balanced-scorecard
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when performance management needs a broader view than financial or single KPI tracking. Use when applying the Balanced Scorecard consulting method and when a user asks for Balanced Scorecard, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- tupe12334/instincttheir own version, first seen Aug 17, 2026
- CAPP-Financials/Consulting_Braintheir own version, first seen Apr 24, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- tupe12334/instinct★ 1same name
- CAPP-Financials/Consulting_Brain★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository57 other files it gives its agents.
- 5w1h-analysisSkill
- abductive-reasoningSkill
- account-planSkill
- affinity-diagramSkill
- assumption-inventorySkill
- break-even-analysisSkill
- business-model-canvasSkill
- change-event-timelineSkill
- change-impact-analysisSkill
- communications-planSkill
- competitive-positioningSkill
- constraint-analysisSkill
- cost-benefit-analysisSkill
- critical-uncertaintiesSkill
- customer-segmentationSkill
- customer-success-health-scoreSkill
- deal-strategy-mapSkill
- decision-matrixSkill
- deductive-reasoningSkill
- effort-impact-matrixSkill
- empathy-mapSkill
- evidence-mapSkill
- fifteen-percent-solutionsSkill
- first-principles-thinkingSkill
- fishbone-diagramSkill
- five-whys-root-causeSkill
- force-field-analysisSkill
- go-to-market-diagnosisSkill
- hypothesis-treeSkill
- inductive-reasoningSkill
- issue-treeSkill
- jobs-to-be-doneSkill
- kano-modelSkill
- mece-frameworkSkill
- metrics-treeSkill
- mind-map-analysisSkill
- min-specsSkill
- north-star-metricSkill
- pestel-analysisSkill
- porter-five-forcesSkill
- power-interest-gridSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- pricing-strategy-checkSkill
- raci-matrixSkill
- rice-scoringSkill
- risk-matrixSkill
- scenario-planningSkill
- service-blueprintSkill
- signal-vs-noise-filterSkill
- stakeholder-power-mapSkill
- swot-analysisSkill
- systems-thinkingSkill
- user-journey-mappingSkill
- validation-planSkill
- weighted-scorecardSkill
- win-loss-reviewSkill
- wsjf-prioritizationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 9
Use this skill to run Balanced Scorecard as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.
- Distinctive: line 13
Use financial, customer, internal process, and learning/capability perspectives.
- Very specific: line 25
If an input is missing, do not block automatically.
- Distinctive: line 29
Do not use before the strategy, intended outcomes, and cause-and-effect logic are clear.
- Distinctive: line 85
Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Balanced Scorecard
Use this skill to run Balanced Scorecard as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.
Method Notes
- Use financial, customer, internal process, and learning/capability perspectives.
- Limit metrics per perspective so the scorecard stays usable.
Required Inputs
Collect or infer these inputs before execution:
- strategy or objective
- current metrics
- stakeholders
- time horizon
If an input is missing, do not block automatically. Mark it as missing, state the assumption used, and add a validation action.
When Not To Use
Do not use before the strategy, intended outcomes, and cause-and-effect logic are clear. A balanced scorecard is a small management system, not a catalogue of every available KPI.
Adjacent Methods
metrics-tree: decompose one outcome into causal drivers and guardrails.north-star-metric: define one leading value metric for a product or service.
Step-by-Step Execution
| Step | Required input | How to execute | Output |
| Clarify strategy | Strategic objective and business context. | State the strategy the scorecard must translate into measures. | Strategy frame. |
| Set four perspectives | Financial, customer, internal process, learning/capability context. | Define objectives under each perspective. | Perspective objectives. |
| Choose measures | Objectives, data availability, owners. | Select a few measures per perspective with formula and cadence. | Scorecard metrics. |
| Set targets and initiatives | Measures, baseline, ambition, resources. | Define target, owner, initiative, and review rhythm. | Targets and initiatives. |
| Check balance | Scorecard draft. | Remove overload and check whether short-term financial goals crowd out capability and customer measures. | Balanced scorecard. |
Output Template
### 1. Strategy And Scope
Strategy objective:
Time horizon:
Target operating unit:
Key assumptions:
### 2. Four-Perspective Scorecard
| Perspective | Objective | Measure | Baseline | Target | Initiative | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | | |
### 3. Cause-And-Effect Logic
| Leading objective | Expected effect | Lagging outcome | Evidence strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
### 4. Review Cadence
| Measure | Review frequency | Trigger | Corrective action |
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
### Evidence And Next Decision
- Confirmed facts:
- Assumptions:
- Missing evidence:
- Next action, owner, and timing:
- Expected signal and decision threshold:Quality Gate
- Produce the method-specific outputs for Strategy And Scope, Four-Perspective Scorecard, Cause-And-Effect Logic; do not substitute a generic framework summary.
- Tie every material score, causal claim, or stakeholder judgment to evidence or label it as an assumption.
- Include at least one disconfirming check, sensitivity, alternative explanation, or failure condition appropriate to the method.
- Convert the result into a named action or decision with an owner or stakeholder, timing, and observable signal.
- State missing inputs and the smallest validation action instead of inventing precision.
- Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

