Analysis of Modern Methods for Management Performance Using the Analytical Criteria Method

Abstract

In today’s dynamic and competitive business environment, continuous evaluation is essential to improve the organization's competitiveness, by choosing and using the right model for evaluating and improving organizational performance. This paper identifies, describes and compares three modern models for evaluating and improving the management performance—Balanced Scorecard, EFQM Excellence Model, and the Baldrige Performance Excellence Framework—using the Analytical Criteria Method. Several evaluation criteria were selected, among which can be listed strategic alignment, flexibility, stakeholder focus, and measurability. The models were compared through pairwise evaluations to highlight their strengths. The results show that the Balanced Scorecard is strong in strategy and measurement, EFQM is appreciated for continuous improvement and stakeholder involvement, and the Baldrige Framework performs well in terms of flexibility and overall structure. Based on this comparison analysis, the models were ranked, offering useful insights and proposals for managers in choosing the most suitable approach. The paper also mentions possible directions for deep research, such as combining the models or analysing how different industries influence performance evaluation. Additionally, this study contributes to a better understanding of how decision-making processes can be improved through structured comparisons, supporting both academic and practical perspectives. The findings are particularly relevant for organizations operating in complex or regulated sectors, where adaptability and strategic clarity are essential for long-term performance. The research also opens the door for future empirical validation of the evaluation matrix proposed, by applying it in real organizational contexts.