This article argues that the balanced scorecard model developed by Kaplan and Norton can be adapted and applied to the TUIK (Turkish Statistical Institute). The central proposition is that the model can be effectively tailored to fit TUIK’s specific organizational needs, aligning the dimensions and performance indicators with its vision, mission, and operational objectives. The study proposes that the number and nomenclature of these dimensions can vary depending on the functions and goals of each organizational unit within TUIK. By extending the foundational principles of the model, this research aims to offer a context-sensitive approach to performance measurement, which can contribute to enhanced strategic management practices at TUIK. In this regard, the study aims to develop a model for evaluating institutional performance at TUIK through the implementation of the balanced scorecard, with a specific focus on constructing a balanced scorecard for the Department of Demographic Statistics (DEID). The research findings indicate the feasibility of establishing a model predicated on the balanced scorecard for performance evaluation within TUIK. The study offers both theoretical and practical insights, contributing to the institution’s strategic management and informing future research in the domain.
AltunbasM. (2015). Dengeli Olcum Karnesinin (Balanced Scorecard) Kamu Sektorunde Uygulanması. Uzmanlık Tezi. Calısma ve Sosyal Guvenlik Bakanlığı.
2.
ArthurW. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131. https://doi.org//10.2307/2234208
3.
AsaY. (2011). Kamu Kurumlarında Surdurulebilir Etkinliğin Kontrolu: Balanced Scorecard ile Kurumsal Performansın Olcumu ve Kutahya İli Nufus Mudurluklerinde Bir Uygulama. Doktora Tezi. Dumlupınar Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu.
4.
AščićA.SkeloŽ. (2017). Utilization of balanced scorecard as a management tool in statistical institutes. Sarajevo Business and Economics Review, 35, 181–201.
5.
BrownD. M.LaverickS. (1994). Measuring corporate performance. Long Range Planning, 27(4), 89–98. https://doi.org//10.1016/0024-6301(94)90059-0.
6.
BuyukK. (2009). Stratejik Performansın Olculmesi ve Gelistirilmesinde Kurumsal Basarı Karnesi ile Faaliyet Raporlarının Karsilastirilmasi: Tepebası Belediyesi Orneği. Doktora Tezi. Sakarya Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu.
7.
ChanY. C. L. (2004). Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecards: A survey of municipal governments in the USA and Canada. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(3), 204–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550410530144
8.
DavidF. (2005). Strategic management: Concepts& case studies. Prentice Hall.
9.
DavidP. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332–337. https://doi.org//10.4236/ss.2011.24042.
10.
DavidP. A. (2000). Path dependence, its critics, and the quest for ‘historical economics’. In GarrousteP.IoannidesS. (Eds.), Evolution and path dependence in economic ideas: Past and present (pp. 15–40). Edward Elgar.
11.
De VasconcelosC. R.de CarvalhoR. S. M. C.de MeloF. J. C.de MedeirosD. D. (2022). Improving quality in public health service: An integrated approach to the Kano model and the balanced scorecard. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 35(2), 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2022.2066598
12.
DesslerG. (2014). Fundamentals of human resource management. Pearson.
13.
DickinsonT.TamS.-M. (2004). Measuring client servicing in the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS): A balanced scorecard approach. Statistical Journal of the United Nations, 21, 7–16.
14.
DuraiP. (2012). Human resource management. Pearson.
15.
EsidirH. (2009). TUİK Bolge Mudurluğu Calısanlarının Performansının Değerlendirilmesi Uzerine Bir Calısma. Uzmanlık Tezi. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu.
16.
GomesR. C.de AzevedoC. B. (2024). Balanced scorecard: A literature review to trace its trajectory in the public administration domain. International Journal of Public Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2024.2376053.
GunduzalpS. (2010). Egitim Mufettisi, Yonetici ve Oğretmen Goruslerine gore Kurumsal Karne Sisteminin İlkoğretim Okullarında Uygulanabilirliği. Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Fırat Universitesi.
19.
GurbuzS.SahinF. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde Arastırma Yontemleri. Seckin Yayıncılık.
20.
HugleT.GrekV. (2023). Digital transformation of an academic hospital department: A case study on strategic planning using the balanced scorecard. PLOS Digit Health, 2(11), e0000385. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000385.
21.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70, 71–79.
22.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (1996). Translating strategy into action the balanced scorecard. Harvard Business School Press.
23.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (1997). Why does business need a balanced scorecard?Journal of Cost Management, 11, 5–10.
24.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (2002). Strategy maps. Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes (pp. 1–19). Harvard Business Review.
25.
KoseogluO.SenM. L. (2014). Kamu Sektorunde Performans Yonetimi: Politikalar, Uygulamalar ve Sorunlar. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 9(2), 113–136. https://doi.org/10.17550/aid.40671
26.
KumariN. (2011). Balanced scorecard for superior organizational performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(5), 73–86.
27.
LawsonR.DesrochesD.HatchT. (2007). Scorecard best practices: Design, implementation, and evaluation. John Wiley & Sons.
28.
LuegR. (2015). Strategy maps: The essential link between the balanced scorecard and action. Journal of Business Strategy, 36(2), 34–40.
29.
LynnJ.LaurenceE. (1998). The new public management: How to transform a theme into a legacy. Public Administration Review, 58(3), 231–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/976563.
MathysN. J.ThompsonK. R. (2006). Using the balanced scorecard: Lessons using the balanced scorecard: Lessons learned from the U.S. postal service and the defense finance and accounting service. IBM Center for The Business of Government.
32.
MerriamS. B. (2015). Nitel Arastırma Desen ve Uygulama icin Bir Rehber (3b ed.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
33.
NivenP. R. (2006). Balanced scorecard step by step maximizing performance and maintaining results. Wiley.
34.
NorthcottD.Ma’amora TaulapapaT. (2012). Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organizations: Issues and challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 25(3), 166–191. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551211224234
35.
OymanS. (2009). Stratejik Yonetim Surecinde Performans Olcumu ve Dengeli Sonuc Kartı Uygulaması: Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası icin Bir Değerlendirme. Uzmanlık Tezi. Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası.
36.
Ozkal Sayanİ.Guneser DemirciA. (2018). Kamu Personelinin Değerlendirilmesinde Performans Sistemine Gecis Surecinin Analizi. Ankara Universitesi SBF Dergisi, 73(2), 667–700. https://doi.org/10.1501/SBFder_0000002513
37.
PekelB. (2009). Anketor Etkinliğini Olcmede Performans Kriterleri Belirleme: TUİK Van Bolge Mudurluğunde Bir Uygulama. Uzmanlık Tezi. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu.
38.
PudjonoA. N. S.WibisonoD.FatimaI.RachmaniaI. N. (2024). Examining the causal relationships of balanced scorecard perspectives on organizational performance improvement: A case study from the Indonesian public sector. GATR Accounting and Finance Review, 8(4), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.35609/afr.2024.8.4(3).
39.
RautR. W.SahasrabuddheA. V. (2021). Performance evaluation and comparative analysis of selected public and private sector banks in India using balanced scorecard. Prajnan, 50(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.35609/afr.2024.8.4(3)
40.
RingP. S.PerryJ. L. (1985). Strategic management in public and private organizations: Implications of distinctive contexts and constraints. The Academy of Management Review, 10(2), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/257969.
41.
RoestH. (1987). The balanced scorecard: A tool for strategic management and performance evaluation. Journal of Business Performance, 15(3), 163.
42.
StefanescuD.SilivestruM. (2012). Balanced scorecard-instrument of strategic planning. Romanian Statistical Review, 2, 24–39.
43.
SubasıT. (2013). Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletisim Kurumunda Dengeli Olcum Kartı (DOK) Uygulaması. Uzmanlık Tezi. Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletisim Kurumu.
44.
TUIK. (2019). Stratejik Plan (2019-2023), Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Baskanlığı Yayını Ankara.
45.
TUIK. (2024). Stratejik Plan (2024-2028), Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Baskanlığı Yayını Ankara.
46.
UcariM. S. (2015). Bolgesel Performans Olcumunun İs Surclerine Etki Analizi: Kocaeli Bolge Mudurluğu. Uzmanlık Tezi. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu.
47.
Van DoorenW.BouckaertG.HalliganJ. (2015). Performance management in the public sector. Routledge.
48.
VoelkerK. E.RakichJ. S.FrenchG. R. (2001). The balanced scorecard in healthcare organizations: A performance measurement and strategic planning methodology. Hospital Topics, 79(3), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00185860109597908
49.
World Bank. (2024). World development report 2024: The middle-income trap. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-2078-6. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO.
50.
YıldırımA.SimsekH. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Arastırma Yontemleri. Seckin Yayıncılık.
51.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research design and methods. Sage.
