Strategia, incertezza ambientale e balanced scorecard. Quali impatti sulla performance aziendale?

Anteprima

Strategy, environmental uncertainty and balanced scorecard. What impacts on business performance?

Taking a contingency perspective, this study aims at exploring the linkages between strategy types (ST) and perceived environmental uncertainty (PEU) as contextual variables, the use of the balanced scorecard (BSC) and organisational performance. In particular, it has two main purposes: 1) to investigate whether the use of the BSC is influenced by ST and the level of PEU; 2) to examine the relationship between organisational performance and the interaction between the use of the BSC and the two contextual variables.

Findings are based on a questionnaire survey of a randomly selected sample including 65 large manufacturing companies in Italy. Data show that most of these companies make use of the BSC. Linear regression and two-way ANOVA were used for the statistical analyses to accomplish the purposes. Regression results reveal that greater use of the BSC is associated with higher PEU, while ST do not influence the use of the BSC. This suggests that the BSC can assist different strategic approaches. Then, the two-way ANOVA provides support for the main effect of the use of the BSC on organisational performance, while the interaction between the use of the BSC and the contextual variables does not seem to affect performance.

Keywords: contingency theory, strategy, perceived environmental uncertainty, balanced scorecard, organisational performance.

Bibliografia
  1. Agbejule A. (2005), The relationship between management accounting systems and perceived environmental uncertainty on managerial performance: a research note, Accounting and Business Research, 35, 4, pp. 295-305. Doi: 10.1080/00014788.2005.9729996.
  2. Amigoni F. (1978), Planning management control systems, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 5, 3, pp. 279-291. Doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.1978.tb01042.x.
  3. Anthony R.N, Hawkins D., Macrì D.M., Merchant K.A. (2012), Sistemi di controllo. Analisi economiche per le decisioni aziendali (tredicesima edizione), Milano, McGraw-Hill.
  4. Ax C., Bjørnenak T. (2005), Bundling and diffusion of management accounting innovations – the case of the balanced scorecard in Sweden, Management Accounting Research, 16, 1, pp. 296-311. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2004.12.002.
  5. Bassani G., Cattaneo C. (2015), Performance management systems and strategy: the state of the art in Italian journals, Management Control, 2/2015, pp. 13-40. Doi: 10.3280/MACO2015-002002.
  6. Bisbe J., Malagueño R. (2012), Using strategic performance measurement systems for strategy formulation: does it work in dynamic environments? Management Accounting Research, 23, 4, pp. 296-311. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2012.05.002.
  7. Braam G.J.M., Nijssen E.J. (2004), Performance effects of using the balanced scorecard: a note on the Dutch experience, Long Range Planning, 37, 4, pp. 335-49. Doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2004.04.007.
  8. Brunetti G. (1979), Il controllo di gestione in condizioni ambientali perturbate, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  9. Bubbio A. (2004), Il grado di diffusione della balanced scorecard nelle imprese italiane: i risultati di una ricerca, Liuc Papers n. 159, Serie Economia aziendale 21.
  10. Cadez S., Guilding C. (2008), An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency model of strategic management accounting, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 7-8, pp. 836-863. Doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2008.01.003.
  11. Chenhall R.H. (2003), Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 2-3, pp. 127-168.
  12. Chenhall R.H. (2005), Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: an exploratory study, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30, 5, pp. 395-422. Doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2004.08.001.
  13. Chenhall R.H., Langfield-Smith K. (1998), The relationship between strategic priorities management techniques and management accounting: an empirical investigation using a system approach, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23, 3, pp. 243-264. Doi: 10.1016/S0361-3682(97)00024-X.
  14. Chenhall R.H., Morris D. (1986), The impact of structure, environment, and interdependence on the perceived usefulness of management accounting systems, c, LXI, 1, pp. 16-35.
  15. Chong V.K., Chong K.M. (1997), Strategic choices, environmental uncertainty and SBU performance: a note on the intervening role of management accounting systems, Accounting and Business Research, 27, 4, pp. 268-276. Doi: 10.1080/00014788.1997.9729553.
  16. Cinquini L., Tenucci A. (2010), Strategic management accounting and business strategy: a loose coupling? Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 6, 2, pp. 228-259. Doi: 10.1108/18325911011048772.
  17. Cinquini L., Miraglia R.A., Giannetti A. (2016), Strumenti di gestione dei costi e misure di performance negli attuali contesti competitivi, Management Control, 2/2016, pp. 5-14. Doi: 10.3280/MACO2016-002001.
  18. Coller G., Collini P., Frigotto M.L. (2012), Strategia e design del sistema di controllo, Management Control, 2/2012, pp. 15-41. Doi: 10.3280/MACO2012-002002.
  19. Costantini A., Zanin F. (2017), The effect of perceived environmental uncertainty on the use and perceived usefulness of strategic management accounting: some empirical evidence, Managing Global Transitions, 15, 4, pp. 379-398. Doi: 10.26493/1854-6935.15.379-398.
  20. Cronbach L.J. (1951), Coefficient Alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, 16, pp. 297-334. Doi: 10.1007/BF02310555.
  21. Davis S., Albright T. (2004), An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard implementation on financial performance, Management Accounting Research, 15, 2, pp. 135-153. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2003.11.001.
  22. De Geuser F., Mooraj S, Oyon D. (2009), Does the Balanced Scorecard add value? Empirical evidence on its effect on performance, European Accounting Review, 18, 1, pp. 93-122. Doi: 10.1080/09638180802481698.
  23. Franco-Santos M., Lucianetti L., Bourne M. (2012), Contemporary performance measurement systems: a review of their consequences and a framework for research, Management Accounting Research, 23, 2, pp. 79-119. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2012.04.001.
  24. Gerdin J., Greve J. (2004), Forms of contingency fit in management accounting research – a critical review, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29, 3-4, pp. 303-326. Doi: 10.1016/S0361-3682(02)00096-X.
  25. Gordon L.A., Narayanan V.K. (1984), Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and organization structure: an empirical investigation, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9, 1, pp. 33-47. Doi: 10.1016/0361-3682(84)90028-X.
  26. Gosselin M. (2005), An empirical study of performance measurement in manufacturing firms, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54, 5-6, pp. 419-437. Doi: 10.1108/17410400510604566.
  27. Grant R. (2003), Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: evidence from the oil majors, Strategic Management Journal, 24, pp. 491-517. Doi: 10.1002/smj.314.
  28. Guilding C. (1999), Competitor-focused accounting: an exploratory note, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 24, 7, pp. 583-595. Doi: 10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00007-0.
  29. Gul F.A. (1991), The effects of management accounting systems and environmental uncertainty on small business managers performance, Accounting and Business Research, 22, pp. 57-61. Doi: 10.1080/00014788.1991.9729418.
  30. Gul F.A., Chia Y.M. (1994), The effects of management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and decentralization on managerial performance: a test of three-way interaction, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19, 4-5, pp. 413-426. Doi: 10.1016/0361-3682(94)90005-1.
  31. Hair J.F., Black W.C., Babin B.J., Anderson R.E. (2010), Multivariate data analysis (seventh edition), Upper Saddle River, Pearson Prentice Hall.
  32. Hendricks K., Hora, M., Menor L., Wiedman C. (2012), Adoption of the balanced scorecard: a contingency variables analysis, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 29, pp. 124-138. Doi: 10.1002/cjas.229.
  33. Hoque Z. (2005), Linking environmental uncertainty to non-financial performance measures and performance: a research note, The British Accounting Review, 37, 4, pp. 471-481. Doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2005.08.003.
  34. Hoque Z. (2014), 20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research, The British Accounting Review, 46, 1, pp. 33-59. Doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2013.10.003.
  35. Ittner S.D., Larcker D.F., Meyer W.M. (2003), Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: evidence from a balanced scorecard, The Accounting Review, 78, 3, pp. 725-758. Doi: 10.2308/accr.2003.78.3.725.
  36. Istat (2019), Rapporto sulla competitività dei settori produttivi – Edizione 2019, Roma, Istat.
  37. Jermias J., Gani L. (2004), Integrating business strategy, organizational configurations and management accounting systems with business unit effectiveness: a fitness landscape approach, Management Accounting Research, 15, 2, pp. 179-200. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2004.03.002.
  38. Jusoh R. (2008), Environmental uncertainty, performance, and the mediating role of balanced scorecard measures use: evidence from Malaysia, International Review of Business Research Papers, 4, 2, pp. 116-135.
  39. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. (1992), The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70, 1, pp. 71-79.
  40. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. (1996), Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system, Harvard Business Review, 74, 1, pp. 75-85.
  41. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. (2001), Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: part I, Accounting Horizons, 15, 1, pp. 87-104. Doi: 10.2308/acch.2001.15.1.87.
  42. Kober R., Ng J., Paul B.J. (2007), The interrelationship between management control mechanisms and strategy, Management Accounting Research, 18, 4, pp. 425-452. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2007.01.002.
  43. Kraus K., Lind J. (2010), The impact of the corporate balanced scorecard on corporate control – a research note, Management Accounting Research, 21, 4, pp. 265-277. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2010.08.001.
  44. Koufteros X, Verghese A., Lucianetti L. (2014), The effect of performance measurement systems on firm performance: A cross-sectional and a longitudinal study, Journal of Operations Management, 32, 6, pp. 313-336. Doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2014.06.003.
  45. Lal M., Hassel L. (1998), The joint impact of environmental uncertainty and tolerance of ambiguity on top managers perceptions of the usefulness of non-conventional management accounting information, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 14, 3, pp. 259-271. Doi: 10.1016/S0956-5221(98)80010-9.
  46. Langfield-Smith K. (2007), A review of quantitative research in management control systems and strategy, in Chapman C.S., Hopwood A.G., Shields M.D., editors, Handbook of Management Accounting Research, Volume 2, Oxford, Elsevier. Doi: 10.1016/S1751-3243(06)02012-8.
  47. Lucianetti L. (2011), L’adozione della Balanced Scorecard: i risultati di una ricerca empirica, Management Control, 3/2011, pp. 39-66. Doi: 10.3280/MACO2011-003003.
  48. Malina M.A. Selto F.H. (2001), Communicating and controlling strategy: an empirical study of the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard, Journal of Management Accounting Research, 13, 1, pp. 47-90. Doi: 10.2308/jmar.2001.13.1.47.
  49. Merchant K.A., Van der Stede W.A. (2007), Management control systems – Performance measurement, evaluation and incentives (second edition), Harlow, Pearson Education.
  50. Merchant K.A., Van der Stede W.A. (2017), Management control systems – Performance measurement, evaluation and incentives (fourth edition), Harlow, Pearson Education.
  51. Miles R.E., Snow C.C. (1978), Organizational strategy, structure, and process, New York, McGraw-Hill.
  52. Miller D., Friesen P.H. (1978), Archetypes of strategy formulation, Management Science, 24, 9, pp. 921-933. Doi: 10.1287/mnsc.24.9.921.
  53. Norreklit H. (2000), The balance on the balanced scorecard – a critical analysis of some of its assumptions, Management Accounting Research, 11, 1, pp. 65-88. Doi: 10.1006/mare.1999.0121.
  54. Olson E.M., Slater S.F. (2002), The balanced scorecard, competitive strategy, and performance, Business Horizons, 45, 3, pp. 11-16. Doi: 10.1016/S0007-6813(02)00198-2.
  55. Otley D. (2016), The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980-2014, Management Accounting Research, 31, pp. 45-62. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2016.02.001.
  56. Papalexandris A., Ioannou G., Prastacos G., Soderquist K.E. (2005), An integrated methodology for putting the balanced scorecard into action, European Management Journal, 23, 2, 214-227. Doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2005.02.004.
  57. Porter M. (1980), Competitive strategy, New York, The Free Press.
  58. Shieh G. (2010), Sample size determination for confidence intervals of interaction effects in moderated multiple regression with continuous predictor and moderator variables, Behavior Research Methods, 42, 3, pp. 824–835. Doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.3.824.
  59. Sohn M.H., Taewoo Y., Seok-Lyong L., Heeseok L. (2003), Corporate strategies, environmental forces, and performance measures: a weighting decision support system using the k-nearest neighbor technique, Expert Systems with Applications, 25, 3, pp. 279-292. Doi: 10.1016/S0957-4174(03)00070-8.
  60. Speckbacher G., Bischof J., Pfeiffer T. (2003), A descriptive analysis on the implementation of balanced scorecards in German-speaking countries, Management Accounting Research, 14, 4, pp. 361-387.
  61. Tavakol M., Dennick R. (2011), Making sense of Cronbach’s Alpha, International Journal of Medical Education, 2, pp. 53-55. Doi: 10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.
  62. Tymon W.G., Stout D.E., Shaw K.N. (1998), Critical analysis and recommendations regarding the role of perceived environmental uncertainty in behavioral accounting research, Behavioral Research in Accounting, 10, pp. 23-46.
  63. Widener S.K. (2006), Associations between strategic resource importance and performance measure use: the impact on firm performance, Management Accounting Research, 17, 4, pp. 433-457. Doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2005.10.002.
  64. Wiersma E. (2009), For which purposes do managers use balanced scorecards? An empirical study, Management Accounting Research, 20, 4, 239-251.
  65. Zanin F., Comuzzi E., Costantini A. (2017), Management control systems in complex settings: emerging research and opportunities, Hershey, IGI Global. Doi: 10.4018/978-1-5225-3987-2.