Blog Archives

Problems can be caused by a failure to understand the strategic objectives of the company employees and their non-participation in achieving these goals. In practice, we encountered the following situation in the steel company. She claimed that the products the buyer will be strictly within the specified period and the highest quality. Employees of the enterprise, directly managing the production process of steel reinforcement, was asked about a what indicators they are responsible. The answer was as follows: – “quality products, adherence to process parameters of production, trouble-free running of equipment.” Thus, the rank and file employees did not think that should be responsible for timely production.

In other words, they did not understand their tasks and roles in implementing the strategic plans of the company. These problems can solve the implementation of BSC. The third criterion – using a balanced scorecard is justified in the group of companies where each company pursues its goal is not always appropriate unified strategy of the holding. By implementing a BSC issue is solved Communications Group and built clear scheme of strategic management. The fourth important sign that the company is expedient to introduce a system of balanced indicators – the lack of operational control over the process of implementing the company strategy. Strategic management of the company is an ongoing process that includes setting strategic goals, set performance tasks, monitoring and taking corrective management decisions. If the company can not control the performance goals, we should not hope that they will be achieved. – What challenges face European companies in implementing the balanced scorecard? – Problems arising from the implementation of BSC, are typical and do not depend on the country in which the company operates.

There are three main problems. First, is the implementation of the balanced scorecard in the absence of a clearly articulated strategy. If the company has no strategy and vision of its future, the introduction of a balanced performance does not make sense.

Understanding the top management of the fact that the embodiment of life in the global plans depends on the performance of each individual manager and the team as a whole – the key to successful change in the CEO from the beginning should adjust their subordinates. In deciding to open to all who will carry out the transformation, including the ordinary performers. Ideal – the manager, was thoroughly dismantled in the purpose and procedure of the change, he is in discussions with their employees, both individually and with groups. The task of director of human resources – to make sure that the explanations of the control available and understandable to all. His role at this stage is to prepare the manager to talk with subordinates. Every senior manager has ever faced with the introduction of changes in the company and, therefore, is the bearer of a unique experience in terms of change. His point of view can be useful and to influence course of events if it is supported by knowledge of the industry and production processes, as well as features of a particular group. Specialist with a similar experience automatically becomes a "perfect conductor" changes.

If his authority in the company's strong enough, then we can say that the problem of influencing public opinion is half solved. In large holdings for this purpose are sometimes sent to the field management team to create a group from among the line managers of branches and work with them and through them – with all plant personnel. These are necessary measures that support innovation on the part of the head office through its leaders. Such groups are "implementing change" in its subsidiaries. Management influence on the team and the recognition of merit – the main aspect of the motivation of top management in the conduct of global changes. Proper direction of this effect head of the organization for senior managers is its trump card in building a strong team, "tops." Incorrect redistribution of power may lead to "Fall in authority," the head of the management team respectively to the loss of confidence in him by his subordinates.