Empirical investigation of balanced scorecard’s theoretical underpinnings

Christos Sigalas

Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 2015, vol. 11, issue 4, 546-572

Abstract: Purpose - – The purpose of this study is to investigate empirically the balanced scorecard (BSC)’s theoretical underpinnings. Design/methodology/approach - – This study undertakes a cross-sectional, self-administered e-mail survey to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the performance indicators of the BSC’s four perspectives using principal components analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Findings - – The results suggest that the performance indicators of each BSC’s perspective converge with the same perspective’s performance indicators and discriminate from other perspectives’ performance indicators. Research limitations/implications - – Future researchers are invited to conduct conceptual-level tests of the BSC framework using the newly constructed subjective scales of the performance indicators of the BSC’s perspectives. Furthermore, scholars conducting empirical research on the field are encouraged to further investigate the BSC’s theoretical underpinnings using various research designs, multiple research methods and a combination of existing and new BSC’s performance indicators. Originality/value - – This study contributes to the academic stream of management accounting and strategic management field by: empirically validating the BSC’s theoretical underpinnings that is a prerequisite for the BSC to advance from a framework to a theory and providing subjective scales for measuring the generic performance indicators of the BSC’s four perspectives that can be used in future research of the BSC framework’s hypotheses. In addition, the literature is enhanced with a newly developed perceptual measure of firm performance with attributes of the BSC’s four perspectives.

Keywords: Balanced scorecard; Performance indicators; Perceptual measure of firm performance; Subjective scales; Theoretical underpinnings of balanced scorecard; Validity of balanced scorecard framework (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:jaocpp:jaoc-03-2014-0024

DOI: 10.1108/JAOC-03-2014-0024

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change is currently edited by Prof Zahirul Hoque

More articles in Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().