, Dr., Professor, Department of Commerce and Business Administration, India
, Dr., Professor and Director, School of Business Studies, Punjab Agricultural University, India
Purpose. The purpose of the study is to analyze the holistic performance of NTPC – A Maharatna Company by using balance scorecard to view the effectiveness of NTPC in attaining its core values and business objectives. NTPC has classified their objectives into business performance, financial performance, customer orientation, R&D, performance management and therefore the four perspectives of balance scorecard were ideal to analyze performance measurement and management of NTPC
Research Methodology and Approach. The present research uses descriptive and analytical approach of measuring performance of NTPC by using four perspectives of Balance Scorecard namely- financial, customer, internal processes and innovation & learning. The annual reports, financial analyses, financial websites and newspapers are used as a secondary data source to analyze the performance.
Findings. It was observed that NTPC has defined its objective statement with utmost clarity to enhance the performance with measurable goal. With the application of balance scorecard it was found that there is a positive association of companies overall objectives with that of its performance.
Implications. It would provide a holistic view of the overall performance outcome and an opportunity to increase qualitative and quantitative performance to create more synergy and alignment of strategies with performance management system.
Keywords: performance measurement and management, Maharatna Companies, public sector enterprises, NTPC, balance scorecard.
JEL Classification: H11.
Cite as: Al. K. Chakrawal, P. Goyal. (2018). Performance Measurement and Management in Public Enterprises in India: A Case Study of NTPC. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 2(3), 28-37. DOI: 10.21272/fmir.2(3).28-37.2018.
- Anand, M., Sahay, B. S., & Saha, S. (2005). Balanced scorecard in Indian companies. Vikalpa, 30(2), 11-26.
- De Bruijn, H. (2002). Performance measurement in the public sector: strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(7), 578-594.
- De Bruijn, H. (2003). Managing performance in the public sector. Routledge.
- Heinrich, C. J. (2002). Outcomes–based performance management in the public sector: implications for government accountability and effectiveness. Public administration review, 62(6), 712-725.
- Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1999). The balanced scorecard for public-sector organizations. Balanced Scorecard Report, 15(11), 1999.
- Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I. Accounting horizons, 15(1), 87-104.
- Kaplan, R. S., Robert, N. P. D. K. S., Davenport, T. H., Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business Press.
- Kaplan,R.S., & Norton,D. P.(1999). The balance scorecard for public-sector organizations.”
- Sharma, D. P., Nair, P. C., & Balasubramanian, R. (2005). Performance of Indian power sector during a decade under restructuring: a critique. Energy Policy, 33(4), 563-576.
- Verbeeten, F. H. (2008). Performance management practices in public sector organizations: Impact on performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(3), 427-454.
- Vine, E. (2005). An international survey of the energy service company (ESCO) industry. Energy Policy, 33(5), 691-704.
- Wang, C. N., Lin, L. C., & Murugesan, D. (2013). Analyzing PSU’s performance: A case from ministry of petroleum and natural gas of India. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2013.