Wei-Chien Chou, Sheng-Tun Li


The major objective of higher education is to meet the international and local demand for top talent, the core driving force in enhancing its international competitiveness. Since Taiwan is facing increasingly fierce international competition as it begins to open its education market, the government’s "Plan for Developing World-class Universities and Top-tier Research Centers." is aimed at building world-class universities to improve the overall quality of higher education. There is therefore a great need for a set of evaluation criteria and an alignment model to realize the strategic plan of achieving the educational objectives. This paper presents a framework to measure the extent to which the strategic objectives of a top-tier university in Taiwan are aligned with the results obtained through the Balanced Scorecard (BSC). To achieve this, the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques will be used to create a strategic map. With the cause-and-effect relationship extracted from the strategy map, one can discover gaps that exist between the strategic objectives and the present status. Our study conducted a case study on Taiwan’s higher education, using National Cheng Kung University’s implementation of the top-tier university plan as an example.


  1. Asan, E. S., Tanyas, M., 2007. Integrating Hoshin Kanri and the balanced scorecard for strategic management: The case of higher education. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(9), pp.999-1014.
  2. Berler, A., Pavlopoulos, S., and Koutsouris, D., 2005. Using key performance indicators as knowledgemanagement tools at a regional health-care authority level. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, 9(2), pp.184-192.
  3. Chen, S. H., Yang, C. C., and Shiau, J. Y., 2006. The application of balanced scorecard in the performance evaluation of higher education. The TQM Magazine, 18(2), pp.190-205.
  4. Griffiths, J., 2003. Balanced scorecard use in New Zealand government departments and crown entities. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(4), pp.70-80.
  5. Hamid, S., Leen, Y. M., Pei, S. H., and Ijab, M. T., 2008. Using e-balanced scorecard in managing the performance and excellence of academicians. Pacific Asia Conference on Information System (PACIS), Suzhou, China July 3-7 2008.
  6. Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P., 1992. The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70, pp.71-79.
  7. Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P., 2004. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
  8. Karathanos, D., and Karathanos, P., 2005. Applying the balanced scorecard to education. Journal of Education for Business, 80(4), p.222-230.
  9. Lawrence, S., and Sharma, U., 2002. Commodification of education and academic labour using the balanced scorecard in a university setting. Critical Visions on Accounting, 13, p.661-677.
  10. Niven, P. R., 2002. Balanced Scorecard Step by Step. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  11. Oliveira, J., 2001. The balanced scorecard: an integrative approach to performance evaluation. Healthcare Financial Management, 55(5), p.42-46.
  12. Seyed-Hosseini, S. M., Safaei, N., and Asgharpour, M. J., 2006. Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 91(8), p.872-881.
  13. Solano, J., De Ovalles, M. P., Rojas, T., Padua, A. G., Morales, L.M., 2003. Integration of systemic quality and the balanced scorecard, privacy and security in ebusiness. Information Systems Management, Winter Issue, pp.66-81.
  14. Storey, 2002. Performance management in schools: Could the balanced scorecard help?. School Leadership & Management, 22(3), p.321-338.
  15. Tamura, M., Nagata, H., and Akazawa, K., 2002. Extraction and systems analysis of factors that prevent safety and security by structural models. Osaka, Japan. Proceedings of the 41st SICE Annual Conference Tseng, M. L., 2010. Implementation and performance evaluation using the fuzzy network balanced scorecard. Computers & Education, 55(1), p.188-201.
  16. Umashankar, V., and Dutta, K., 2007. Balanced scorecards in managing higher education institutions: an Indian perspective. International Journal of Educational Management, 21(7), p.54-67.
  17. Wu, W. W., and Lee, Y. T, 2007. Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), p.499-507.
  18. Yu, M. L., Hamid, S., Ijab, M. T., and Soo, H. P., 2009. The e-balanced scorecard (e-BSC) for measuring academic staff performance excellence. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 57(6), p.813-828.
  19. Zack, M. H., 1999. Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3), p.125-145.
  20. Ministry of Education, Republic of China (Taiwan), 2011. The Excellent Development of University Education. [online] (Updated 29 June 2006) Avaiable at: <http:// &mp=1> [Accessed 30 Jan 2011]

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Chou W. and Li S. (2011). REALIZING THE STRATEGIC PLAN OF A TOP-TIER UNIVERSITY IN TAIWAN - A Multi-criteria Evaluation and Alignment . In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Business - Volume 1: ICE-B, (ICETE 2011) ISBN 978-989-8425-70-6, pages 31-36. DOI: 10.5220/0003448500310036

in Bibtex Style

author={Wei-Chien Chou and Sheng-Tun Li},
title={REALIZING THE STRATEGIC PLAN OF A TOP-TIER UNIVERSITY IN TAIWAN - A Multi-criteria Evaluation and Alignment},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Business - Volume 1: ICE-B, (ICETE 2011)},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Business - Volume 1: ICE-B, (ICETE 2011)
SN - 978-989-8425-70-6
AU - Chou W.
AU - Li S.
PY - 2011
SP - 31
EP - 36
DO - 10.5220/0003448500310036