***Use the case study as the resource for this assignment***

The term “balanced scorecard” became part of the professional accounting vernacular in the early 1990s. This nontraditional approach to measuring strategic performance was developed by Dr. Robert Kaplan and Dr. David Norton. As the name implies, the goal of the balanced scorecard is to provide stakeholders with a balanced view of the performance of an organization.

For this Assignment, review Case 14-1, “Global Oil” in Chapter 14 of your course text and reflect on the information presented. Consider how the balanced scorecard should be implemented, including how it the results of this implementation might contribute to organizational decision making.

The Assignment:

• Provide a critical analysis of M&R’s implementation of the balanced scorecard, including an identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the program.
• Prepare a response to the following: Was the adoption of the balanced scorecard at M&R responsible for turning around the organization’s financial performance? Explain why or why not.

By Day 7

Submit your Assignment.

General Guidance on Assignment Length:

Your Assignment, due by Day 7, will typically be 2–3 paragraphs in length as a general expectation/estimate for each bullet point. Refer to the rubric for the Week 7 Assignment for grading elements and criteria. Your Instructor will use the rubric to assess your work.

Cases Case 14–1: Global Oil12

In 1995, Global Oil Corporation’s Marketing and Refining (M&R) Division was the fifth largest U.S. refiner with 7,700 Global-branded service stations selling about 23 million gallons per day, or 7 per- cent of the nation’s gasoline. All the service stations are company owned. In 1990, M&R ranked last among its peers in profitability and was annually draining $500 million of cash from the corporation.

In 1993, M&R reorganized from a centralized functional organization (Refineries, Transporta- tion, Warehousing, Retail, and Marketing) into 17 geographic business units (sales and distribu- tion) and 14 service companies. The functional organization was slow to react to changing market conditions and the special customer needs that differed across the country. The new decentralized organization was designed to better focus on the customer. New marketing strategies could be better tailored to local markets by giving local managers more decision-making authority.

A new corporate strategy to focus on the less price-sensitive customer who would not only buy Global gas but also shop in its convenience gas-store outlets was implemented simultaneously with the reorganization. Global’s new strategy was to redesign its convenience stores so they would become a “destination stop,” offering one-stop shopping for gas and snacks.

The old organization used a variety of functional measures: manufacturing cost, sales margins and volumes, and health and safety metrics. After changing its corporate strategy and organizational struc- ture, M&R decided to change its performance metrics and began investigating the balanced scorecard.

Balanced scorecard (BSC) at M&R M&R formed project teams of managers to design performance metrics for its operations. Thirty-two different metrics were identified. These included Financial (ROA, cash flow, volume growth, etc.), Customer (share of segment, mystery shopper, etc.), Internal (safety incidents, refinery ROA, inven- tory level, etc.), and Learning (strategic skills accumulation, quality of information system, etc.). The “mystery shopper” is a third-party vendor who purchases gas and snacks at each station monthly. During each visit, the mystery shopper rates the station on 23 items related to external appearance, rest rooms, and so forth. A brochure describing the BSC was prepared and distributed to M&R’s 11,000 employees in August of 1994. Extensive meetings with employees explained the new metrics and the BSC concept.

Compensation plans All salaried employees of M&R received up to a 10 percent bonus if Global ranked first among its seven competitors on ROA and earnings per share (EPS) growth. In addition to this existing plan, a new program was added that awarded bonuses of up to 20 percent to managers. The size of the bonus depends on the average performance of three factors:

• Global’s competitive ranking on ROA and EPS growth.

• M&R’s balanced scorecard metrics.

• Own business unit’s balanced scorecard.

In 1995, M&R generated more income per barrel of oil than the industry average, and its ROA exceeded the industry’s average.

Required:

a. Critically evaluate M&R’s implementation of the balanced scorecard. Identify any strengths and weaknesses of the program.

b. Was the adoption of the balanced scorecard at M&R responsible for the turnaround in its financial performance?

12This case is based on R. Kaplan, “Mobil USM&R(A): Linking the Balanced Scorecard,” Harvard Business School Case 9–197–025 (May 7, 1997).

Zimmerman, J. L. (2017). Accounting for decision making and control (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

• Chapter 14, “Management Accounting in a Changing Environment” (pp. 609-633)
  • Case 14-1, “Global Oil” (pp. 649-654)