A balanced scorecard can be a helpful tool for strategic management in both the public and private sector. This article analyzed the use of a balanced scorecard in the healthcare sector as organizations and institutions implement the mythology in a day to day clinical laboratory. The article mainly served as a blueprint for setting up a successful balanced scorecard. The strategy for development of a balanced scorecard included theoretical perspective objectives, as well as some indicators and goals with which the monitoring and quantitative measure of the achievements of a strategic plan in a clinical laboratory can be done (Alvarez et al., 2019). The development occurred in the following steps: definition of theoretical objectives of each of the perspectives most used in the management of a clinical laboratory (customers, financial, internal processes and learning) taking into account the vision and the organizational model of the laboratory; creation of a strategic map of perspective objectives; definition of the relevant indicators to follow up on the objectives in a quantitative manner and establishment of the goals(Alvarez et al., 2019). Whether or not the laboratory is a reference laboratory, in which specific and infrequent analysis and health population programs are performed, is another fact to take into account. Many organizations will present results and achievements reached from the use of a study, but have no way to track and obtain quantitative data; which is where the balanced scorecard comes into effect. A balanced scorecard will review indicators and goals for each objective to make navigation more clear.

Assessment Description

Using the GCU Library locate a journal article about the balanced scorecard. In the subject line of your post, include the name of the article that you read. Then, in your initial post, provide a link to the article and a summary followed by your reaction to the article. The summary should be approximately 250 words and the reaction should be approximately 150 words. The summary should describe the major points of the article, and the reaction should demonstrate your interpretation of the article and how you can apply that knowledge. Do not choose an article that one of your classmates has already posted. To participate in follow-up discussion, choose one of the articles that a classmate has posted and provide your own reaction to it. Note: It will be challenging to find a relevant article if you do not use the library.

strategic plan

Article Analysis in 5 Easy Steps

Please include proper citations in your discussion post. Points will be deducted if proper citations are not used.

Review Case 10.32 in your textbook. Using the questions provided as a guide, discuss your suggested strategy(ies) for improving ROI and the steps that the company would have to implement to obtain the desired result(s).

To participate in follow-up discussion, ask questions and post comments regarding classmates’ posts, or respond to follow-up questions posted by the instructor.

Please include proper citations in your discussion post. Points will be deducted if proper citations are not used.

A complete balanced scorecard that includes theoretical objectives for each perspective, as well as uses indicators for the goals to be achieved, can be a very helpful tool for laboratories to monitor quantitative data with. It will help them measure the degree of achievement to each objective that was set forth and define a strategic plan for the future. This model is adaptable to any organizational model as the study proved the laboratory’s ability to strategically adjust and bend its mission. The result of having a flexible balanced scorecard allowed the clinical hospital to generate self-financing to carry out its initiatives they set forth, instead of relying on outside financers to bank roll riskier initiatives that most likely would not have been approved.


Alvarez, L., Soler, A., Guiñón, L., & Mira, A. (2019). A balanced scorecard for assessing a strategic plan in a clinical laboratory. Biochemia Medica29(2), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2019.020601