific means should be present with a view to disseminating our research?”, Customer
Perspective, in the original BSC, is identified as companies meeting their customers’
needs through a value proposition (Kaplan and Norton 1996). The second perspective will aim to clarify the key and relevant issues that will highlight the new value
proposition and high impact publications.
Next, in place of the Internal Process Perspective (original BSC) where,
according to Kaplan and Norton (2000), allows managers to identify processes
that are critical to meeting customer and stakeholder goals, we have the Enabling
Internal Processes Perspective with the following research question: “To satisfy
our stakeholders and the academic community, which internal processes should we
perform optimally?” where similarly to the original BSC, the group should identify
which internal processes to be able to perform. to provide high impact research.