Parameter for evaluating the quality of management of the educational institution in relation to the educational process should be considered as the ratio of the quality of education under the current head of the university at time T to the maximum quality of education chosen from all periods and under all heads of the university.

Quality management as a key indicator of the projection processes has a direct impact on the level of socio-economic inequality in the projection finance. Under the socio-economic inequality in this case should be understood the ratio of average overhead wage to the average direct cost of wages. In this case, the direct salary costs include the cost of time of employees of the university directly involved in the education process with customers, while overhead costs include the salaries of managerial staff of the institution, who are not directly related to the clients. Excess of a threshold indicator of socio-economic inequalities could lead to a deterioration of almost all indicators of the quality of the educational process. This pattern should be considered by educational institution managers in conducting various types of reforms. And reduction of the incentive due to inadequate revenue generation of personnel policies lead to reduction of the scientific level of the institution – in the projection potential this leads to negative trends of reduction of the scientific and methodological base and escalation of conflicts in the socio-economic sphere.

The “finance” projection includes a measure of opportunity costs of the institution related to the shortage of customers and their sifting during the learning process.

The last projection “potential” includes indicators of socio-economic sphere and the sphere of management, and shows the direction of application of strategic efforts to improve the quality of the educational process. The potential includes:
– increase of the level of scientific personnel (teachers);
– reserve of quality of management;
– reserve of quality of education.

The management sphere includes the quality of management, as well as reserve of education quality and quality of management. An important aspect in the implementation of management and decision-making regarding the educational process is the interaction of socio-economic and managerial spheres. Developmant of the strategy and vision of the educational establishment belongs to the management sphere, and their implementation to the socio-economic sphere. Reforms can be implemented both in evolutionary and revolutionary way: if the threshold of socio-economic inequalities is not exceeded, reforms are performed in an evolutionary way. Otherwise it is necessary to create a new management team that can more effectively motivate staff to improve the quality of the educational process. On this basis, it should be noted that the value of non-profit, in
particular educational institutions are its employees, which actions primarily influence the full range of quality of education.

Thus, we can conclude that the balanced scorecard allows the institution to identify and assess its goals and strategies, to develop a more correct vision and mission based on a purely social nature of the educational process that constitute the main value of the higher educational institution as a non-profit organization.



 The value of strategic planning and management in the public sphere is obvious to all. But the simple transfer model of the BSC from the scope of business in the area of public administration would be too simple a solution, and would claim the status of “proprietary recipe”. In the example it was considered the need to adapt to the specific logic of BSC to the scope of non-profit organization. BSC is an effective management tool only if it is used in conjunction with other management tools. For example, the goals formulated in the BSC should be included in the harmonization of objectives and indicators used in the reporting system.

Effective implementation of the BSC assumes quite strict phasing, as well as organizational, methodological and analytical support to this process from both top management and executive managers of lower rank.

Leave a Reply