Organizing DB 2

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

263

BALANCED SCORECARD AND ITS

PERSPECTIVES

Pavle BRZAKOVIĆ

Katarina ĐORĐEVIĆ

Miloš MASTILOVIĆ

Abstract: In the contemporary environment whose main feature implies

constant and unpredictable change in competition, companies have to

pay additional attention to the time and resources both financial and

human resources in order to be capable of measuring success

performances in their organization. Such a state of the contemporary

environment has led to the situation where, apart from the financial

aspects of doing business, an organization also has to monitor the other

key performance elements, where traditional financial indicators are

considered as insufficient for the current environment, which makes

performance measurement systems much more complex. The BSC

represents the model that came to light in 1990, when Kaplan and Norton

conducted a research study entitled: “Performance Measurement in the

Organization of the Future.” The main reason why Kaplan and Norton

conducted the research study was the belief that the financial

performance measures were inappropriate for the modern business

operations of organizations given the fact that the then organizations

were exclusively using financial measures to manage their business

operations based upon historical data. The BSC model proposed by

Kaplan and Norton is a management tool supportive of the successful

implementation of corporate strategies. This was discussed and broadly

considered in practice and research. Connecting operational and

nonfinancial corporate activities with the causal chains in the context of

a company’s long-term strategy, the BSC supports the compliance and

management of all corporate activities in compliance with their strategic

relevance. The balanced scorecard enables taking into consideration the

nonmonetary strategic success factors, which exert a significant

influence on an organization’s economic success. The BSC is therefore a

promising starting point which also includes ecological and social

aspects in the main management system of an organization.

Key words: balanced scorecard, BSC model, financial perspective,

internal processes, performances, buyer perspective

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

264

1. Introduction

The Balanced Scorecard (hereinafter referred to in the abbreviated form

BSC) originated from the sports world, namely from boxing. During a

boxing match, the referee uses a card called a scorecard to record a boxer’s

successful and correct hits. In case the match does not end in a knockout,

the referee makes a decision based upon the records in the already

mentioned scorecard.

In today’s contemporary business and business operations, an

organization not only has a goal to survive, but also to win a market game.

Global technological, economic, political, legal, sociocultural and other

factors have had an influence on changes being made faster and on the

modeling of the management methodology and practice as well. There are

authors who refer to a new strategy management theory which would enable

development in the field of creative, proactive strategic contemplations. In

today’s dynamic networked world, the fact that a whole is greater than the

sum of its parts, on the one hand, and that holistic contemplation and such

approached should be replaced by or at least amended with analytical ones,

on the other, are increasingly being accepted (Hamel, 1998). Today’s

environment is becoming more and more dynamic and more and more

uncertain. The availability of an increasingly larger number of pieces of

information, a simple approach to information, as well as oversaturation

with information, have led to the world being reoriented from the industrial

economy to the knowledge economy (Drucker, 1998).

In the contemporary environment, the companies whose main feature

reflects in permanent and unpredictable change in competition have to pay

additional attention to the time and resources, both financial and human

resources, so as to be able to measure success performances in their

organization. Such a state of the contemporary environment has led to the

situation in which the organization also has to monitor the other key

performance elements apart from the financial aspects of doing business,

where the traditional financial indicators are considered as insufficient for

the current environment, which makes performance measurement systems

much more complex. “The traditional financial indicators were good in the

industrial era, but they are obsolete in relation to the necessary

competencies and capacities which today’s enterprises are doing their best

to develop.” (Kaplan & Norton, 1992)

It is also due to the changes in the character of labor and doing business

that there have been changes from labor-intensive towards capital-intensive,

all the way to knowledge-colored-intensive labor and business operations

which we are in today, which has led to the key problem faced by

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

265

management – namely the application of the formulated organizational

strategy (Papalexandris et al., 2005).

The key problem identified in the traditional performance measurement

and management models is a great tendency to manage business operations

only founded on financial performances reporting on past events. Such a

performance measurement and management model is insufficient for the

successful implementation of the organizational strategy (Niven, 2002;

2014).

The BSC is a model which came to light in 1990, when Kaplan and

Norton conducted their research study entitled “Performance Measurement

in the Organization of the Future.” That research study included ten

organizations in which new performance measurement methods were being

studied. The main reason why Kaplan and Norton conducted that research

study was the belief that the financial performance measures were

inappropriate for the modern business operations conducted by

organizations given the fact that the then organizations had exclusively been

using financial measures to manage their business operations based upon

historical data. Because of all the mentioned problems and challenges

encountered by contemporary organizations, a later research study carried

out with a very small number of the organizations included in the survey

assessed the existing approaches to performance measurement as either

efficient or very efficient (Kaplan & Norton, 2001).

The BSC model proposed by Kaplan and Norton represents a

management tool supportive of the successful implementation of corporate

strategies. This was discussed and broadly contemplated in practice and

research. Connecting operational and nonfinancial corporate activities with

causal chains in the context of a company’s long-term strategy, the BSC

supports the reconciliation and management of all corporate activities in

compliance with their strategic relevance. The balanced indicator enables

taking into consideration the nonmonetary strategic success factors that exert

a significant influence on the economic success of the organization. The BSC

is therefore a promising starting point, which also includes ecological and

social aspects in the main management systems of an organization.

Not only is this approach a set of performance indicators, but it also

represents something much more than that – it is a management structure

modelling an integral planning, management and control process. There is

also the need to emphasize the fact that certain segments’ and employees’

goals are brought into harmony with the company’s organizational strategy,

so that the BSC approach is considered as the central and organizational

framework for the whole management process.

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

266

In relation to the first time that it appeared, the BSC approach has

changed so some extent, those changes leading to the yet better integration

of the strategy into the organizational business operations. This new version

of the BSC approach is based upon the continuous improvement of the

approach and encompasses six stages (Kaplan & Norton, 2008):

1. The development of a strategy based upon the internal context, the

external context and the existing strategy.

2. Strategy planning by developing a “Map Strategy.”

3. Bringing to compliance all initiatives with the organizational strategy.

4. Planning operations – the budget and the strategy need to be connected

with each other.

5. Testing and adaptation – whether the strategy is being implemented is

checked and necessary modifications to the same are made.

To be even more precise, the BSC concept is implicative of a balanced

organizational performance measurement system which implies a balance

between short-term and long-term goals, financial and nonfinancial

indicators, the leading indicators, as well as both internal and external

perspectives of the organization’s performances (Kloppenborg & Petrick,

2002).

2. The Four Fundamental Perspectives of the BSC Approach

2.1. The four perspectives of the BSC Approach

The starting basis of the BSC approach methodology implies that no

management is possible of what cannot be measured; in the same way, it is

also impossible to measure what cannot be described (Kaplan et al., 1996;

Anthony et al., 2007).

The BSC model presented by Kaplan and Norton in 1992 is a popular

performance measurement system categorizing the goals of the organization

into the four measurable and operational perspectives: learning and growth,

the financial perspective, the user perspective, and internal business

processes (Kaplan & Norton, 1992).

As has already been mentioned, the BSC approach consists of the

measures of financial successfulness, buyer relationships, internal business

processes, organizational learning and growth. Each business unit in the

organization should develop its own BSC measures so that they should

reflect the organization’s goals and strategies. Some of those measures will

be common to all participants, i.e. to all units, whereas others will be unique

for each business unit (Gascho et al., 2000).

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

267

The four main perspectives of the BSC approach according to

(Hannabarger et al., 2011) are as follows:

1) the financial perspective – it measures the success made by a company

in increasing value for its shareholders, i.e. whether the organizational

strategy does contribute to the improvement of the financial state of the

organization or not;

2) the buyer perspective – it measures how the organizational strategies

and activities oriented towards buyers influence buyer loyalty and

greater profitability;

3) the internal business processes perspective – it measures how the

processes inside the organization should be carried out so as to increase

the efficiency of the organization itself; and

4) the learning and development perspective – it measures how

innovations, employee education and employee satisfaction contribute

to the achievement of strategic goals.

The foregoing four perspectives do not eliminate one another, but they

rather support the goals of different management techniques (such as

strategic planning, Total Quality Management), which were being used in

the years when the BSC appeared for the first time. Each mentioned

perspective contains and is observed through the following four parameters,

namely:

 goals – What is it that needs to be done in order to make a success?

 measures – Which parameters will be selected and monitored in order to

prove a business success?

 target values – Which quantitative values are going to be used to

determine the measurement success?

 initiatives – What is it that needs to be done so as to achieve such set

goals?

According to the BSC concept, all financial and nonfinancial measures

should be included and they should be a part of the information system at

all the organizational levels (Kaplan & Norton, 2006).

The BSC contributes to the improvement of organizational performances,

enabling the existence of the four main elements, which, in comparison with

the other frameworks, make a difference between strategic management and

learning (Kaplan & Norton, 2007):

1. the clarification of the vision and mission for all the employed inside

the organization;

2. the role of communication as a factor of the integration of all the efforts

made by individual business units intended to meet the organizational

goals;

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

268

3. be focused on the importance of the approach as the tool enabling a

revised strategy; and

4. be focused on strategic feedback by including professional types of

knowledge of changes in the competitive environment.

It would be desirable that the BSC approach should be implemented in

all organizations as a performance measuring and improvement system. In

that manner, based upon a set of different financial and nonfinancial

indicators, the organization would be knowledgeable of where it stands in

relation to its set and planned goals (Kaplan & Norton, 1996).

The BSC approach offers a possibility for strategic goals to be

transparent and converted into the goals of all the organizational segments

and all employees as well. A strategy would have to be so defined as to

make it possible for each organizational whole, for each segment, for each

process owner, even for each single employee in it to be able and obliged to

recognize their role in such defined strategic goals, determining their own

goals and activities towards meeting them and improving the very indicators

of organizational performances in that manner.

The BSC approach has the role to contain in itself regular mixes of

measuring and process assessment and additional value for buyers, which may

lead to the financial results previously wanted and planned (Niven, 2010).

2.2. The financial perspective

Generally viewed, financial performance measures can be considered as

the most important component in the application of the company’s strategy.

That is a consequence of the main role of support and organizational

improvement. The goal to be achieved b the main financial perspective

reflects in an increase in shareholder value, growth and profitability.

The construction of a strategy map itself as a rule starts with a financial

strategy. As has already been mentioned, this perspective’s goal is to increase

value for shareholders, to increase income, and to increase organizational

growth. An increase in income can be achieved via penetrating new markets,

offering new products and services, or attracting new buyers, as well as

increasing the value of the existing buyers through strengthening the

relationships by broadening the offer. As a rule, there are two productivity

approaches: the first relates to the improvement of the cost structure by

decreasing direct and indirect costs; the second approach relates to a better

utilization of the existing assets through a decrease in labor and fixed capital.

The financial perspective represents the most important aspect of doing

business given the fact that profit achievement is the most important goal

aspired to by every single organization. The financial perspective of the

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

269

BSC approach consists of the goals and measures that represent the ultimate

measure of successfulness for the organization for the purpose of profit

maximization. The achievement of such goals in the learning and

development perspective, the internal business processes perspective and

the buyer perspective result in the financial perspective, which indicates the

importance of financial performance indicators, but not as the only indicator

of the achievement of organizational goals, for which reason long-term

financial growth may be achieved using the BSC approach to setting goals

which measure such financial performances in combination with a series of

the other activities that can be used to engage employees, improve the

financial processes, the internal processes and the buyer relationships.

If organizations want to achieve the optimal advantage using the BSC

approach, they should also consider the nonfinancial factors, too. If

organizations are only focused on achieving short-term financial outcomes,

that might lead to that organization only developing short-term goals and

ignoring long-term value and investments, simultaneously also neglecting

the significance of intellectual and intangible assets, whose main role

reflects in organizational development (Kaplan et al., 1996). It is indicative

that some among the applicable financial measures are as follows: gross

marge percentage, cost reduction in key areas, investment return and

invested capital return (Kaplan et al., 1996; Collis et al., 2012).

2.3. The buyer perspective

In the last few years, the majority of organizations have developed their

own vision based on the own buyer, given the fact that the buyer focus and

satisfaction are considered to be important for any sector. The basic

organizational goal based upon the buyer perspective is offering excellent

services, an excellent quality and the provision of buyer satisfaction so that

business operations would be able to maintain a good reputation amongst

them (Amaratunga et al., 2000).

The main leading indicator of this perspective is meeting key user, i.e.

key buyer needs and expectations. Yet another factor of importance which all

business entities have to consider is ensuring that all the products and services

are delivered in time and that market circumstances are so classified to enable

the measuring of a share in particular sectors (Kaplan et al., 1996).

The buyer perspective is focused on the buyer’s opinion about the

organization and about how the organization wants to be seen by buyers

(Norreklit, 2000). Buyer satisfaction is a priority for many organizations,

especially today, when the business environment is even more competitive and

can act as a very important, even key, performance indicator, which testifies to

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

270

the efforts made by the organization to be yet more successful (Anderson &

Sullivan, 1993). When defining a strategy, it is very important that the market

segment and the buyer segment, as well as their wishes with respect to prices,

the quality, functionality, etc. should be defined through market research. The

organizations that opt for performance excellence have to be very careful about

the competition’s prices, product and service quality, and the quick realization

of the orders made and delivery within the deadline. A personal approach to

the buyer (user) requires a quality relationship with the buyer through an

exceptional service level and product offer. If the product and service

leadership has already been selected, the strategy must be redirected towards

such product and service functionality, features and total performance.

There are usually the main four concerns on the user’s part related to a

product or service offered by an organization, those concerns being the time,

the quality, the performances and the service, and the costs. For the reason of

that fact, the organization has to bring to compliance its goals according to

these four elements, and then to have these goals transformed into special

measures.

2.4. The internal processes perspective

Internal process can be used to categorize buyers’ and the

organization’s goals. This is achieved by measuring the company’s

processes with the aim to achieve the best performance outcome.

Conducting the internal process perspective, customer satisfaction and

financial strategic goals can be achieved (Kaplan et al., 1996).

Organizational process can also be observed through the use of the BSC

approach, and they can ensure that results will be sufficient, i.e. satisfactory.

There are two main differences between the traditional approach and the

BSC style when performance measurement is concerned. The main two

differences are as follows according to (Amaratunga et al., 2000):

- the main method used in the traditional approaches pertained to

observing and developing the existing processes, whereas the BSC

approach generates new processes, which enable the organization to

overcome meeting financial goals and clients’ goals;

- in order to introduce new products and services, the BSC approach

integrates innovative processes so as to increase the outcome of the

introduction of novel products and services.

The goals of this perspective are usually set after the financial

perspective and the buyer perspective, since this element de facto identifies

the processes critical for the achievement of buyers’ and the owners’ goals,

thus also creating value for the organization itself.

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

271

The connectedness of the processes and buyers is very important, since

there are two big transitions signalized here, namely the transition from the

internal (the employees, the atmosphere, the processes) towards the external

(clients), and from the intangible (know-how) towards the tangible

(outcomes with buyers and financial rewards). Outcomes with buyers

signalize “what?” and the internal processes give the answer to the question

“how?” to have it strategically conducted (Niven, 2010).

Financial gains founded on improved business processes may appear in

several stages. Stage one is a cost reduction which appears due to the

improvement of business processes. It is in this stage that short-term gains

for the organization are generated. Stage two represents income growth

based on a deepened relationship with buyers, and it leads to the

improvement of the financial result in the medium term. Stage three implies

innovativeness, which may lead to long-term income and a profit

improvement. For that reason, an organization should implement all the

three stages in the improvement of its business processes.

2.5. The learning and development perspective

The fact that the learning and development perspective is the weakest

perspective in the BSC approach has been recognized as such. As an

executive body has described it, learning and the growth perspective have for

many years now been “the black hole of the BSC.” Although companies had

generic measures for their employees, such as worker satisfaction and moral

for example, there was not one single company that had the metrics to

measure and connect their employees’ capabilities with the organizational

strategy. A few scientists have done research in the connection between the

improvement of human resources and the improvement of financial

performances (Becker et al., 1998; Huselid, 1995).

According to Kaplan Norton, the learning and growth perspective can

be divided into the two main parts (Kaplan & Norton, 1996):

- employee goals: employee competencies can be improved using a

training program. Also, employee productivity and retention are

achieved through the personal satisfaction they will be provided with by

a suitable environment for them to perform their activities and work in.

- the system processes and goals: this aspect is focused on the

improvement of the practical infrastructure of the organization, so that

permanent and continuous learning can improve the information

management ability (for example, communication skills, the data

structure and databases).

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

272

The BSC approach highlights the importance of investing in the human

potential and directs measurements towards the three basic indicators,

according to (Podrug et al., 2012):

1. employee satisfaction and their motivation represent a precondition for

the improvement of the quality, productivity and buyer satisfaction;

2. employee retention represents the task the organization has to retain

those employees with respect to whom the organization has a long-term

interest. In the long run, the organization invests in its employees, so

their leaving the organization would mean a loss of its intellectual

capital.

3. Employee productivity is measured by the manufactured product or

service per employee. A product or service can be measured by means

of physical measures (the number of products per employee, the

number of the miles travelled, etc.) or by means of financial measures

(income per employee, a profit per employee, additional value per

employee, etc.).

The learning and development perspective is the most neglected one in

organizations. An organization’s growth and development are impossible to

achieve without employees. Employee satisfaction is most frequently

measured by filling out anonymous questionnaires or surveys at the level of

the organization as a whole. The greater employee satisfaction, the better

employee performance, which can be achieved in numerous manners:

taking part in the organization’s campaigns, providing them with

opportunities to meet personal goals, a quality working environment, a good

internal communication. Employees are aware of the organization’s

common vision, mission and strategy, so they do completely understand it

and they do identify their own goals with the organization’s goals (Atkinson

et al., 2007; 2010).

It can be concluded that, in order to achieve ambitious goals in the first

three perspectives of the BSC approach, they will depend on the

organizational abilities of the learning and growth perspective, which are

the driver of excellent achievements according to (Kaplan & Norton, 2010).

2.6. Conclusion

The strategy of the BSC approach in nonprofit organizations is retained

at the heart of the system irrespective of the activity. Nonprofit

organizations, however, often have no clearly and precisely defined

strategy, especially in relation to the time component. While profit

organizations are trying to define and implement a strategy, nonprofit ones

are turning to creating plans and programs for securing the budget. As a

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

273

result of that, nonprofit organizations are primarily focused on the internal

measurements of efficiency and quality within the framework of the

available funds, frequently forgetting the purpose of the existence and the

final goal (a service to clients), for which reason the mission (as the most

important driver) is put at the top of the BSC card. Yet, it is clear that

nonprofit organizations are in need for strategic goals which first clearly

define the reasons for the existence of that organization, and only ultimately

describe the priorities which the organization has brought itself in

compliance with so as to achieve and perfect its own mission. Given the

obligation to permanently improve itself through the defined mission and

strategic goals, the strategy has yet centrally been placed in the BSC in

nonprofit organization as well.

The basic difference between profitable and nonprofitable

organizations lies in the fact that profitable ones are strategically oriented,

whereas nonprofitable ones are yet prevalently mission-oriented.

Nonprofitable organizations start from top (a mission) and come to the user

(client) perspective, not the finance one, which is the case with profitable

organizations. The private sector has the responsibility towards its

shareholders through the results of the financial perspective, whereas the

public sector’s focus is on client satisfaction and the satisfaction of their

needs in accordance with the mission defined by the organization.

REFERENCES

Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of

customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing science, 12(2), 125-143.

Anthony, R. N., Govindarajan, V., & Dearden, J. (2007). Management control

systems (Vol. 12). New York, NY, McGraw-Hill.

Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., & Sarshar, M. (2000). Assessment of facility management

performance—What next? Facilities, 18(2), 66-75.

Atkinson, A.A., Kaplan, S.R., Matsumura, M.E., & Young, M.S. (2007). Management

accounting, fifth edition, Pearson Education, Inc., New Jersey.

Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance

work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial

implications. In Research in personnel and human resource management..

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 53-101.

Collis, J., Holt, A., & Hussey, R. (2012). Business Accounting: An Introduction to

Financial and Management Accounting. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

Drucker P. (1998). Managing in a Time of Great Change, Routledge, New York.

Gascho, Lipe, M., & Salterio, S., E. (2000). The Balanced Scorecard: Judgmental Effects

of Common and Unique Performance Measures.

Hannabarger, C., 1992Buchman, F., & Economy, P. (2011). Balanced scorecard strategy

for dummies. John Wiley & Sons.

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

274

Hamel, G. (1998). The challenge today: Changing the rules of the game. London Business

School Review, 9(2), 19-26.

Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover,

productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of management

journal, 38(3), 635-672.

Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, D.P. (1992). The balanced scorecard–measures that drive

performance. Harvard business school review (70), 70–79.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard—Translating strategy into

action. Harvard College, America, 91-120.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic

Management System. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization: how Balanced

Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Boston, MA:

Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan R., & Nortoн D. (2006). Alignment: Using the Balanced Scorecard to Create

Corporate Synergies. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2007). Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic

Management System. Harvard Business Review, July-August.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2008). Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations

for Competitive Advantage. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press.

Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (2010). Uravnotežena tablica rezultata, Mate, d.o.o., Zagreb.

Kloppenborg, T. J., & Petrick, J. A. (2002). Managing project quality. Management

Concepts Inc.

Niven, P. R. (2002). Balanced Scorecard Step-By-Step: Maximizing Performance and

Maintaining Results. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.

Niven, P. R. (2010). Balanced scorecard, korak po korak. Masmedia, Zagreb.

Niven, R.P. (2014). Balanced Scorecard Evolution. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New

Jersey.

Norreklit, H. (2000). The balance on the balanced scorecard a critical analysis of some of

its assumptions. Management accounting research, 11(1), 65-88.

Papalexandris A., Ioannou G., Prazvojacos G., & Soderquist K. E. (2005). An Integrated

Methodology for Putting the Balanced Scorecard into Action. European

Management Journal, 23(2), 214–227. New Jersey.

Podrug, N., Raguž, V. I., & Pavković I. (2012). Istraživanje primjene bilance postignuća

u hrvatskim poduzećima. Ekonomska misao i praksa, (2), 697.

NOTES ON THE AUTHORS Pavle BRZAKOVIĆ, prof. Dr., is Assistant professor at the Faculty of Applied

Management, Economics and Finance – MEF, Belgrade/Serbia, University Business Academy in Novi Sad. He holds a PhD. in Strategic Management at MEF Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance. He has also published numerous articles, studies and reviews in specialized journals and volumes. His main areas of interest are management, digital marketing, advertising, event planning, strategic management, market research. [email protected]

Katarina ĐORĐEVIĆ, bachelor’s degree in management, is Teaching Associate at the Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance – MEF, Belgrade/Serbia,

QUAESTUS MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL

275

University Business Academy in Novi Sad. She is also active as an associate at the Center for Career Guidance in Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance – MEF. Her main areas of interest are human resources, management, company organization, recruitment and training and the social network. [email protected]

Miloš MASTILOVIĆ, MA, is Teaching Associate at the Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance – MEF, Belgrade/Serbia, University Business Academy in Novi Sad. He is also the owner of the digital marketing agency Click Media. His main areas of interest are digital marketing, CEO, social media, marketing strategy, google analytics and management. [email protected]

© 2022. This work is published under

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/(the

“License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and

Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the

terms of the License.