A MODAL BASED ON PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND GOOD GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES IN NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: OVERALL PERFORMANCE SCORECARD MODAL

Year 2014, Issue: 3, 7 - 36, 24.11.2015

Yaşar Köse Hakan Karabacak , Murat Atik

Abstract

In the performance measurement of non-profit organizations, performance indicators remain inefficient so it’s essential to specify non-financial measurement criterion and create a management system based on these criterion for these organizations. In this study, “Overall Performance Scorecard Model” has been developed for performance measurement of non-profit organizations. The first and basic point which makes the model different is that the assessment criteria in performance report, which are termed as performance components or dimensions, are based on good governance principles. The basic good governance principles used in the model are as follows: Accountability, efficiency and productivity, responsiveness, participation, transparency and strategic planning. The model is capable of gathering all proposed approaches for performance measurement of non-profit organizations under a single roof and it also has the elasticity to be adapted in accordance with these organizations’ needs.

Keywords

Non-Profit Organizations, Performance Measurement, Overall Performance Scorecard

KÂR AMACI GÜTMEYEN ORGANİZASYONLARDA PERFORMANS ÖLÇÜMÜ VE İYİ YÖNETİŞİM İLKELERİNE DAYANAN BİR MODEL ÖNERİSİ: BÜTÜNSEL PERFORMANS KARNESİ

Abstract

Kâr amacı gütmeyen organizasyonların performans ölçümünde finansal performans göstergelerinin yetersiz kalması nedeniyle, bu organizasyonlar için finansal olmayan ölçütlerin belirlenmesi ve bu ölçütlere dayalı bir performans yönetim sisteminin kurulması gereklidir. Bu çalışmada kâr amacı gütmeyen organizasyonlarda performans ölçümüne ilişkin “Bütünsel Performans karnesi Modeli” geliştirilmiştir. Önerilen bu modeli farklılaştıran ilk nokta, performans bileşenleri veya boyutları olarak adlandırılan performans karnesindeki değerlendirme ölçütlerinde iyi yönetişim ilkelerinin temel alınmasıdır. Modelde kullanılan iyi yönetişimin temel ilkeleri; hesap verebilirlik, etkinlik ve verimlilik, cevap verebilirlik, katılımcılık, şeffaflık ve stratejik planlama olarak tespit edilmiştir. Önerilen Performans karnesi Modeli kâr amacı gütmeyen organizasyonların performans ölçümüne yönelik olarak önerilen tüm yaklaşımları tek bir çerçeve altına alma ve bu organizasyonların gereksinimleri doğrultusunda uyarlanabilme esnekliğine sahiptir. 

Keywords

Kâr Amacı Gütmeyen Organizasyonlar, Performans Ölçümü, Bütünsel Performans Karnesi

References

• • ABDEL-MAKSOUD, A., DUGDALE, D. ve LUTHER, R., (2005), “Non-Financial Performance Measurement in Manufacturing Companies”, The British Accounting Review 37, ss.261–297.
• • ADAMS, C. ve ZUTSHİ, A., (2004), “Corporate Social Responsibility: Why Business Should Act Responsibility and Be Accountable”, Australian Accounting Review 14(3), ss.31–39.
• • AZOFRA, V., PRİETO B. ve SANTİDRİAN A., (2003), “The Usefulness of a Performance Measurement System in The Daily Life Of An Organisation: A Note on a Case Study”, The British Accounting Review 35, ss.367–384.
• • BAŞBAKANLIK AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ GENEL SEKRETERLİĞİ , (2002), Proje Dönüsü Yönetimi El Kitabı, Ağustos 2002.
• • COŞKUN, A., (2006a), “STK’ların Stratejik Performans Yönetiminde Yeni Bir Yaklaşım: Performans Karnesi”, Sivil Toplum, 4 (15), ss.103-117.
• • COŞKUN, A., (2006b), “Stratejik Performans Yönetiminde Performans Karnesi Kullanımı: Türkiye’deki Sanayi İşletmeleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma”, MÖDAV Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, Yıl: 8, Sayı: 1, ss.127-153.
• • CUTT, J., (1998), “Performance Measurement in Non-Profit Organizations: Integration and Focus within Comprehensiveness, Asian Journal of Public Administration”, Vol.20,No.1, 3-29.
• • CUTT, J. ve MURRAY, V., (2000), Accountability and Effectiveness Evaluation in Non-profit Organizations, Routledge.
• • EUSKE, K.J., (1984), Management Control: Planning, Control, Measurement, and Evaluation, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.,ss.136.
• • EVANS, J.R., (2004), “An Exploratory Study Of Performance Measurement Systems And Relationships With Performance Results”, Journal of Operations Management, 22, ss.219–232.
• • GRAHAM, J., AMOS, B. ve PLUMPTRE, T., (2003), Principles for Good Governance in the 21st Century, Policy Brief No. 15 - Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada.
• • HOQUE, Z., (2003), “Total Quality Management and the Balanced Scorecard Appoach: A Critical Analysis of Their Potential Relationships and Directions for Research”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 14, ss.553–566.
• • JAZAYERİ, M. ve SCAPENS, R.W., (2008), “The Business Values Scorecard Within Bae Systems: The Evolution Of A Performance Measurement System”, The British Accounting Review 40, ss.48–70.
• • JOHNSON, H.T. ve KAPLAN, R.S., (1987), Relevance Lost: The Rise And Fall Of Management Accounting, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass.
• • KAPLAN, R. S. ve NORTON, D.P., (1996a), Translating Strategy into Action: The Balanced Scorecard, Harvard Business School Press.
• • KAPLAN, R. S. ve NORTON, D.P., (2004a), Plotting Success With ‘Strategy Maps, Optimize, 2, ss.61-64.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (2004b), Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets Into Tangible Outcomes, Harvard, Business School Press.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (1996b), “Linking The Balanced Scorecard To Strategy”, Management Review 39 (1), ss.53–79.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (2000), “Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it”, Harvard Business Review 78 (5), ss.167–176.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (1992), “The Balanced Scorecard As A Strategic Management System”, Harvard Business Review 70, (January–February), ss.61–66.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (2001), “Transforming The Balanced Scorecard From Performance Measurement To Strategic Management”, Accounting Horizons. Part I: 15(1), ss.87–104; Part II, 15(2), ss.147–160.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (1993), “Putting The Balanced Scorecard To Work”, Harvard Business Review 71 (5), ss.134–147.
• • KAPLAN, R.S. ve NORTON, D.P., (1996c), “Using The Balanced Scorecard As Strategic Management System”, Harvard Business Review 74 (1), ss.75–85.
• • KÖSEOĞLU, M.A., (2005), Kamu İktisadi Teşebbüslerinde Performans Ölçümü, Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı Müsteşarlığı, Uzmanlık Tezi.
• • MALİNA, M.A. ve SELTO, F.H., (2004). “Choice And Change Of Measures In Performance Measurement Models”, Management Accounting Research 15, ss.441–469.
• • MALİYE BAKANLIĞI., (2003), İyi Yönetişimin Temel Unsurları, Ayrıntı Basımevi, Ankara.
• • PAPALEXANDRİS, A., IOANNOU, G., PRASTACOS, G. ve SODERQUİST, K.E., (2005), “An Integrated Methodology For Putting The Balanced Scorecard Into Action”, European Management Journal Vol. 23, No. 2, ss.214–227.
• • PEKKAYA, M. ve ÇOLAK, N., (2013), “Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Meslek Seçimini Etkileyen Faktörlerin Önem Derecelerinin AHP İle Belirlenmesi”, International Journal of Social Science, Vol. 6,Issue 2, ss.797‐818.
• • RAMACHANDRAN, S., (2008), Good Governance In Non Profit Organizations, Icfai University Press.
• • ROBERT, H.C. ve LANGFIELD-SMITH K., (2007), “Multiple Perspectives of Performance Measures European”, Management Journal Vol. 25, No. 4, ss. 266–282.
• • SAYIŞTAY, Sayıştay'ın Performansının Ölçümüne İlişkin Ön Araştırma Raporu, Ankara: Sayıştay Yayını, 2002.
• • SOUISSI, M., (2008), “A Comparative Analysis Between The Balanced Scorecard and The French Tableau de Bord”, International Business & Economics Research Journal, 7(7), ss.83-86.
• • TESEV-Türkiye Ekonomik ve Sosyal Etüdler Vakfı., (2008), İyi Yönetişim El Kitabı, Yayına Hazırlayan Fikret Toksöz, İstanbul.
• • TOKGÖZ, N. ve ÖNCE, S., (2009), “Şirket Sürdürülebilirliği: Geleneksel Yönetim Anlayışına Alternatif”, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, ss.249-275.
• • UNDP – United Nations Development Programme, (1997), Governance for Sustainable Human Development. (http://mirror.undp.org/magnet/policy/, 02.02.2010)
• • White Paper on European Governance., (2001), Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, ss.428.
• • YARALIOĞLU, K., (2004), “Uygulamada Karar Destek Yöntemleri”, İlkem Ofset, İzmir.