Search results

For many years management accountants have been involved in the design of information systems for decision-making. To be effective in system design, accountants need pertinent and reliable performance measures within a valid framework. The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) has received a great deal of attention as a comprehensive model of performance that takes into account both financial and non-financial measures. This paper examines the empirical reliability and validity of the BSC framework and its associated measures. With reference to content validity, internal consistency reliability, and factorial validity, results show that BSC, with measures grouped into its four dimensions, is a valid performance model.

Previous studies have called for better reliability and validity of BSC measures. The present study may help in the design and implementation of BSCs in business units by adding robustness to the BSC framework, and by suggesting a set of valid measures associated with the four BSC dimensions. The results may lead to reduced costs of BSC design and implementation, and enhanced consistency of future studies of the BSC.

In managerial accounting courses, students lacking business experience find the balanced scorecard (BSC) an inherently difficult topic to understand. Students may lack an understanding of business strategy, the BSC's perspectives, and the measures that a BSC uses to report performance. This chapter aims to assist instructors who teach the BSC by developing an analogy to a resume, which is a familiar concept to students. The analogy draws upon similarities between the BSC and a well-constructed resume: a cohesive strategy, multiple perspectives or areas, and multiple types of measures for each area. In using this approach, the instructor guides students through the process of viewing a resume as a vehicle for conveying a job-search strategy, similar to the way a BSC communicates an organization's strategy. Thus, students can apply their knowledge of the familiar (their own resumes) to the unfamiliar (the BSC). The chapter provides implementation guidance and results of student surveys. Our students responded positively to the exercise, saying that they learned the basics of the BSC, and even found the exercise enjoyable.

This study examines the impact of different Balanced Scorecard (BSC) formats (table, graph without summary measure, graph with a summary measure) on various decision outcomes: performance ratings, perceived informativeness, and decision efficiency.

Using an original case developed by the researchers, a total of 135 individuals participated in the experiment and rated the performance of carwash managers in two different scenarios: one manager excelled financially but failed to meet targets for all other three BSC perspectives and the other manager had the opposite results.

The evaluators rated managerial performance significantly lower in the graph format compared to a table presentation of the BSC. Performance ratings were significantly higher for the scenario where the manager failed to meet only financial perspective targets but exceeded targets for all other nonfinancial BSC perspectives, contrary to the usual predictions based on the financial measure bias. The evaluators reported that informativeness of the BSC was highest in the table or graph without summary measure formats, and, surprisingly, adding a summary measure to the graph format significantly reduced perceived informativeness compared to the table format. Decision efficiency was better for the graph formats (with or without summary measure) than for the table format.

Ours is the first study to compare tables, graphs with and without a summary measure in the context of managerial performance evaluations and to examine their impact on ratings, informativeness, and efficiency. We developed an original case to test the boundaries of the financial measure bias.

Purpose – Since the introduction of the concept of the balanced scorecard (BSC) in the early 1990s, researchers and practitioners have been discussing its impact on managerial and organizational performance. However, there are still few empirical results available in favor of the effectiveness of the BSC to justify its high rate of diffusion among companies. The central aim of this paper is to substantiate the claim for more empirical studies on performance implications of BSC use and to derive recommendations how to conduct such research effectively.

Approach – We review existing research on costs and benefits of the BSC in order to pinpoint to the necessity to do more large-scale empirical work on this topic. Moreover, we discuss important methodological challenges researchers are confronted with when analyzing performance consequences of the system.

Findings – Empirical studies have found both, evidence in favor and against the BSC by investigating specific elements constituting the system. However, no large-scale empirical evidence exists so far that unambiguously shows that companies using a fully developed BSC outperform non-users. We argue in the paper that this might be explainable by the holistic nature of the concept and particularly the methodological difficulties associated with analyzing its effects on performance.

Contribution – The paper is supposed to motivate researchers to conduct more large-sale empirical studies in the area and offers recommendations how to effectively design such studies. It emphasizes the opportunities structural equation modeling offers to investigate possible indirect effects and moderating effects stemming from the BSC.

The balanced scorecard (BSC) allows firms to place importance on both financial and nonfinancial performance measures in four perspectives for developing and implementing corporate strategy and performance evaluation. The BSC literature however provides minimal insight on how to set targets, how to weigh measures when evaluating managers and the firm, and how to resolve conflicts that arise in the BSC process. Researchers have attempted to fill these gaps using two contending approaches. In particular, Datar et al. (2001) uses an agency model to select the optimal set of weights and more recently Herath et al. (2009) develop a mathematical programming–based collaborative decision model to find the optimal (or approximately optimal) set of target and weights considering inputs from two parties. In this article, we apply the Herath et al. (2009) model to a detailed BSC example. We demonstrate how the collaborative BSC model can be implemented in Microsoft Excel by practitioners to minimize BSC conflicts. Finally, we discuss how the model facilitates alignment and a culture of open reporting (information sharing) around the BSC that is necessary for its effective implementation.

This paper illustrates a story of “rise and fall” of a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) project in a Sri Lankan firm. The “rise” was due to a series of attempts made by CIMA (SL) for popularising BSC practice among business leaders and local consultants, and the “fall” was due to professional rivalry between engineering managers and accounting personnel and the decline of interest on the part of the owner-manager. In relation to these two opposing phenomena, the paper shows how and why the firm first receives the BSC project as a useful management system device, and later, how and why the management tends to undermine the use of BSC. The argument advanced is that the popularisation of BSC is part of a project of accounting knowledge diffusion which comes through the broader globalisation process, but the failure in sustaining BSC is due to the upsurge of professional rivalry and the rise of alternative management fads and the owner-manager's inclination to look at financial matters, rather than a BSC, as a basis for the appropriation of surplus. The underlying public interest implication is that even though globalisation project seems to be functional and positive, it provokes contradictions and resistance when new accounting knowledge is diffused from the centre to the periphery.

Behavioral aspects and positive attitudes toward the balanced scorecard (BSC) could be a determinant factor in the success of BSC implementation. In the study we use the contingency theory framework to examine whether adopting a planned strategy improves employees’ buying into the BSC and helps to maximize the benefits of BSC implementation by enhancing corporate performance. We hypothesize that employees’ attitudes and perceptions toward the implementation of the BSC are contingent upon the type of strategy the firm is employing and the suitability of deploying the BSC with this strategy in place. We use a path model that draws an association between the firm's strategy and employee attitudes toward BSC implementation and employs OLS regression to test the association between the variables. We also examine whether employees’ positive attitudes help to improve a firm's performance as proxied by the customer, internal processes, learning and innovation, and financial perspectives of the BSC. We sent a mail survey to Canadian and US firms to collect the necessary data in order to conduct this study.

Conforming to our expectations, we find that firms that carefully plan their strategic objectives are more likely to have a positive impact on their employees’ perception of the BSC. A deliberate strategy – or planned strategy – as defined by Mintzberg (1978) is associated with higher levels of BSC awareness, perceptions of BSC ease of use, perceptions of BSC usefulness, and intentions to use the BSC. We also find that higher perceptions of BSC ease of use are positively associated with aspects of a firm's performance, such as from the customer, internal processes, and learning and innovation perspectives. Hence, we conclude that firms implementing the BSC need to take into consideration that the successful implementation of the BSC requires careful planning to ensure that the firm's strategic objectives are well formulated, in agreement with BSC measures, and effectively communicated to BSC users.

The balanced scorecard (BSC) is the most popular toll for business performance management. It can be used by managers belonging to every kind of (public or private) organization to keep track of the execution of activities and to monitor the consequences arising from the improvements projects. The (financial, customer, internal business processes, and learning/growth) perspectives of the BSC allow to plan and control the company strategy in a holistic way. Starting from its theoretical bases, this chapter describes the BSC measurement perspectives and how to build a strategy map. The chapter closes with some suggestions for ensuring the success of the BSC.

This exploratory study aims at identifying the main characteristics of strategic performance measurement systems (SPMS) that influence SPMS outcomes, which, in turn, impact firm performance. Using data from 1,990 companies in a wide range of industries, we employed path analysis and stepwise regression to test the model. We found empirical support for the model, in that SPMS have a significant effect on human resource practices and business results. The degree of BSC adoption, the impact of SPMS on human resources, the purposes for which the SPMS were designed, and the use of nonfinancial performance measures were found to have the most effect on the impact of the SPMS on business results.

This study examines the relationship between the motives for balanced scorecard (BSC) adoption and the development and use of the BSC. We expect that a stronger focus on economic adoption motives is associated with full development of the BSC and its integration into the performance measurement and control systems of the firm. In contrast, we expect that a higher focus on legitimacy as a motive for adoption leads to loose coupling of the BSC with the control systems of the firm. We expect legitimacy as a catalyst to BSC adoption leads to a lower level of BSC development and use, which enables the organization to keep the environment satisfied, but does not influence processes within the organization.

The data are obtained from a web-based survey with 88 useful responses of firms indicating that they use the BSC. The study investigates the relationship between the motives for BSC adoption (economic and legitimacy) and the development and use of the BSC. The results provide evidence for the hypothesis that economic motives for adoption positively affect the development of the BSC. In addition, the results partially support the hypothesis that legitimacy motives negatively affect the use of the BSC. When legitimacy comes via the mechanism of mimetic isomorphism, it has a negative effect on use of the BSC. Surprisingly, however, legitimacy has a positive effect on use when it comes via the mechanism of normative isomorphism.