1.0 Introduction

2.0 Literature Review: SPMS Research

2.1 Salient Features

Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is the most popular multi- perspective SPMS adopted by business, as Marr (2019) stated that “About half of major companies in the US,Europe and Asia are using Balanced Scorecard approach. ” Balanced Scorecard can be used for both financial and non-financial measures. And it has 4 perspectives( Kaplan and Norton,1992; 1996a)，they are:

◎Financial perspective：Whether it is profitable and whether shareholders are satisfied. . .(focuses in money)

◎Customer perspective:Image in the industry, customer satisfaction，Whether winning new business。（focuses on customers）

◎Internal business processes: Whether the internal operation of the company is efficient and smooth, whether there is any obstacle in the communication between the departments, and the execution ability of the department.

◎Infrastructure (learning and growth) perspective：Focus on corporate culture, industry trends, employee training, teamwork within the company, technology and systems used by the company, etc.

2.2 Academic Research on SPMS Adoption/ Implementation

The Balanced Scorecard can bring many benefits to the company. With Veolia water (a successful application of the balanced scorecard in the company) as an example, According to Balanced Scorecard Institute (2009), in 2008 the company began to use the balanced scorecard as its SPMS, Laurent Auguste（President and CEO, Veolia Water Americas） believes that balanced scorecard can improve organizational performance, let business department and the department more effective communication, and put the focus on strategy and results, reasonable arrangement of the budget, resources and time, at the same time, help the company to better understand and respond to customer demand. It is worth mentioning that Balanced Scorecard has indeed brought a beneficial impact on Veolia Water. It helps Veolia Water to effectively measure the progress of its different facilities, make the best use of resources, and make Veolia Water better able to set clear goals.

Another company which also benefiting from the Balanced Scorecard is Mobil, According to Kaplan and Norton(2000), in Mobil five years after the launch of the balanced scorecard, the annual output loss dropped by seventy percent, environmental accidents dropped sixty-three percent, brought new value proposition for the customer and improved customer satisfaction.

The advantages of balanced scorecards can be summarized according to the benefits that balanced scorecards bring to users.

1. Improve the overall management level of the organization.
2. To overcome the short-term behavior of financial evaluation methods and achieve long-term development of the organization.
3. Improve the core competence of the organization and employees.
4. Transform the organization’s strategy into performance indicators and actions at all levels.
5. Promote communication between various departments.

Although the use of balanced scorecards is common, this does not mean that all organizations can successfully use it. Bernard Marr(2019) has conducted research on some companies that have failed to use Balanced Scorecard, and listed some common pitfalls. For example,

1. The implementation of the company has not been understood and recognized before implementation.
2. Copy the Balanced Scorecard of another organization. Did not combine the actual situation of his company.
3. Did not keep pace with the times, did not update Balanced Scorecard.
4. The goals and plans are not strongly related to Balanced Scorecard.

In addition, Jackson (2020)also put forward some descriptions about the disadvantages of Balanced Scorecard. For example,

1.Balanced Scorecard involves a lot of content, and it is difficult to fully understand and use it (There are too many indicators. According to Kaplan(1992), the appropriate number of indicators is 20-25.).

2.Its success requires strong leadership support and,

3. Internal chaos caused by the transition period. （Many companies withdrew from Balanced Scorecard during the transition period and backed to their original model）。

In terms of challenges, balanced scorecards are used more successfully in large companies and non-profit organizations (Kaplan and Norton, 2001), and not many small companies use balanced scorecards (Bergen and Benco, 2004). How can the balanced scorecard adapt to small companies is its inevitable challenge.

3.0 Literature Review: Motivation Theories and Reward System

3.1 Motivation Theory

3.1.1 Vroom’ Expectancy Theory

Expectancy theory was proposed by Victor h. Vroom in 1964 and extended by Porter and Lawler in 1968. The theory is based on the assumption that one’s behaviors is the choices from lots of alternatives. The purpose of these behaviors is to maximize the pleasure and to minimize pain. Basically, expectancy theory illustrates that a person chooses to behave in the hope that the outcome will be better than others. Vroom uses expectancy, instrumentality and valence, three variables to explain the expectancy theory. (Yourcoach 2020)

Expectancy is the brief that if one work hard, he will be able to achieve the goals set by himself or his manager. There are some factors may affect the expectancy, including past experience, confidence of own ability, available resources, necessary support and so on. When this factor plays a positive role, it can turn effort into performance.

Instrumentality is the belief that if one performs well, he will get valuable results. In this variable, the likelihood of receiving a reward may be assessed by the degree to which the goals are completed. The judgement can be made by these things:  the relationship between performance and outcomes, the level of trust in the person who made the decision and the transparency of decision-making process. If most of the above conditions are satisfied, the performance will proceed to the outcomes.

Valence is an individual’s emphasis on the desired outcome. It is the perceived value of the reward. An employee has to weigh the pros and cons at this step. If the valence is positive, the outcomes are attractive satisfying the personal goals.

3.1.2 Relation to Reward System

Expectancy theory can be used to explain why a person behaves at a certain level. This has a great probability to increase motivation, which can help leaders develop incentive plans in management. (Brian 2016) The theory focuses on the individual performance to earn rewards, which connects with the reward system of Individual incentive plans. Individual incentive plans are based on achieving performance target related to the work, such as safety, productivity, quality, customer satisfaction or attendance. Individual incentive plans are best for the following situations, performance can be judged objectively, employees could control the outcomes, and the plan will not make bad competition. (Compensation 101: Individual Versus Group Incentive Plans 2010)

3.2 Academic Research on Real Companies

Hollard is a family-owned insurance company in South Africa with 400 employees. It provides financial services in Australia, Europe, USA and many countries. It is committed to attracting and retaining innovative, capable employees, thus creating a convenient channel for communication, rewards and recognition. In the process of improving reward system, they met some challenges.

Initially Hollard used different systems to manage employee benefits, rewards and recognition. Employees were confused and deemed some of these systems tedious, lacking transparency and meaningful reward options. There was no such thing as a company-wide recognition of rewards, where people can’t fully see what’s going on, and employees completely lose faith in it. Managers want to create a reward which is about rewarding day-to-day achievements in addition to annual salary or bonus. (Reward Gateway 2020)

To solve this problem, HR seeks the help of a mature reward platform, Reward Gateway. Its employee engagement platform makes Hollard easier to improve immediately. Hollard launches a recognition and rewards component as an extension of employee benefits program. What’s more, they created the “Hollard high-five” e-card to facilitate daily identification and enable each area of the business to nominate peers for rewards based on their demonstrated value. Employees can now access all the information about their employee experience.

This reward system makes it clear for employees to know what the rewards are. Employees can set their personal goals based on this content in order to win corresponding rewards or bonuses. All employees can log on to e-card, learn about the fresh and interesting content then communicate quickly, which plays as a supervisory role. One person’s award is recognized by all the other employees. These are the embodiment of individual incentive plan and team-based incentive schemes.

4.0 Selected Companies’ SPMS Adoption and Disclosures

4.1 Profile

This section analyses the profit and revenue targets of the two companies in the 2018-2019 from a financial perspective.

4.1.1 The Profile of ASX Limited

ASX is at the heart of the globally attractive, deep and liquid Australian financial markets, helping companies grow and investors build wealth. As an integrated exchange, ASX offers listings, trade execution, technology, data and post-trade services. According to ASX Limited’s financial statements for 2018-2019, the company’s statutory after-tax net profit for 2019 increased 10.5% year on year to $492 million. The financial report shows that the company’s pre-tax profit in 2019 rose 5.7% from a year earlier and 7.7% from a year earlier. EBITDA was $649m, up 5.5 per cent from the previous year, bringing the total amount of ordinary dividends paid up 5.7 per cent for the year (ASX, 2019). Interest income on cash balances at ASX Limited increased 28.7% to $23.4 million due to higher balances and higher yields. From an asset perspective, the group’s net assets were $3,916.4 billion, down 0.7% from June 30, 2018, mainly due to the company’s increased leverage as it invested in a business (ASX, 2018). In a word, the profits of ASX Limited have been continuously increasing in the past two years, and ASX Limited has a strong profitability. As the company has achieved its revenue and profit targets in the past two years, the company has implemented the right strategy.

4.1.2 The Profile of Oil Search Limited

Oil Search Limited operates in the exploration, development and production of Oil and gas fields. Revenue rose 6.21% to $1.536 billion in 2018, and after-tax profit rose 12.95% to $341 million. From the perspective of operating sector, revenue of the Papua New Guinea business segment increased by 6.66% year-on-year to us $1.522 billion in fiscal year 2018, accounting for 99.01% of the total revenue. Revenue from other divisions fell 27.55% to $13.969 million, or 0.99% of total revenue (OSH,2019). Oil Search Limited reported net profit after tax for 2019 of $312.4 million, down 8% from a year earlier. Revenue rose 3% to $1.584.8 billion, with production up 11%, recovering from the 2018 PNG high ground earthquake thanks to the record performance of the PNG LNG project. This was partly offset by the fall in global energy prices. Real prices for liquefied natural gas and natural gas fell by 5% (OSH, 2018). Spot prices remain under pressure from the oversupplied market, while contract prices for liquefied natural gas are being affected by weaker global oil prices. Oil and condensate prices fell 11 per cent in real terms to $62.86 a barrel. In 2019, the company was affected by the high earthquake in 2018, which caused it to miss the expected profit target and operating target. Profits will continue to grow as a result of the company’s strategy for new gas projects in 2018, which will return to normal by 2020.

4.2 Determining SPMS Adoption Using Specific Criteria

4.2.1 ASX Limited

In recent years, ASX has implemented a number of measures that could enhance the attractiveness of Australia as a listing and capital destination. Among the company’s SPMS in 2019, to broaden customer choice, it invested in a joint venture in 2018, Sympli, which has set up an electronic hosting network operator (ELNO). This is mainly to meet the growing diversity of customer needs. Implementing employee behaviour strategies including providing a safe and pleasant workplace and programs to support employee well-being; Undertake to protect employee confidentiality. The company’s remuneration table is prepared according to the accounting standards stipulated in the company law 2001.

4.2.2 Oil Search Limited

Due to the earthquake in 2018, the development of the company has been affected. In the company’s SPMS in 2019, the strategic objective is to promote the commercialization of the proposed three lines of liquefied natural gas expansion projects; Optimize the value of existing oil, exploration, oil and gas assets, drill two value-added development Wells and maintain sustainable operations. In terms of human resource strategy, strengthen ties with the company’s key stakeholders in Alaska, including local communities and government. Optimize capital and liquidity management from an organizational perspective to support continued investment and return to shareholders; the company decided to streamline its organizational structure. Human resources, stakeholder relations, and legal services are placed in an executive vice President (EVP) position, reporting to the managing director. The number of KMP executive positions has been reduced from eight to seven. This had no significant effect on individual compensation for the year. In order to improve the work enthusiasm of employees, the company will reward senior managers and other employees fairly and responsibly according to their work and personal performance, so as to achieve long-term and short-term drastic goals. Reshuffled the senior leadership team with shareholders; establish a clear link between performance and pay. These enhance organizational capabilities to fulfil the company’s strategic commitments. In 2020, the company’s strategic goal has Deliver major hydrocarbon development programmes; prioritise the exploration portfolio; optimise value from producing assets (OSH,2019).

4.3 Examination and Companies of SPMS Disclosures

In this paper, in order to better understand the Oil Search Limited and ASX Limited SPMS Disclosures, can review from the annual report, shareholders, sustainability reports, company policy and analysed such as the company’s web site. Since the nature of the two companies is different, it is necessary to discuss whether there is any change in the SPMS disclosure in terms of perspectives, objectives, and goals set, and to briefly compare the SPMS disclosures of the two companies.

Oil Search Limited adopts all newly revised standards and interpretations issued by IASB. These standards and interpretations apply to accounting periods on or after January 1, 2019. ASX Limited complies with IASB standards and interpretations of accounting standards (OSH, 2019). According to the company’s organizational structure, compared with 2018, Oil Search Limited has reduced the number of senior executives in 2019, which may be related to the earthquake. In terms of profits, the company’s after-tax profit in 2019 was 8 percent lower than in 2018, missing the expected operating target. But revenues are up on last year, mainly because LNG projects are being implemented correctly. As a matter of policy, community events occurred in Papua New Guinea in 2018, and while progress in the communities where the oil search was conducted limited the disruption in 2019, the heightened threat continued until 2020. With the change of external conditions, as Oil Search enters or exits the existing region, this has seriously affected the implementation of the company’s expansion strategy.

For ASX Limited, accounting standards require disclosure of the company’s fees or costs for the fiscal year, which may result in only a portion of the cash compensation being disclosed and payment being deferred to a future financial year. For profit, the company’s after-tax profit in 2019 increased compared with that in 2018, meeting the expected operating target. From the analysis of accounting policies, the group has adopted AASB9 and AASB15 since July 1, 2018(ASX,2018). This will cause changes in accounting policies and adjustments in the amounts recognized in the financial statements. From the perspective of organizational structure, the senior management positions in the past two years have not changed. The structure of executive pay has not changed in the past two years.

 5.0 Selected Companies’ Performance

5.1 Financial Performance for 2018 & 2019

In order to analyse the financial performance of both companies, the solvency and profitability ratios have been considered. The profitability ratios chosen for conducting research are: net profit margin, operating profit margin, return on assets and return on equity. The solvency ratios used for analysis are: Debt-to-equity ratio, Debt-to-asset ratio, Long-term Debt to Equity ratio and Financial Leverage.  All the figures are taken from Annual Financial Statements of ASX Ltd. for the year 2019 and 2018.

5.1.1        ASX Ltd.

PROFITABILITY RATIOS

 

Net Profit Margin
	Net Profit	Revenue
2019	492	1089.4	45.16%
2018	445.1	1013	43.94%

The net profit margin of ASX Ltd. remained almost same over past two years with an increase of about two percent. This rise was due to increase in net profit and revenues alike.

Operating Profit Margin
	EBIT	Revenue
2019	601.2	1089.4	55.19%
2018	567.8	1013	56.05%

The OPM fell from 56% to 55% over past two years. This shows that the rise in EBIT was low than the rise in revenues.

Return on Assets
	Net Profit	Average Assets
2019	492	14126	3.48%
2018	445.1	13067	3.41%

The ROA also remained consistent at 3.4% for ASX Ltd. indicating towards the management of its assets in a consistent manner to drive profits out of it.

Return on Equity
	Net Profit	Average Equity
2019	492	3930.95	12.5%
2018	445.1	3926.8	11.3%

The ROE fell from 11.3% to 12.5% since 2018 meaning that the company is comparatively utilizing its equity in an inefficient manner for driving the net profits in 2019 as compared to 2018. This fall was due to less rise in net profits as compared to increase in average equity. The overall profitability trend depicted a strengthened position for ASX Ltd. as its NPAT increased leaving a positive impact on ROE, ROA and NPM. This means that the company is utilizing its assets and equity efficiently for driving more net profit. Apart, it is now more able to convert its revenues into net profit by the end of the year.

 SOLVENCY RATIOS

Debt to Asset Ratio
	Total Liabilities	Total Assets
2019	11413.9	15330.3	74%
2018	8977.5	12923	69%

The ratio shows that now ASX Ltd. is relying more on debts for financing its assets. It increased from 69% in 2018 to 74% in 2019 showing that the company is more skewed to debts for funding its assets.

Debt to Equity Ratio
	Total Liabilities	Total Equity
2019	11413.9	3916.4	291%
2018	8977.5	3945.5	228%

The ratio shows the huge rise in debt-to-equity ratio meaning that company is highly leveraged as its total debts are way more than its total equity. It shows the higher risk rate of the company when it comes to debt funding. High leverage ratios are risky for firms and might make it difficult for the company to raise further funds from investors or financial institutions.

Long Term Debt to Equity Ratio
	Long-Term Debt	Total Equity
2019	275.4	3916.4	7.0%
2018	273.3	3945.5	6.9%

The ratio shows that the LT to Equity ratio is almost same for two years in consideration. This ratio shows that the company is not relying on long-term debt financing and is more reliant on equity funding. This ratio depicts that the company’s higher debt-to-equity ratio was more because of high current liabilities. It means company is using current liabilities for funding its operations as compared to equity or long-term loans.

Financial Leverage
	Average Total Assets	Average Total Equity
2019	14126	3930.95	3.59 times
2018	13067	3926.8	3.33 times

This financial leverage ratio rose over two years meaning that the company is now more financially leveraged as compared to that in 2018. It indicated that now company is financing a higher portion of its assets by using debts as compared to equity.

Overall, the solvency ratios are very high for ASX Ltd. showing its over reliance on debt financing as compared to equity financing. It suggests that the company can face cash flow issues in future and might become unable to cover its interest expenses in near future due to high number of loans. Apart, from long-term debt ratio, it was indicated that ASX Ltd. has higher current liabilities in its capital structure as compared to long-term non-current liabilities. This can be a positive sign because it wouldn’t have to pay interests (except for over-drafting) on its financing.

5.1.2        Oil Search Ltd

PROFITABILITY RATIOS

 

Net Profit Margin
	Net Profit	Revenue
2019	312.42	1584.8
2018	341.2	1535.8

The net profit margin shows a decreasing trend over past two years as it fell from 22% to 19%. The fall was due to decrease in net profit more than the increase in revenues by Oil Search Ltd.

Operating Profit Margin
	EBIT	Revenue
2019	685	1584.8	43.22%
2018	717	1535.8	46.69%

The OPM shows a decreasing trend as well as it decreased from 47% to 43% meaning that company is inefficiently converting its revenues into operating profits in 2019.

Return on Assets
	Net Profit	Average Assets
2019	312.42	11123.4	2.81%
2018	341.2	10593.2	3.22%

The ROA for the company also deteriorated from 3.2% to 2.8% over two years. The decrease in the ROA means that now company is inefficiently managing its assets for driving net profits. The average assets rose over two years but the net profit fell down.

Return on Equity
	Net Profit	Average Equity
2019	312.42	5212	6.0%
2018	341.2	5051.6	6.8%

The ROE also fell from 6.8% to 6% in 2019. The fall in ROE also indicates the weak position of ROE meaning that now it is inefficiently managing its equity for booking net profits.

The overall profitability of Oil Search Ltd. is getting weaker as can be seen from its falling ROE, ROA, NPM and OPM. Further looking deeper in its costs and expenses can reveal the major causes of reducing net profits and its operating margin.

SOLVENCY RATIOS

Debt to Asset Ratio
	Total Liabilities	Total Assets
2019	6314.5	11573
2018	5508	10673

The Debt-to-Asset ratio for the company rose from 52% to 55% in 2019 meaning that now it is funding its assets more with the debts and getting more leveraged.

Debt to Equity Ratio
	Total Liabilities	Total Equity
2019	6314.5	5258	120.1%
2018	5508	5166	106.6%

The Debt-to-Equity ratio for the company rose from 106% to 120% meaning that its capital structure is more made up of debts as compared to equity. It is now relying more on total liabilities as compared to its equity funding option.

Long Term Debt to Equity Ratio
	Long-Term Debt	Total Equity
2019	5193	5258	98.8%
2018	4737	5166	91.7%

The long-term debts also rose from 92% to 99% over past two years meaning that the company is now taking more long-term debts as compared to equity for managing its operations. This is high leverage ratio and shows the riskiness of the company.

Financial Leverage
	Average Total Assets	Average Total Equity
2019	11123.4	5212	2.13 times
2018	10593.2	5051.6	2.10 times

The financial leverage ratio remained almost same but rose a bit. It also indicates that the company is now becoming more leverage instead of decreasing its leverage ratio.

The overall solvency/riskiness of the company is gloomy as well since it is getting more leveraged as indicated by debt-to-equity, debt-to-assets and leverage ratios. All the risk ratios indicate that the company is now becoming more leverage and riskier for investors and it might face issues in future for raising funds by financial firms.

5.2 Link Between SPMS Measure & Reward System

ASX Ltd. has been incorporating its financial and non-financial risk considerations into the reward framework and performance framework through mandating and regulating its individual goals. It has been reinforcing the risk management policy in its reward system for highlighting the importance of individual’s accountability so that risks could be managed. Each year, ASX Ltd. carries on with performance assessment process by Chief Risk Officer. ASX also measures its long-term incentives for four years and make adjustments to remunerations of the executives based on their satisfactory performances. It also defer the portion of short term incentives over two to four years in order to ensure that the risks are addressed over long time before these are conceived by the executives in order to ensure that the risks are managed. It also ensures that the financial goals are balanced with non-financial goals while adhering to ASX values. The figure below shows the process of STIs.

It uses the relative total shareholder return (TSR) at 50% target for measuring the performance of participation by CEO and Deputy CEO in order to see whether they add long-term value for shareholders or not. The internal performance measures are measured through EPS and its growth at 50% target.

Oil Search Ltd. is also using measures like balanced scorecard for measuring the STIs and for setting the threshold performance levels. It agreed to review the scorecard methodology in 2019 by capping the individual performance measures. The company uses scorecard for measuring whether employees are aligned and balanced for responding to any unexpected factors facing the company. It also capped the growth component contribution to STI pool and increased the operations component for managing and recognizing the response of management towards event that were outside their control. During 2019, the adjustment revealed 60& of opportunity in STI outcomes. It also uses TSR performance indication measure for granting LTIs to its employees. Throughout its reward system, Oil Search Ltd. have been working towards ensuring alignment between performance and remuneration outcomes for its employees. The figure below shows the scorecard measure of STIs by Oil Search Ltd.

5.3 Explanation of Selected Companies’ Competitive Advantage

ASX Ltd. has gained competitive advantage on basis of its insights out products like ASX DataSpher, Webstore, Commercial Framework and its product team  (ASX Ltd., 2019). The insights out products have helped ASX in gaining competitive advantage, cost efficiency and risk reduction (ASX Ltd., 2019). At ASX, the product team plays a vital role in transforming the model into a finished product that can then be used by the consumers. The people at the firm help in running, monitoring and supporting products on platform  (ASX Ltd., 2019). The company’s ability to connect the state-of-the-art bug data platform with scalable workspaces loaded with science data can allow the users to visualize comprehensive analytics through artificial intelligence. Moreover, the company’s market competitiveness as an employer is also very strong as it kept on recruiting diverse range of roles throughout 2019  (ASX Ltd., 2019). The overall strength and brand visibility were strong in 2019 due to its sustained leading projects and their successfulness. The company is also focusing on maintaining active engagement with government and political decision makers so that it can build world-class infrastructure and stay globally competitive  (ASX Ltd., 2019).

Oil Search Ltd.’ basis its competitive edge by offering competitive projects at competitive prices. Its Joint Venture with Papua LNG project and PNG Government became a competitive project as it offered LNG to the country at competitive prices (Oil Search Ltd., 2019). During 2019, the company endorsed deferred payment mechanisms for funding past costs and new production levynes. The key to sustainable competitive advantage lies in the investment in its employees. The company recognizes that people play an important role in shaping the company and gearing it towards gaining competitive advantage. It engages in good communication, dialogues and discussions with employees. It also encourages continuous improvement for ensuring that its actions are aligned with business objectives. It has a full stakeholder engagement measurement system like Gallup Q for understanding opportunities and issues faced by employees  (Oil Search Ltd., 2019). The company believes that for its company, the engagement with employees is the key to gaining and sustaining competitive advantage for long-term  (Oil Search Ltd., 2019).

6.0 Conclusion & Recommendation

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is one of the prominent Strategic Planning and Management System (SPMS) that companies use to articulate what they are attempting to do, coordinate the day-to-day job that everyone performs with policy, prioritize programs, goods, and resources, and assess and track progress against strategic goals. The BSC encompasses strategic target sets and reporting on results through four different perspectives: financial, customer, internal business processes, and learning and growth. Moreover, the balanced scorecard supported organisations by positioning policy and mission at the heart, not regulation. It sets targets then expects that people are going to follow certain habits and follow certain acts are required to accomplish those targets. The interventions are meant to attract people into the overall vision. This new performance assessment approach is aligned with the programs under way in many companies. The balanced scorecard has businesses planning and going ahead, rather than going backward.

This assessment highlights the profile and determine SPMS adoption using specific criteria for two listed companies i.e. ASX limited and Oil search limited. ASX limited has shown positive and increasing trend in terms of profitability since past two years and this indicates that ASX limited has adopted the right strategy. While Oil search limited has shown some decreasing trends since past few years because of various reasons i.e. decrease in global oil prices and earthquake of 2018 etc. Both these companies are working on their respective strategic planning and management systems and trying to improve their performance in various areas of their business. Furthermore, ASX Ltd. has gained competitive advantage on basis of its insights out products like ASX DataSpher, Webstore, Commercial Framework and its product team. The overall strength and brand visibility were strong in 2019. The company is focusing on maintaining active engagement with government and political decision makers so that it can build world-class infrastructure and stay globally competitive. Whereas, Oil Search Ltd. basis its competitive edge by offering competitive projects at competitive prices. It encourages continuous improvement for ensuring that its actions are aligned with business objectives. It has a full stakeholder engagement measurement system like Gallup Q for understanding opportunities and issues faced by employees.

Following are few recommendations for companies such as ASX limited and Oil search limited, to determine appropriate SPMS adoption in their businesses:

1. Companies should define the performance categories of their businesses that align company’s vision and strategy with the positive outcome.
2. Companies should learn from the successful businesses and also put an eye on their past financial performance and then design SPMS accordingly.

7.0 References

Brian, F 2016, Expectancy Theory, Confluence, viewed 14 April 2020, <https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/PSYCH484/4.+Expectancy+Theory>

‘Compensation 101: Individual Versus Group Incentive Plans’, Compensation, 17 April, viewed 14 April 2020, <https://compensation.blr.com/Compensation-news/Compensation/Compensation-Administration/Compensation-101-Individual-Versus-Group-Incentive/>

Hollard uses employee benefits and reward and recognition to reinforce their commitment to being an employer of choice, Reward Gateway, viewed 14 April 2020, <https://www.rewardgateway.com/au/case-study/hollard-employee-reward-and-recognition>

Marr ,B 2019, Balanced Scorecard: How Many Companies Use This Tool?  Bernard Marr & Co, viewed 12 April 2020,

<https://bernardmarr.com/default.asp?contentID=1485>

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 1992,The Balanced Scorecard – Measure That Drive Performance,Harvard Business Review, viewed 12 April 2020,

<https://hbr.org/1992/01/the-balanced-scorecard-measures-that-drive-performance-2>

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 1996a, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press，viewed 13 April 2020, <https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=8831>

Balanced Scorecard Institute 2009, Veolia Water Uses Balanced Scorecard to Drive North American Strategy ,Balanced Scorecard Institute, viewed 12 April 2020, <https://balancedscorecard.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/BSI-case-study-veolia-water-na.pdf>

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 2000, The Strategy-Focused Organization, Harvard Business School, viewed 12 April 2020, <https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/the-strategy-focused-organization>

Marr ,B 2019, 7 Common Balanced Scorecard Mistakes Every Company Should Avoid ,  Bernard Marr & Co, viewed 12 April 2020, <https://www.bernardmarr.com/default.asp?contentID=971>

Jackson, T 2020, A Thorough List Of Balanced Scorecard Advantages & Disadvantages, ClearPoint Strategy, viewed 12 April 2020, <https://www.clearpointstrategy.com/thorough-list-of-balanced-scorecard-advantages-disadvantages/>

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 2001, Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measurement to Strategic Management: Part I. Accounting Horizons, CCSE, viewed 13 April 2020, <http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/26425>

Bergen, C. W. V., & Benco, D. C. 2004, A Balanced Scorecard for Small Business. Proceedings of the United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship Conference,Dallas, Texas, viewed 13 April 2020, <http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/26425>

Vroom expectancy motivation theory, Yourcoach, viewed 13 April 2020, <https://www.yourcoach.be/en/employee-motivation-theories/vroom-expectancy-motivation-theory.php>

Financial report of ASX limited in 2018 (2018).

Financial report of ASX limited in 2019 (2019).

Financial report of Oil search limited in 2018 (2018).

Financial report of Oil search limited in 2019 (2019).