A key measurement that is used by human resource management is the balanced scorecard. Before beginning your discussion, read the Human Resource Measurement: A Balanced Scorecard (Links to an external site.) article. In the article, an example of using the balanced scorecard for recruiting was described. For this discussion, put yourself into the role of a human resource manager that has been asked by the CEO to create a balanced score card for another area of human resource management (i.e.., motivation, performance reviews, training, laws and regulations, or work environment safety). Using your chosen area, create an example of how the balanced scorecard could be used. Your balanced scorecard must include the following:

Objective(s)

Description

Actions

Measures

In addition to your example of the balanced scorecard, explain how the results can positively affect the organization.

Your initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.

Journal of Human Resource Management
2015; 3(2-1): 28-32

Published online February 10, 2015 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/jhrm)

doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.s.2015030201.14

ISSN: 2331-0707 (Print); ISSN: 2331-0715 (Online)

Human Resource Measurement: A Balanced Scorecard
Approach

Benedetta Gesuele
*
, Mauro Romanelli

Department of Business and Economics Studies, University of Naples “Parthenope”, Naples, Italy

Email address:
benedetta.gesuele@uniparthenope.it (B. Gesuele), mauro.romanelli@uniparthenope.it (M. Romanelli)

To cite this article:
Benedetta Gesuele, Mauro Romanelli. Human Resource Measurement: A Balanced Scorecard Approach. Journal of Human Resource Man-

agement. Special Issue: Challenges and Opportunities in the Performance Measurement and Control Systems of Human Resources Manage-

ment for the Services Industry. Vol. 3, No. 2-1, 2015, pp. 28-32 doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.s.2015030201.14

Abstract: This study aims to adopt the balanced scorecard approach to improve the measurement and evaluating of human
resources performance in the USA public sector. We use a balanced

scorecard approach in terms of innovation, learning and

growth for employees feeling to contribute to the governmental agency ends. Innovation, learning and growth may represent

constitutive elements of organizational strategies value oriented. In this study we have built a set of key performance drivers

drawn by a sample of American public employees during 2010. The United States are the first country introducing public

management reform programs fostering continuous attention on human resources performances. The study is a research desk.

Data are collected by United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) with regard to last Federal Employees Viewpoint

Survey conducted in 2010 and concern employees of every Federal agencies which responded to the survey. The results show

that the employee’s perception of the organization performance seems to be positively judged.

Keywords: Federal Civil Workforce, Organization Performance Measurement, Balanced Scorecard Approach

1. Introduction

The Human Resource Management (HRM) has received a

growing attention and interest coherently with developments

of New Public Management (NPM) doctrines encouraging

public organizations to adopt and implement management

techniques and tools drawn by private sector in order to im-

plement measurement performance systems within the west-

ern and industrialized countries. Since 1980, in the OCSE

area strategic and organizational changes driven by public

management reform improved the relationship between or-

ganizational performance and human resources management.

This study aims to adopt the balanced scorecard approach

to improve the measurement and evaluating of human re-

sources performance in the USA public sector. Measurement

performance systems as evaluated by a balanced scorecard

approach lead civil servants to perceive positively what public

organization do and how perform task. We use a balanced

scorecard approach in terms of innovation, learning and

growth perspective in order to verify that measurement per-

formance methodologies may have a positive impact on em-

ployees’ perceptions about the organizational performance.

Innovation, learning and growth constitute a driver for em-

ployees that feel to contribute to the governmental agency

ends. Learning and growth represent constitutive elements of

organizational strategies value oriented for developing and

implementing successfully the internal processes.

We have considered a sample of civil servants in the USA

public sector. In the OCSE area the United States are the first

country introducing public management reform programs

fostering continuous attention on managing and evaluating the

human resources performances.

The paper is structured as follows. In the section two the

literature review about the relationship HRM development

and the employees’ performance is presented. In the section

three how to manage Federal Civil Service by act is pre-

sented. In the fourth section the research design is described.

Finally, conclusions and future research perspectives are

presented.

2. Literature Review

In the last decade management changes occurred in public

sector organizations coherently with a growing relevance of

the human resource management for improving the organiza-

tional performance [1, 2, 3, 4]. The Harvard Scholars School,

in 1985, defined the HRM in terms of “all management deci-

Journal of Human Resource Management 2015; 3(2-1): 28-32 29

sions that affect the relationship between the organization and

employees” [2, 5]. In the HRM field both practices and aca-

demic studies have shown more and more a growing need to

explore the HRM systems. Some authors have conducted

comparative studies about the human resource management

diffusion. For example Rainey et al., Scott and Falcone argue

that differences of management practices about human re-

sources in the public and private organizations were influ-

enced by ownerships [6, 7]. In a similar vein, the ownership

may exert influence on HRM policies and practices. Public

managers have been encouraged to adopt and embrace private

sector management practices and policies [4, 8, 9, 10]. Boyne

et al. [4] try to answer to this question. Is there the difference

between public and private managers in their attitudes and

behaviors? In 1992, Brewster [11] agrees about the HRM

practices in ten European Countries and underlines the exis-

tence of different styles of HRM. Accordingly, Farnham and

Horton [12] have conducted a research about the implemen-

tation of HRM and identified a number of fundamental cha-

racteristics in conventional HRM practice in public sector.

A large number of empirical studies examine the relation-

ship between HRM and organizational performance. Ac-

cording to Williams [11] there is a positive relationship be-

tween implementation of HRM practices in public sector and

management performance. According to this approach same

scholars study the relationship between HRM and perfor-

mance; these studies consider a HRM as a set of ideal or best

practices [14, 15]. The dominant focus on the HRM literature

has demonstrated the importance of introducing these prac-

tices and implementation in the public sector, in order to in-

crease the public performance [16, 17]. Similarly Tessema and

Soeter [18], in their article, examine how, when and to what

extent HR practices may affect performance on the employees

level. Some scholars describe the different national expe-

riences in order to explore the different steps about the de-

velopments and the diffusion of HRM practices. For Example

the Public Administration Observatory [19] published the

report on human resources in different countries in OCSE area

(Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Spain,

USA and Sweden). In accordance with this study, other au-

thors describe the various HR practices in different countries

around the world. In the public sector HRM practices can be

influenced by different management cultures [4, 8, 13, 18, 19].

Some scholars have implemented the balanced scorecard

approach in order to measure the performance in the public

sector [19]. For example Kloot and Martin [20] by analyzing

performance management systems in local government used

all dimensions of the balanced scorecard: financial, commu-

nity, internal business process, innovation and learning. Fitz-

geralt et al. [21] have suggested a performance model based

on six dimensions: competitiveness and financial dimensions

as results of strategy are included. In a similar vein, Ballantine

et al. [22] illustrated the relationship between strategy and

performance management. Accordingly, Estis and Hyatt [23]

provided a framework for applying a balanced scorecard ap-

proach to measuring the performance in the public sector

based on financial, customer, internal processes, learning and

growth perspec

tives.

3. Managing Federal Civil Service by Act

In the USA public sector the continuous attention on Hu-

man resource management (HRM) is growing coherently with

fostering employees performance. The performance mea-

surement system has been applied in both industrialized

countries and developing countries. In the United States there

is great attention on managing strategically and measuring

human resources performance. Thereby, performance mea-

surement practices seem not to be a part of what public sector

organizations do [24]. Several performance measurement

oriented acts were promulgated over time. The first step of

reform was implemented in 1979. According to the Civil

Service Reform Act as promulgated in the 1979 the US Office

of Personnel Management introduced a set of actions regard-

ing on human resource appraisal, merit pay programs, clari-

fication and simplification of appeal procedures for personal

actions. Reform changes occurred over time (1984, 1994,

2000 and 2004).

The Chief Human Capital Officer Act of 2002 was signed

into law with the promulgation of the Homeland Security Act

of 2002.The scopes are: setting the agency’s workforce de-

velopment strategy; assessing workforce characteristics and

future needs based on the agency’s mission and strategic plan;

aligning the agency’s human resources policies with organi-

zational mission, goals and performance outcomes; devel-

oping a culture of learning, identifying the best practices and

benchmarking studies; applying methods for measuring in-

tellectual capital; identifying links to organizational perfor-

mance and growth, and serving on the Chief Human Capital

Officer’s Council.

In 2004 the Federal Workforce Flexibility Act provides

great emphasis on employee development and training to

promote strategic alignment with agencies’ missions. This part

of the Act is effective immediately; the OPM and Federal

agencies will be working together to align training programs

with agency strategic goals and performance objectives. The

issues of these actions concern the importance of the rela-

tionship between performance measurement and human re-

source management.

Nowadays, the public employees’ perceptions on perfor-

mance measurement systems are considered as factors that

may characterize successful organizations. Accordingly, the

Office of Personnel Management conducted a survey for

Federal Employees, the Employee Viewpoint Survey as ad-

ministered for the first time in 2002 and then repeated every

two years: 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2010.

4. Research Design

In this section we describe the research methodology: the

implementation of one perspective of balanced scorecard

approach and the results.

The aim of this study is to elucidate that human resources

measurement performance systems may be measured by a

30 Benedetta Gesuele and Mauro Romanelli: Human Resource Measurement: A Balanced Scorecard Approach

balanced scorecard approach in order to improve the organi-

zational performance as positively perceived by civil servants

in USA. In accordance with previous studies [25, 26] we

choose to implement one dimension of balanced scorecard

approach: innovation, learning and growth because this

perspective may constitute a driver for employees that feel to

contribute to the agency ends. Innovation, learning and growth

represent constitutive elements of organizational strategies

value oriented. The objectives of internal processes concern as

strategic themes innovation and corporate citizenship too [25,

27]. The organizational success can depend on the innovation,

the ability to learn and the attitude of personnel to learn and

contribute to organizational growth [20, 28, 29]. The sample

under investigation concerns USA Federal employees. The

data are collected by United States Office of Personnel Man-

agement (OPM). Data are available on OPM’s Fed-View

survey website regarding last Federal Employees Viewpoint

Survey and being located at www.FedView.opm.gov as con-

ducted in 2010 [30]. The Federal Employee Survey is a tool

that measures employees’ perception of whether and to what

extent conditions that characterize successful organizations

are present in their agencies. This survey is the fifth in a series

of survey starting in 2002. These survey samples are the

full-time permanent employees of Departments, large agen-

cies, small agencies and independent agencies and the

small/independent agencies that accepted an invitation to

participate in the survey. These institutions comprise ap-

proximately 97% of the executive branch workforce. In the

year under investigation more than 260,000 Federal em-

ployees responded to the survey, a response rate of 52 percent.

We have chosen only 12 items on the 89 which are pre-

sented in the survey in order to implement the balanced sco-

recard approach in terms of innovation, learning and growth

perspective.

We identify two outcomes and some corresponding key

performance drivers to measure innovation, learning and

growth perspective: strategic team work condition and grati-

fication of innovation, learning and growth perspective on for

employees in their job. Implementation of a good leadership

program and employees satisfaction are key performance

drivers for the first outcome. Implementation project plan for

knowledge and best practice, employees work experience,

implementation of new strategies and routine, employees

relation are the key performance drivers for the outcome gra-

tification for employees in their job.

In the following table the framework to guide this research

is described (table 1).

Table 1. Balanced scorecard approach

Balanced Scorecard Perspective Outcomes Key performance Drivers

Implementation of good leadership

program

Strategic team work condition

Employees satisfaction

Innovation Learning and Growth Gratification for employees in his job Implementation project plan for

new knowl

edge and best practice

Employees work experience

Implementation new strategies and

routine

Employees relation (good team

work relation)

Source: our elaboration

Table 2. Key performance drivers: measurement (Federal Employee View-

point Survey FEV Survey)

Key performance Indicator Measurement

1 Implementation of good leadership

program

Questions number 53- 56 -61 of

FEV

Survey

2 Employees satisfaction
Questions number 63 – 64 – 65 66 of

FEV Survey

3 Implementation project plan for

new knowledge and best practice

Question number 11- 15 – 18 of FEV

Survey

4 Employees work experience
Question number 5 – 10 – 13 of FEV

Survey

5 Implementation new strategies and

routine

Question number 1- 4- 32 of FEV

Survey

6 Employees relation (good team

work relation)

Question number 20 – 21 – 22 of

FEV Survey
Source: our elaboration

We have selected these items for two motives. First of all,

these items are used by the literature [25, 27] in order to

measure overall organizational and human resource perfor-

mances by applying a balanced scorecard approach. These

items are relevant for the analysis conducted in order to

measure and evaluate both satisfaction and performance of

employees coherently with the Chief Human Capital Officers

Act of 2002. According to the Federal Employee Viewpoint

Survey (Fed-View) these items were just tested and verified

We choose some questions as measurement too for each driver

of performance l (table 2).

Some questions are identified in the OPM survey in order to

measure the six key performance indicators.

The questions (Q) are described in the following table (table

3).

We have assigned a weight to the responses as classified in

accordance with OPM research based on a Likert scale:

strongly agree- very satisfied (6); agree- satisfied (5); neither

agree nor agree (4); neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (3);

disagree and do not know (2); dissatisfied and very satisfied

(1). We have not considered the values of responses when the

respondents have not made a choice. Secondly, we have con-

sidered the percent of response classified in relation to scales

and multiplied for the weight assigned in order to build the key

Journal of Human Resource Management 2015; 3(2-1): 28-32 31

performance indicators.

Table 3. Questions chosen

Key performance Drivers Questions

Implementation of good leadership program

53- Managers/supervisors/team leaders work well with employees of different backgrounds.

56-Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization.

61-I have a high level of respect for my organization’s senior leaders.

Employees satisfaction

63-How satisfied are you with your involvement in decisions that affect your work?

64-How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management on what’s going on in your

organization?

65-How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive for doing a good job?

66-How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your senior leaders?

Implementation project plan for new knowl-

edge and best practice

11-My talents are used well in the workplace.

15 My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance.

18-My training needs are assessed.

Employees work experience

5-I like the kind of work I do.

10-My workload is reasonable.

13-The work I do is important.

Implementation new strategies and routine

1-I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my organization.

4-My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment.

32-Creativity and innovation are rewarded.

Employees relation (good team work relation)

20-The people I work with cooperate to get the job done.

21-My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills.

22-Promotions in my work unit are based on merit.

Source: adaptions by Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey FEV Survey

In accordance with previous studies the organizational

success seems to depend on the organizational and human

resources capabilities to innovate and learn. Public organi-

zations have to learn on changing behaviors and strategies to

prepare for the future. The civil servants may exert influence

on the organizational performance as a whole. Measuring

learning, growth and innovation aspects may help public

administrations to face the challenge of embracing a conti-

nuous change.

The analysis of data gathered on federal civil workforce in

2010 shows how to implement the balanced scorecard ap-

proach based on innovation, learning and growth perspec-

tives.

With regard to implementation of an effective leadership

program as the first key performance driver, we agree that

the effective leadership style may lead the employees to

achieve positive results in their performance. They feel a

high level of respect for their leader. Communications be-

tween employees and their leaders are positively judged and

satisfying.

The employees seem to be satisfied by corporate policies

and practices. With regard to key performance driver em-

ployees satisfaction only the 26% of employees respond to

be negatively impressed.

With regard to key performance driver implementation

project plan for new knowledge and best practice, the 60%

of the interviewed employees believe that their talent is well

used in the workplace. The 54% of the interviewed em-

ployees consider that their training should be assessed.

The employees consider their workload as reasonable and

important in relation to the third key driver, employees work

experience.

The creativity and innovation are considered to be im-

portant for the most part of the sample (40%). They believe

that organization could offer them the opportunity to im-

prove their abilities (key driver indicator implementation

new strategies and routine).

The employees believe there is cooperation in the

workplace and there are merit systems for gratification in

relation to the key driver employees relation.

5. Conclusion

In the public sector the diffusion and implementation of

management techniques is the priority in the agenda of in-

dustrialized countries. Strategic and organizational changes

driven by public management reform may improve the re-

lationship between organizational performance and human

resources management coherently with the implementation

of performance strategic measurement systems.

Public sector organizations have to develop and measure

outcomes consistent with strategic goals and human re-

sources performance.

Innovation, learning and growth perspective as result of a

balanced scorecard approach may emerge as an useful me-

thodology for measuring the civil service workforce per-

formance. The study highlights a framework to analyze the

employees performance. The results are concordant with

issue of previous literature concerning the relationship be-

tween human resource management and public management

reform performance oriented.

In this study there are some limits. Data collected and

gathered are no recent. We have considered only the inno-

vation, growth and learning perspective and used only six

key performance drivers.

Future research perspectives lead us to consider the other

key drivers indicators of a balanced scorecard approach for

building an integrated pattern of analysis.

32 Benedetta Gesuele and Mauro Romanelli: Human Resource Measurement: A Balanced Scorecard Approach

References

[1] Gould-Williams J., 2003. “The importance of HR practices
and workplace trust in achieving superior performance: a
study of public sector organizations”. In Journal of Human
Resource Management., No 14, pp 28-54.

[2] Blyton P. and Turnbull P., 1992, “Reassessing human re-
source management”, The Free Press.

[3] Legge K., 1995, “Human Resource Management: rhetoric
and Realitie”s, in Chippenham Macmillan Business

[4] Boyne G., Jenkins G. Poople M. 1999, “Human resource
management in the public and private sectors: an empirical
comparison”. In Public Administration, vol. 77 No 2, pp
407-420

[5] Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P.R., Quinn Mills, D. and
Walton, R.E. 1984, Human Resource Management. New
York: Free Press.

[6] Rainey, H., Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H., 1976. “Com-
paring public and private organizations”. In Public Adminis-
tration Review, No 36 (2), pp. 233-244.

[7] Scott P. G. and Falcone S., 1998, “Comparing public and
private organizations: An exploratory analysis of three
frameworks”. In American Review of Public Administration
28 (2):126-145.

[8] Budhwar and Boyne, 2004. “Human Resource Management
in Indian public and private sectors: an empirical compari-
son”. In The international Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 15, No 2, pp. 346-370.

[9] Box R. C., 1999, “Running Government like a business:
implication for public administration theory an research”. In
American Review of Public Administration, No 29, pp
19-43.

[10] Ferlie E. et al., 1996, “The new Public Management in ac-
tion”, Oxford University Press.

[11] Brewster C., 1995. “Toward a ‘European’ Model of Human
Resource Management”. In Journal of International Business
STUDIES, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 1-21.

[12] Farnham D. and Horton S., 1996,. “Managing people in the
public service. In Managing Social Policy”. London.
McLaughlin.

[13] Williams, 2004. “The effects of high commitment HRM
practices on employee attitude: the views of public sector
workers”. In Public Administration, Vol. 82, No. 1, Pp 63-81.

[14] Huselid M., 1995. “The impact of Human Resource Man-
agement practices on Turnover, productivity and Corporate
finance performance”, in Academy of Management Journal
Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 637- 672.

[15] Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. . (1996). “The Impact of Hu-
man Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Or-
ganizational Performance”. In Academy of Management
Journal, No 39(4), pp 949–969.

[16] Pfeffer J., 1998. “The human equation: building profits by
putting people first”. Boston Harvard Business School Press.

[17] Tessema M.T. and Soeters J.L., 2006. “Challenges and
prospects of HRM in developing countries: testing the HRM-
performance link in Eritrean civil service”. In International
Journal of Resource Management, No 17(1), pp. 86-105.

[18] OPAC (Public Administration Observatory), 2011. “Sistemi
di pubblico impiego a confronto, casi di studio internaziona-
li”. Egea, Milano.

[19] Kaplan R.S. and Norton D., 1992. “The balanced scorecard:
Measures that drive performance”, In Harvard Business Re-
view, Jan- Feb, pp 71 – 79.

[20] Kloot L. and Martin J., 2000, “Strategic performance man-
agement: a balanced approach to performance management
issue in local government”. In management Accounting Re-
search, Vol. 11, pp 231 – 251.

[21] Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R., Brignall, T. J., Silvestro, R. and
Voss, C., 1991. “Perfomance Measurement in Service Busi-
nesses”, C.I.M.A.

[22] Ballantine, J. A., Brignall, T. J. and Modell, S., 1998. “Per-
formance measurement and management in public health
services: a comparison of UK and Swedish practice”. In
Management Accounting Research, No. 9, pp.71–94.

[23] Aaron A. Estis KPMG Peat Marwick LLP and Grand Hyatt,
1998, “The balanced Scorecard – Applying a Private Sector
Technique to the Public Sector”. Paper presented at the 1998
Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis.
New York City, New York

[24] De Lancer Julnes P., Holzer M. “Promoting the Utilization of
Performance Measures in Public Organizations: An Empiri-
cal Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementa-
tion”. In Public Administration Review, Vol. 61, No. 6, pp.
693-708.

[25] Wilson C., Hagarthy D. and Gauthier J., 2003. “Results using
the balanced scorecard in the public sector”. In Journal of
Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 53-63.

[26] Guest D. E. 2001. “Human resource management: when
research confronts theory”. In International Journal of Hu-
man Resource Management, Vol. 17, No. 7, pp. 1092-1106.

[27] Kaplan R.S., Norton D. P. 2001. “Transforming the Balanced
Scorecard from Performance measurement to Strategic
Management”: Part I.

[28] Harel D. and Tzafrir N.N. , 1999. The effect of Human Re-
source Management practices on the perceptions of organi-
zational and market performance of the firm. In Human Re-
source Management, Vol. 38, No 3, pp185-200

[29] United States Office of Personnel Management, 2014, “An-
nual Report Common Characteristics of the Government,
Fiscal Year 2013”.

[30] United States Office of Personal Management, 2010, “Fed-
eral Employee Viewpoint Survey”,
www.FedView.opm.gov

Objective: Performance evaluations are utilized to measure employee levels of performance. The purpose of the evaluation is to establish clear expectations regarding performance as well as opportunities to increase growth and development. New employee evaluations should be completed on the 90th day of employment as a 90-day probationary evaluation. All other employees receive an annual performance evaluation.

Description: During the performance evaluation the Manager and the employee will review the jo description of the position that the employee holds. The metrics of the position will be discussed to ensure expectations of the role. Next, review any feedback and/or coaching sessions that occurred throughout the year. Verify if metrics were met, unmet, or were unobtainable. Finally, discuss future goals, such as growth and development, and promotion opportunities.

Actions: Review the metrics of the evaluation which are: 1.0 Unsatisfactory, 2.0 Inconsistent Performer, 3.0 Valued Performer, 4.0 Star Performer, and 5.0 Orchestrator of Excellence. Review the score of the self-evaluation provided by the employee. Then review the scores provided by the Manager of the employee.

Measures: Each section of the evaluation is broken into categories that align with the mission and values of the organization. Review the rates, feedback, coaching notes, disciplinary action, or accolade. Determine whether the employee met or did not meet by being categorized by: 1.0 Unsatisfactory, 2.0 Inconsistent Performer, 3.0 Valued Performer, 4.0 Star Performer, and 5.0 Orchestrator of Excellence. If the employee scores 1.0 Unsatisfactory, 2.0 Inconsistent Performer, a discussion must be including either a change in behavior or an alignment to meet goals as well as an action plan to ensure the employee is on track.

A balanced scorecard is necessary for an organization to ensure the overall performance as well as supporting the success of the metrics in place. The scorecard is considered to be strategic planning that organizations utilized to communicate what is to be accomplished, prioritizing, and measurement of targets. According to Gesuele & Romanelli (2015), “We use a balanced scorecard approach in terms of innovation, learning and growth perspective in order to verify that measurement performance methodologies may have a positive impact on employees’ perceptions about the organizational performance.” (pg.28).

In the performance management process, employees are highlighted for their contributions to goals which allow for organizations to meet their strategic objectives. This allows for stakeholders to measure and assess the capability of organizations and their obligations. According to n.d (2019) “It’s a necessary juggling act: Running a successful company is all about trying to keep many people as happy as possible.” “No matter what the owner or leadership of a company thinks, if the stakeholders aren’t happy, the company is not succeeding.” (para.1).

Resources

Gesuele, B. & Romanelli, M. (2015, February 10). Human resource measurement: A balanced scorecard approach (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.). Journal of Human Resource Management, 3(2-1), 28-32. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.s.2015030201.14

n.d. (2019, March 14). Council Post: Seven Strategies For Ensuring Stakeholders Are Pleased With Your Company’s Performance. Retrieved February 01, 2021, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2019/03/14/seven-strategies-for-ensuring-stakeholders-are-pleased-with-your-companys-performance/?sh=11da63ef3ca4