Joint selection of balanced scorecard targets and weights in a collaborative setting

Hemantha S.B. Herath, Wayne G. Bremser and Jacob G. Birnberg

Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 2010, vol. 29, issue 1, 45-59

Abstract: Information asymmetries may create problems in developing both the balanced scorecard (BSC) targets and weights. In practice, the process of assigning weights to performance measures can be challenging in terms of reaching a consensus between top management and divisional managers. In this research, we address the issues of target and weight selection using a collaborative decision-making model. Most of the previous research related to performance measurement has assumed self-interested agents. When weights are assigned subjectively, there is evidence in the literature of common-measure bias leading to BSC disagreement (conflict). We contribute to the literature by considering actor preferences in a novel approach that permits the parties jointly to determine optimal (or approximately optimal) BSC targets and weights.

Keywords: Balanced; scorecard; Joint; decision; making; Balanced; scorecard; targets; and; weights; Negotiation; analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278-4254(09)00084-2
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:jappol:v:29:y::i:1:p:45-59

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Accounting and Public Policy is currently edited by L. A. Gordon

More articles in Journal of Accounting and Public Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().