Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 218829 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
JMTM
25,8
A method for generating
strategy maps using ANP
Luis Ernesto Quezada and Pedro Ivan Palominos
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Santiago of Chile,
1090 Santiago, Chile, and
Received 12 October 2013 Rosa E. Galleguillos and Alexis H. Olmedo
Revised 1 April 2014 Faculty of Engineering, Andres Bello University, Santiago, Chile
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
15 June 2014
Accepted 24 June 2014
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a method for identifying causal relationships
in a strategy map.
Design/methodology/approach A strategy map is a visual representation of the strategy of
a company, which includes the strategic objectives of a company and the cause-effect relationships
between them. Its network structure facilitates its representation as an analytic network process
(ANP) model. The proposed method starts with a network with all possible relationships and then
it deletes those relationships, which are not important. To do this, it uses the techniques of the
ANP approach.
Findings It was found that ANP is a good tool for modelling a strategy map and for identifying the
important relationships of a strategy map. A study case of a manufacturing is shown to illustrate
how the proposed method can be used in practice.
Practical implications Normally, the cause-effect relationships between strategic objectives are
generated in a subjective way. Even this way of working is widely accepted in practice, some studied
have shown that the declared relationships are not necessarily valid. The proposed method provides
a quantitative tool to establish the relationships between strategic objectives, which are obtained
using a method (ANP) that has a strong conceptual base. This is an indication that the strategy map
obtained represents in a better way the strategy of the company.
Originality/value ANP is a methodology which is used to estimate the priority of nodes with in
a network. In this work ANP is used to estimate the priority of the arcs of the network. The results of
application in a company represent a good indication that the method may be implemented in other
manufacturing companies.
Keywords Balanced scorecard, Strategy map, Analytic network process, Strategic objectives
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The balanced scorecard (BSC) developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992, 1996) is a
performance measurement system which has been very popular in the literature as
well as in practice. According to the authors it has become a strategic management tool
(Kaplan and Norton, 2001a, b).
One of the components of a BSC is the strategy map, which is a representation of the
causal relationships between strategic objectives of the organization. According to
Kaplan and Norton (2004) a strategy map is a representation of the strategy of the firm.
of this paper has concluded that the journal papers and books by Kaplan and Norton do
not address the issue. This is the motivation of the work presented in this paper.
Figure 1 illustrates an example of a strategy map. The nodes represent the strategic
objectives and the directed arcs represent the cause-effect relationships between
strategic objectives. An arc between a strategic objective A and a strategic objective B
means that if the objective A is achieved then objective B may also be achieved.
However, Nrreklit (2000) argues that Kaplan and Norton (1996) are not clear in the
meaning of the concept of causal relationship. She states that more than causal
relationships, what the BSC describes are logical relationships. Nrreklit (2003) also
expresses that some cause-and-effect relationship presented in a BSC may be not true. In
the same direction, Bessire and Baker (2005) state that the relationships of the BSC may be
a plausible chain of events, but the relationships are a simplification of the real world.
This paper presents a quantitative method for identifying the causal relationships
between strategic objectives. It is based on a multi-criteria decision system, the
analytic network process (ANP), which is a generalization of the analytic hierarchy
process (AHP), both developed by Saaty (1994, 2001). Both, ANP and AHP, are
explained briefly below. This paper is an extension of the work developed by Quezada
and Quintero (2011), which used AHP to model a strategy map. The main limitation of
their method is the fact that it can be only applied when the strategy map can be
modelled as a hierarchy. In that circumstance, dependence and feedback cannot
be considered in the model, even they may be present in a BSC.
Quantitative studies have been found in the literature regarding making use of
quantitative models for performance measurement. One is developed by Bititci et al. (2001)
Financial
Perspective
Clients
Perspective
Internal
Processes
Perspective
Growth and
Learning
Figure 1.
Perspective
A strategy map
JMTM who propose a quantitative model for performance measurement system (QMPSM) to
25,8 evaluate strategies. They use the AHP to quantify the relationship between various
factors affecting performance. Sarkis (2003) uses ANP to incorporate more complex
relationships in a way to improve the Bitticis model. Abran and Buglione (2003)
criticize the not existence of a quantitative representation of the perspectives that
would allow a consolidation of the perspectives.
1092 Authors, such as Cheng and Li (2001), Yurdakul (2003), Temur et al. (2007)
and Karpak and Topcu (2010) prioritize performance measures using AHP or ANP.
Yurdakul and Ic (2005) proposed another performance measurement model, which uses
AHP and Techniques for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS),
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
to rank companies within an industry. All these authors propose quantitative models
with a given number of performance measures.
There are papers that use AHP or ANP to model a BSC. Some of them are the works
done by Leung et al. (2006), Huang et al. (2011), Torres et al. (2013), Tseng (2010), Yuksel
and Dagdeviren (2010), Wang and Xia (2009) and Lee et al. (1995). The aim of all these
papers is getting the importance of objectives or strategies in a BSC. None of them
intend to get the importance of the causal relationships.
As stated above, this work uses the ANP. In all the papers in which AHP and ANP
have been used in performance measurement, the objective has been to find the priority
of the nodes of the model, but in this case the objective is to find the priorities of the arcs
(relationships). The advantage of using ANP is that it has a strong conceptual and
mathematical base and has been subject to many studies. ANP not only involves
complex calculations of matrices, but it is also based on a strong conceptual base in
which the behaviour of decision makers has been considered (Saaty, 1994, 2001).
Only few studies address the issue of designing a strategy map. One was the
conceptual method proposed by Kunc (2008). The method is based on systems thinking
(Senge, 1999) to develop causal relationships and to understand them. He emphasizes
the importance of the use of cause-effects relationships in performance measurement
systems. He also, in response to those authors that have criticized the BSC and strategy
maps, establishes that they have not made any proposal to overcome those criticisms.
On a different approach, Jassbi et al. (2011) and Wu (2012) use the Decision Making
Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) technique to create a strategy map.
However, their studies have some limitations. Even though Jassbi et al. (2011) develop
their method, they do not explain how to derive the strategy map after applying
DEMATEL. In the case of Wu (2012), the strategy map he presents does not meet the
conceptual relationships that should exist in a strategy map.
2. The method
2.1 ANP representation of a BSC
The proposed method aims at identifying the causal relationships of a strategy map of a
BSC. For doing this, the method uses the ANP to model the strategy map. Basically, what
the method does is to estimate the importance of the relationships and then it selects
those relationships that are considered as important according to a defined criterion.
ANP is an extension of AHP. In the case of AHP, the decision problem has to be
represented as a hierarchy, limitation that is removed in ANP. An ANP model consists
of a network of nodes which are grouped into clusters.
In the case of this research, clusters represent the perspectives of a BSC, nodes
represent the strategic objectives and arcs represent the cause-effect relationships.
Figure 2 shows the ANP model associated to the strategy map of Figure 1. It should be
Generating
Financial
Perspective
strategy maps
using ANP
Clients
Perspective 1093
Internal
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
Processes
Perspective
Growth and
Learning
Perspective Figure 2.
ANP model of a BSC
noted that the arcs in the ANP model are in the opposite direction than those in the
strategy map.
This work assumes that the organization has defined the strategic objectives of the
firm previously and has classified them into the BSC perspectives. The objective of
qthe method is to find those causal relationships between the strategic objectives.
For doing this, the method starts with a network that includes all possible arcs and
then those which are not important are eliminated from the network, resulting in
a strategy map of the firm.
Cluster A Z
Cluster B Figure 3.
X Y Nodes and clusters
JMTM It is necessary to point out that the direction of arrows is important. In this case,
25,8 an arrow going from node Z to node X means than in the strategy map objective
X affects objective Z.
Let:
wnm
ij is the importance of node i of Cluster n in relation to node j of Cluster m, 8 i, j,
n, m; and Wnm {wnm j
ij }i is the block of priorities of Cluster n in relation to Cluster m.
1094 All the blocks Wnm are input into what is called supermatrix. ANP calculate
the limiting power of the supermatrix, leading to a limiting supermatrix containing
the global priorities of the nodes within Clusters.
Let:
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
It means that the sum of the priority of all the nodes within a Cluster is 1.
The supermatrix has the structure shown in Table I. In the last row, the priorities of
the nodes have been included. Due to the fact that a BSC has four perspectives, four
Clusters have been considered, even though more perspectives may be considered.
m1 m2 m3 m4
the importance of the relationships. AHP and ANP are used to estimate the
priority (importance) of every strategic objective of the strategy map, from
the supermatrix.
The matrix of Table I is weighed as follows:
anm m nm nm
ij dj wij bij 8 i; j; n; m 2
bnm
ij is the number of nodes in Cluster n connected to node i of Cluster m.
Finally, the resulting matrix is weighed again in order to normalize the priorities of
all the nodes related to a cluster:
X
enm nm
ij aij = anm
ij 8 i; j; n; m 3
in
The normalization means that:
XX
enm
ij 1 4
n i
Step 5: selection of important relationships. The aim of this step is selecting those
relationships that are important. The method consists in selecting all those
directed arcs that leave a cluster and have an accumulated relative importance
of 80 per cent.
To this the following method is used:
Do m 1
Take all the elements of the blocks Wn1, Wn2, Wn3 and Wn4
Sort all their entries elements in a descending way.
Select those entries of that account for the 80 per cent.
Do m m 1 and repeat cycle until j 4.
Step 6: analysis of network. There is always the possibility that the resulting network
has nodes which are not connected, which is not allowed in a strategy map.
If a node belonging to the Clusters 1, 2 or 3 does not have any relationship with
a subsequent cluster, then its arc with the highest priority is added. If a node
belonging to the Clusters 2, 3 or 4 does not have any relationship with
a preceding cluster then the incoming arc with the highest priority is added.
3. An illustration
3.1 Description
This illustration is based on a real case. The firm is a small printing company. The
products and services include both design and printing. Some specific products are
printing of brochures, books and magazines.
JMTM The company expresses its vision as To become a leading company in Graphical
25,8 Arts in the region by offering a service that exceeds the expectations of our clients and
by innovating in our processes and products. Its mission is expresses as To transform
the communications needs of our clients in images through the design, processes and
technology with the purpose of becoming an important factor in the evolution of means
of communication.
1096 A SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis along with the
mission and the vision of the company has allowed the definition of the strategic
objectives, which has been classified into the four dimensions of the BSC:
(1) Financial perspective:
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
1097
D E F
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
G H I
J K L
Figure 4.
Initial ANP model
Table II.
Comparison matrix of
Improve clients loyalty Increase clients satisfaction Improve quality of service Priority nodes of clients
perspective in relation to
Increase satisfaction 1 4 0.8 objective Improve clients
Improve quality of service 1/4 1 0.2 loyalty
Table III.
Increase income Customers loyalty Satisfaction of clients Quality of service Priority Comparison matrix
of nodes of clients
Customers loyalty 1 1/3 1/3 0.13965 perspective in relation
Satisfaction of clients 3 1 2 0.52784 to objective Increase
Quality of service 3 1/2 1 0.33252 incomes
JMTM 3.4 The supermatrix
25,8 The construction of the supermatrix is the third step of the method. Table IV shows
the supermatrix of the network, which contains all the priorities obtained from the
comparison matrices. As it can be seen, the priority columns of Tables II and III have
been input into columns D and B of the supermatrix, respectively. An entry of
the supermatrix with a value 0 means that there is not an arc associated to the
1098 relationship. For example, in the position (D, J) with a value of 0 means that there is no
directed arc from J to I node.
The Step 4 of the method is the calculation of the importance of the relationships,
which are shown in Figure 5. The figure depicts the supermatrix in which its columns
have been weighed by their corresponding priority (shown in the last row of the
Table IV) and by the number of relationships. For example, the priorities (0.2 and 0.8) of
the Column C are weighed by 0.36975 and 2, while the priorities (0.660761, 0.131112
and 0.208127) in the Column D are weighed by 0.16854 and 3.
The Step 5 is the selection of important relationships. The entries of the matrix
were grouped into the four perspectives of the BSC (clusters) and then they were
normalized, so the sum of all the values within a group is 1.0. In each group, those
entries with an accumulated value of 80 per cent were selected as important.
They have been highlighted in Figure 5. It should be noted that the fourth group
have only zeros, which is because there are not any arc going out from the growth &
learning perspective. As an example, the directed arcs A-H, A-I, B-E, B-F, C-D and
C-I account for the 80 per cent of the accumulated importance of all the entries of
the first group. In Figure 5 the node Mission has been removed, because it was
only considered for taking into account the importance of the nodes of the financial
perspective.
It should be noted that in this application it was not necessary to apply the Step 6
of the method. This is because all the nodes have a connection to some other node.
Figure 6 depicts the ANP model that considers only those arcs representing important
relationships.
A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2
Financial B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4
C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4
D 0 0.139648 0.539615 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clients E 0 0.527836 0.296961 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F 0 0.332516 0.163429 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
G 0.117221 0 0.660761 0.660761 0.208127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal
process H 0.268369 0 0.2 0.131112 0.131112 0.660761 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0.614411 0 0.8 0.208127 0.2081270 0.131112 0 0 0 0 0 0
J 0 0 0 0 0 0.686981 0.708856 0.091403 0 0 0 0
Growth and
learning K 0 0 0 0 0 0.126543 0.17862 0.217639 0 0 0 0
L 0 0 0 0 0 0.186475 0.112524 0.690354 0 0 0 0
Mission M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Priority 0.27731 0.36975 0.33294 0.16854 0.4043 0.42716 0.25216 0.35857 0.38927 0.46298 0.18068 0.35634 0
Supermatrix
Generating
strategy maps
Table IV.
1099
using ANP
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
25,8
1100
JMTM
Figure 5.
Weighed Supermatrix
Financial Clients Internal Processes Growth and Learning
Perspective Node A B C D E F G H I J K L
A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Financial B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D 0 0.03932 0.13683 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clients E 0 0.14864 0.07530 0.15755 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F 0 0.09364 0.04144 0.03938 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
G 0.02475 0 0 0.13013 0.31217 0.10388 0 0 0 0 0 0
Internal Processes H 0.05668 0 0.05071 0.02582 0.06194 0.32982 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0.12977 0 0.20286 0.04098 0.09832 0.06544 0 0 0 0 0 0
J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.17322 0.25417 0.03558 0 0 0
Growth and Learning K 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03190 0.06404 0.08472 0 0 0
L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04702 0.04034 0.26896 0 0 0
Generating
A B C
strategy maps
using ANP
D E F 1101
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
G H I
Figure 6.
Network with important
J K L relationships
Financial
Perspective Reduce costs Increase Increase
income return
Clients Increase
Increase Increase
Perspective quality
clients satisfaction
loyalty
Internal
Processes Increase Improve Improve
Perspective flexibility production productivity
process
Growth and
Learning Improve Figure 7.
Improve work Improve
Perspective motivation
place competencie Strategy map of the firm
6. Conclusions
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
References
Abran, A. and Buglione, L. (2003), A multidimensional performance model for consolidating
balanced scorecards, Advances in Engineering Software, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 339-349.
Bessire, D. and Baker, C.R. (2005), The French Tableau de Bord and the American balanced
scorecard: a critical analysis, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 645-664.
Bititci, U.S., Suwignjo, P. and Carrie, A.S. (2001), Strategy management through quantitative
modelling of performance measurement systems, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 15-22.
Cheng, E. and Li, H. (2001), Analytic hierarchy process, an approach to determine measures for
business performance, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 30-36.
Gomes, C.F., Yasin, M.M. and Lisboa, J.V. (2004), Literature review of manufacturing
performance measures and measurement in an organizational context: a framework
and direction for future research, Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 511-530.
Huang, H., Lai., M. and Lin, L. (2011), Developing strategic measurement and improvement for
the biopharmaceutical firm: using the BSC hierarchy, Expert Systems and Applications,
Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 4875-4881.
Jassbi, J., Mohamadnejad, F. and Nasrollahzadeh, H. (2011), A fuzzy DEMATEL framework
for modelling cause and effect relationships of strategy map, Expert Systems with
Applications, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 5967-5973.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992), The balanced scorecard measures that drive
performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp. 71-79.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), The Balanced Scorecard, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, MA.
Kaplan, R.y. and Norton, D. (2001a), Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance Generating
measurement to strategic management: part I, American Accounting Association, Vol. 15
No. 1, pp. 87-106. strategy maps
Kaplan, R.y. and Norton, D. (2001b), Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance using ANP
measurement to strategic management: part II, American Accounting Association, Vol. 15
No. 2, pp. 147-162.
Kaplan and Norton (2004), Strategic Maps, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. 1103
Karpak, B. and Topcu, I. (2010), Small and medium manufacturing enterprises in Turkey: an
analytic network process for priorizing factors affecting success, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 125 No. 1, pp. 60-70.
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
Kunc, M. (2008), Using systems thinking to enhance strategy maps, Management Decision,
Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 761-778.
Lee, H., Kwak, W. and Han, I. (1995), Developing a business performance evaluation system:
an analytic hierarchical model, The Engineering Economist, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 343-357.
Leung, L.C., Lam, K.C. and Cao, D. (2006), Implementing the balanced scorecard using the
analytic hierarchy process & the analytic network process, Journal of the Operational
Research Society, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 682-691.
Littler, K., Aisthorpe, P., Hudson, R. and Keasey, K. (2000), A new approach to linking strategy
formulation and strategy implementation: An example from the UK banking sector,
International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 411-428.
Neely, A. (2005), The evolution of performance measurement research: developments in the last
decade and a research agenda for the next, International Journal on of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1264-1277.
Nudurupati, S.S., Bititci, U.S., Kumar, V. and Chan, F.T.S. (2011), State of the art literature
review on performance measurement, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 60 No. 2,
pp. 279-290.
Nrreklit, H. (2000), The balanced on the balanced scorecard a critical analysis of some of its
assumptions, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 65-88.
Nrreklit, H. (2003), The balanced scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the
balanced scorecard, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 591-619.
Platts, K.W. (1994), Characteristics of methodologies for manufacturing strategy formulation,
Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 93-99.
Quezada, L.E., Cordova, F.M., Palominos, P., Godoy, K. and Ross, J. (2009), Method for
identifying strategic objectives in strategy maps, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 122 No. 1, pp. 492-500.
Quezada, L. and Quintero, D. (2011), Quantitative model for the design of a strategy map, Proceedings
of the 21st International Conference on Production Research, Stuttgart, 31 July-4 August.
Saaty, T.L. (1994), Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytical
Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
Saaty, T.L. (2001), Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network
Process, 2nd ed., RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
Sarkis, J. (2003), Quantitative models for performance measurement systems-alternate
considerations, International. Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 81-90.
Senge, P.M. (1999), The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization,
Random House, London.
Temur, G.T., Emeksizoghlu, E. and Gozlu, S. (2007), A study of performance measurement
of a plastic packaging organizations system by AHP modelling, PICMET 2007
Proceedings, Portland, OR, 5-7 August.
JMTM Torres, D., Quezada, L., Cordova, F. and Soto, I. (2013), Evaluation of the perspectives of
balanced scorecard through of a multicriteria analysis analytic network process (ANP),
25,8 International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 298-308.
Tseng, M. (2010), Implementation and performance evaluation using the fuzzy network
balanced scorecard, Computers & Education, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 188-201.
Wang, Y. and Xia, Q. (2009), A fuzzy AHP and BSC approach for evaluating performance of
1104 software company based on knowledge management, 1st International Conference on
Information Science and Engineering (ICISE), Nanjing, 26-28 December.
Wu, H.Y. (2012), Constructing a strategy map for banking institutions with key performance
indicators of the balanced scorecard, Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 35 No. 3,
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE At 07:52 13 October 2014 (PT)
pp. 303-320.
Yurdakul, M. (2003), Measuring long term performance of a manufacturing firm using the
analytic network process (ANP) approach, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 4 No. 11, pp. 2501-2529.
Yurdakul, M. and Ic, Y.T. (2005), Development of a performance measurement model for
manufacturing companies using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches, International Journal
of Production Research, Vol. 23 No. 21, pp. 4609-4641.
Yuksel, I. and Dagdeviren, M. (2010), Using the fuzzy analytic network process (ANP) for
balanced scorecard (BSC): a case study for a manufacturing firm, Expert System with
Applications, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 1270-1278.
Further reading
Yang, C.H., Chen, J.C., Shyu, J.Z. and Tzeng, G.H. (2008), Causal relationship analysis based
on DEMATEL technique for innovative policies in SMEs, PICMET 2008 Proceedings,
Cape Town, 27-31 July.