Influencia de los factores de contingencia en el desarrollo del cuadro de mando integral y su asociación con un rendimiento mejorEl caso de las empresas españolas

  1. Luis Pérez Granero 1
  2. Manuel Guillén 2
  3. Alexis J. Banón-Gomis 1
  1. 1 Universidad Politécnica de Valencia
    info

    Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01460j859

  2. 2 Universitat de València
    info

    Universitat de València

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/043nxc105

Revista:
Revista de contabilidad = Spanish accounting review: [RC-SAR]

ISSN: 1138-4891

Año de publicación: 2017

Volumen: 20

Número: 1

Páginas: 82-94

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1016/J.RCSAR.2016.07.002 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDIGITUM editor

Otras publicaciones en: Revista de contabilidad = Spanish accounting review: [RC-SAR]

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

En este trabajo se analiza la relación entre algunos factores de contingencia, el nivel de uso del cuadro de mando integral (CMI) y el beneficio percibido gracias a su aplicación. El CMI es una herramienta capaz de ofrecer a los responsables de las organizaciones una visión completa de cómo a través de la integración de medidas financieras y no financieras se ejecuta la estrategia. Del análisis realizado sobre la base de los datos obtenidos de las sedes centrales de 61 empresas españolas de productos y servicios se deduce que el grado de formalización y estandarización en las empresas tiene una influencia directa y positiva en el desarrollo del CMI hacia niveles más integradores y orientados al valor añadido. Sin embargo, en relación con la influencia de otros factores examinados en esta investigación no se ha encontrado asociación significativa con un mayor desarrollo del CMI en las empresas españolas. Estos resultados contribuyen a complementar los presentados en trabajos previos (Braam y Nijssen, 2011; Cavalluzzo e Ittner, 2004). El documento también señala que el nivel de desarrollo del CMI se asocia con una mejor aplicación de los indicadores para evaluar actividades y mejorar el proceso decisorio. Finalmente, se plantean un conjunto de implicaciones relevantes para la gestión de las empresas.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16:1 (1988), 74–94.
  • Bagozzi, R., Baumgartner, H., The evaluation of structural equation models and hypothesis testing. Principles of Marketing Research, 1994, 386–422.
  • Banker, R.D., Chang, H., Pizzini, M.J., The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of performance measures linked to strategy. Accounting Review 79:1 (2004), 1–23.
  • Birkinshaw, J., Morrison, A., Hulland, J., Structural and competitive determinants of a global integration strategy. Strategic Management Journal 16:8 (1995), 637–655.
  • Bollen, K.A., Structural equations with latent variables. 1989, Nueva York, John Wiley & Sons.
  • Braam, G., Nijssen, E., Exploring antecedents of experimentation and implementation of the balanced scorecard. Journal of Management & Organization 17:06 (2011), 714–728.
  • Budde, J., Performance measure congruity and the balanced scorecard. Journal of Accounting Research 45:3 (2007), 515–539.
  • Cavalluzzo, K.S., Ittner, C.D., Implementing performance measurement innovations: Evidence from government. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29:3 (2004), 243–267.
  • Cepeda, G., Roldán, J.L., Aplicando en la práctica la técnica PLS en la administración de empresas. 2004, Murcia, XIV Congreso de ACEDE.
  • Chenhall, R.H., Reliance on manufacturing performance measures, total quality management and organizational performance. Management Accounting Research 8:2 (1997), 187–206.
  • Chenhall, R.H., 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 (2003), 127–168.
  • Chin, W.W., Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. Management Information Systems Quarterly 22:1 (1998), 7–15.
  • Chin, W.W., The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research 295:2 (1998), 295–336.
  • Chin, W.W., Newsted, P.R., Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares, 1999, 307–314.
  • Churchill, G.A. Jr., A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 1979, 64–73.
  • Cronbach, L.J., Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:3 (1951), 297–334.
  • Decoene, V., Bruggeman, W., Strategic alignment and middle-level managers’ motivation in a balanced scorecard setting. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 26:4 (2006), 429–448.
  • De Geuser, F., Mooraj, S., Oyon, D., Does the balanced scorecard add value? Empirical evidence on its effect on performance. European Accounting Review 18:1 (2009), 93–122.
  • De la Fuente, J.M., Estructura organizativa y eficiencia empresarial: propuesta de un modelo contingente de análisis. Ekonomiaz: Revista vasca de economía 30 (1994), 178–197.
  • Doll, W.J., Avenues for top management involvement in successful MIS development. MIS Quarterly, 1985, 17–35.
  • Dopico, M.I.B., Guzmán, B.A., Agra, S.C., El enfoque conductual contable y su reflejo en un cuadro de mando integral. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad 28:98 (1999), 77–104.
  • Eccles, R.G., The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Business Review 69:1 (1991), 131–137.
  • Epstein, M., Manzoni, J., Implementing corporate strategy: From tableaux de bord to balanced scorecards. European Management Journal 16:2 (1998), 190–203.
  • Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S., Wagner, M., The sustainability balanced scorecard - Linking sustainability management to business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment 11:5 (2002), 269–284.
  • Fornell, C., Bookstein, F.L., Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 1982, 440–452.
  • Fornell, C., Barclay, D.W., Rhee, B.D., A model ans simple iterative algorithm for redundancy analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 23 (1988), 349–360.
  • Fornell, C., Cha, J., Partial least squares. Advanced Methods of Marketing Research 407 (1994), 52–78.
  • Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1981), 39–50.
  • Gold, A.H., Malhotra, A., Segars, A.H., Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 18:1 (2001), 185–214.
  • Gray, P.H., Meister, D.B., Knowledge sourcing effectiveness. Management Science 50:6 (2004), 821–834.
  • Haenlein, M., Kaplan, A.M., A beginner's guide to partial least squares analysis. Understanding Statistics 3:4 (2004), 283–297.
  • Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., Kuppelwieser, V.G., Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review 26:2 (2014), 106–121.
  • Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19:2 (2011), 139–152.
  • Hamel, G., Strategy innovation and the quest for value. Sloan Management Review 39:2 (1998), 7–14.
  • Hatcher, L., A step by step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. 1994, Ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, EE. UU.
  • Hendricks, K., Hora, M., Menor, L., Wiedman, C., Adoption of the balanced scorecard: A contingency variables analysis. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration 29:2 (2012), 124–138.
  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1:43 (2015), 115–135.
  • Hoque, Z., Wendy, J., Linking balanced scorecard measures to size and market factors: Impact on organizational performance. Journal of Management Accounting Research 12 (2000), 1–17.
  • Hulland, J., Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal 20:2 (1999), 195–204.
  • Ittner, C.D., Larcker, D.F., Randall, T., Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firms. Accounting Organizations and Society 28:7-8 (2003), 715–741.
  • Johansson, J.K., Yip, G.S., Exploiting globalization potential: US and Japanese strategies. Strategic Management Journal 15:8 (1994), 579–601.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., The balanced scorecard - Measure that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 1992, 71–79.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Putting the balanced scorecard to work. Harvard Business Review 71:5 (1993), 134–147.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. 1996, Harvard Business School Press.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review 74:1 (1996), 75–85.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. California Management Review 39:I (1996), 53–79.
  • Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P., Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 2000 167–176, 202.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. 2001, Harvard Business School Press.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Measuring the strategic readiness of intangible assets. Harvard Business Review 82:2 (2004), 52–63.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., How to implement a new strategy without disrupting your organization. Harvard Business Review 84:3 (2006), 100–109.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Mastering the management system. Harvard Business Review 86:1 (2008), 62–77.
  • Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., Rugelsjoen, B., Managing alliances with the balanced scorecard. Harvard Business Review 88:1/2 (2010), 114–120.
  • Koller, T., Mateache, P., Impacto y puesta en marcha de una gestión basada en el valor (VBM). Boletín de Estudios Económicos 52:162 (1997), 409–428.
  • Kraus, K., Lind, J., The impact of the corporate balanced scorecard on corporate control—A research note. Management Accounting Research 21 (2010), 265–277.
  • Libby, T., Salterio, S.E., Webb, A., The balanced scorecard: The effects of assurance and process accountability on managerial judgment. The Accounting Review 79:4 (2004), 1075–1094.
  • Lipe, M.G., Salterio, S.E., The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of common and unique performance measures. The Accounting Review 75:3 (2000), 283–298.
  • Lohmöller, J.B., Latent variables path modeling with partial leas squares. 1989, Physica-Verlag, Heildelberg.
  • Manley, J.H., Implementation attitudes: A model and a measurement methodology. Implementing Operations Research/Management Science, 1975, 183–202.
  • Marsh, R.M., Mannari, H., Technology and size as determinants of the organizational structure of Japanese factories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1981, 33–57.
  • Marrewijk, M., A value based approach to organization types: Towards a coherent set of stakeholder-oriented management tools. Journal of Business Ethics 55:2 (2004), 147–158.
  • McGowan, A.S., Klammer, T.P., Satisfaction with activity-based cost management implementation. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 9, 1997, 217.
  • Norreklit, H., The balance on the balanced scorecard a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Management Accounting Research 11:1 (2000), 65–88.
  • Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I., The assessment of reliability. Psychometric Theory 3 (1994), 248–292.
  • Quesado, P.R., Guzmán, B.A., Rodrigues, L.L., La influencia de factores relativos a la estrategia organizativa y al entorno en la adopción del cuadro de mando integral en empresas portuguesas. Revista de Contabilidad 17:2 (2014), 163–173.
  • Ringle, C., Wende, S., Becker, J., Smart PLS 3. 2015, Smart PLS GmbH, Boenningstedt.
  • Roberts, M.L., Albright, T.L., Hibbets, A.R., Debiasing balanced scorecard evaluations. Behavioral Research in Accounting 16:1 (2004), 75–88.
  • Rogers, E.M., Diffusion of innovations. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 2003.
  • Rühli, E., Sauter-Sachs, S., Towards an integrated concept of management efficiency. MIR: Management International Review, 1993, 295–313.
  • Sánchez Franco, M.J., Villarejo Ramos, Á.F., La calidad de servicio electrónico: un análisis de los efectos moderadores del comportamiento de uso de la web. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa 21 (2004), 121–152.
  • Sánchez-Franco, M.J., Roldán, J.L., Web acceptance and usage model: A comparison between goal-directed and experiential web users. Internet Research 15:1 (2005), 21–48.
  • Schultz, R., Ginzberg, M., Implementation research-the third generation. Applications of Management Science 4 (1984), 1–83.
  • Shields, M.D., An empirical analysis of firms’ implementation experiences with activity-based costing. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 7, 1995, 148.
  • Speckbacher, G., Bischof, J., Pfeiffer, T., A descriptive analysis on the implementation of balanced scorecards in German-speaking countries. Management Accounting Research 14:4 (2003), 361–387.
  • Staples, D.S., Hulland, J.S., Higgins, C.A., A self-efficacy theory explanation for the management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Organization Science 10:6 (1999), 758–776.
  • Tsang, E.W., Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal 23:9 (2002), 835–854.
  • Van der Woerd, F., Van den Brink, T., Feasibility of a responsive business scorecard - A pilot study. Journal of Business Ethics 55:2 (2004), 173–186.
  • Wong-On-Wing, B., Guo, L., Li, W., Yang, D., Reducing conflict in balanced scorecard evaluations. Accounting, Organizations and Society 32:4 (2007), 363–377.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet