AS LÓGICAS INSTITUCIONAIS INCORPORADAS AO BALANCED SCORECARD (BSC): UM MODELO PARA ESTUDAR A ADAPTAÇÃO DO BSC
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.4270/ruc.2018322Mots-clés :
Difusão de Contabilidade Gerencial, Mudança, Adaptação, Balanced Scorecard, Lógica Institucional.Résumé
Este artigo examina a adaptação das práticas gerenciais, em nível intraorganizacional, com foco no Balanced Scorecard. O objetivo desse estudo é propor um modelo conceitual para o estudo da adaptação do BSC em nível intraorganizacional com base na literatura da lógica institucional e no modelo proposto por Ansari et al. (2010) – de que os padrões específicos de adaptação de práticas dependerão do ajuste entre a prática em difusão e a organização adotante. Neste artigo, sugere-se que a adaptação de práticas de contabilidade gerencial numa organização pode ser determinada pelo ajuste entre a lógica institucional dominante incorporada na empresa e a lógica institucional embutida na prática em difusão. Com base nesta proposição, foi desenvolvido um modelo conceitual para estudar a adaptação do BSC em nível intraorganizacional. Como resultado, oferece-se este modelo conceitual como uma forma analítica de usar o conceito de lógica institucional para explicar o processo de adaptação do BSC em uma organização.
Téléchargements
Références
ABDEL-KADER, M. G.; MOUFTY, S.; LAITINEN, E. K. Balanced Scorecard development: a review of literature and directions for future research. In: ABDEL-KADER, M. G. (Ed.). Review of Management Accounting Research. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. p. 214-239.
ABRAHAMSON, E. Managerial fads and fashions: the diffusion and rejection of innovations. The Academy of Management Review, v. 16, n. 3, p. 586-612, 1991.
______. Management fashions. The Academy of Management Review, v. 21, n. 3, p. 254-285, 1996.
AGOSTINO, D.; ARNABOLDI, M. Design issues in Balanced Scorecards: rhe “what†and “how†of control. European Management Journal, v. 30, n. 4, p. 327-339, 2012.
ALBERT, S.; WHETTEN, D. Organizational identity. Research in Organizational Behavior, v. 7, p. 263-295, 1985.
ANSARI, S. M.; FISS, P. C.; ZAJAC, Z. J. Made to fit: how practices vary as they diffuse. Academy of Management Review, v. 35, n. 1, p. 67-92, 2010.
AX, C.; BJORNENAK, T. Management accounting innovations: origins and diffusion. In: HOPPER, T.; SCAPENS, R. W.; NORTHCOTT, D. (Eds.). Issues in management accounting. 3rd ed. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2007. p. xxii, 458.
AX, C; GREVE, J. Adoption of management accounting innovations: Organizational culture compatibility and perceived outcomes. Management Accounting Research, v. 34, p. 59-74, 2017.
BARNABÈ, F.; BUSCO, C. The causal relationships between performance drivers and outcomes: reinforcing balanced scorecards’ implementation through system dynamics models. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 8, n. 4, p. 528-538, 2012.
BESHAROV, M. L.; SMITH, W. K. Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of management review, v. 39, n. 3, p. 364-381, 2014.
BOULIANNE, E. Examining the construct validity of the balanced scorecard using multitrait-multimethod matrix. In: EPSTEIN, M. J.; MANZONI, J. F. (Eds.). Performance measurement and management control: measuring and rewarding performance. Bingley: Emerald JAI, 2008. p. xiv, 356.
BOURGUIGNON, A.; MALLERET, V. R.; NØRREKLIT, H. The American balanced scorecard versus the French tableau de bord: the ideological dimension. Management Accounting Research, v. 15, n. 2, p. 107-134, 2004.
BOXENBAUM, E.; JONSSON, S. Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling. In: GREENWOOD, R.; SUDDABY, R.; OLIVER, C.; SAHLIN-ANDERSON, K. (Eds.). Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. New York: Sage, 2008. p. 78-98.
BRIERS, M.; CHUA, W. F. The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in management accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based costing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 26, n. 3, p. 237-269, 2001.
BURKERT, M.; LUEG, R. Differences in the sophistication of value-based management: the role of top executives. Management Accounting Research, v. 24, n. 1, p. 3-22, 2013.
CARDINAELS, E.; VAN VEEN-DIRKS, P. M. G. Financial versus non-financial information: the impact of information organization and presentation in a Balanced Scorecard. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 35, n. 6, p. 565-578, 2010.
CHENG, M. M.; HUMPHREYS, K. A. The differential improvement effects of the strategy map and scorecard perspectives on managers’ strategic judgments. Accounting Review, v. 87, n. 3, p. 899-924, 2012.
COOPER, D. J.; EZZAMEL, M.; QU, S. Q. Popularizing a management accounting idea: the case of the Balanced Scorecard. Contemporary Accounting Research, v. 24, n. 2, p. 991-1025, 2017.
CRABTREE, A. D.; DEBUSK, G. K. The effects of adopting the Balanced Scorecard on shareholder returns. Advances in Accounting, v. 24, n. 1, p. 8-15, 2008.
CRUZ, I.; MAJOR, M.; SCAPENS, R. W. Institutionalization and practice variation in the management control of a global/local setting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, v. 22, n. 1, p. 91-117, 2009.
CUNLIFFE, A. L. A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about management. London: Sarge, 2009.
DAMAYANTHI, S; GOONERATNE, T. Institutional logics perspective in management control research: A review of extant literature and directions for future research. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 13, n. 4, p. 520-547, 2017.
DECHOW, N. The balanced scorecard: subjects, concept and objects – a commentary. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 8, n. 4, p. 511-527, 2012.
EZZAMEL, M.; ROBSON, K.; STAPLETON, P. The logics of budgeting: theorization and practice variation in the educational field. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 37, n. 5, p. 281-303, 2012.
FISS, P. C.; KENNEDY, M. T.; DAVIS, G. F. How golden parachutes unfolded: diffusion and variation of a controversial practice. Organization Science, v. 23, n. 4, p. 1077-1099, 2012.
FISS, P. C.; ZAJAC, E. J. The symbolic management of strategic change: sense giving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, v. 49, n. 6, p. 1173-1193, 2006.
GONDO, M. B.; AMIS, J. M. Variations in practice adoption: the roles of conscious reflection and discourse. Academy of Management Review, v. 38, n. 2, p. 229-247, 2013.
GUERREIRO, M. S.; RODRIGUES, L. L.; CRAIG, R. Voluntary adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards by large unlisted companies in Portugal – Institutional logics and strategic responses. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 37, n. 7, p. 482-499, 2012.
HOPPER, T; MAJOR, M. Extending institutional analysis through theoretical triangulation: regulation and activity-based costing in Portuguese telecommunications. European Accounting Review, v. 16, n. 1, p. 59-97, 2007.
HOQUE, Z. 20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research. The British Accounting Review, v. 46, n. 1, p. 33-59, 2014.
HYVÖNEN, T.; JÄRVINEN, J.; PELLINEN, J.; RAHKO, T. Institutional logics, ICT and stability of management accounting. European Accounting Review, v. 18, n. 2, p. 241-275, 2009.
JAZAYERI, M.; SCAPENS, R. W. The business values scorecard within BAE systems: the evolution of a performance measurement system. The British Accounting Review, v. 40, n. 1, p. 48-70, 2008.
JOHANSON, U.; SKOOG, M.; BACKLUND, A.; ALMQVIST, R. Balancing dilemmas of the balanced scorecard. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, v. 19, n. 6, p. 842-857, 2006.
JUSTESEN, L.; MOURITSEN, J. Effects of actor-network theory in accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, v. 24, n. 2, p. 161-193, 2011.
______. The balanced scorecard: comments on balanced scorecard commentaries. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 8, n. 4, p. 539-545, 2012.
KAPLAN, R. S.; NORTON, D. P. Alignment: using the balanced scorecard to create corporate synergies. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press, 2006.
______. Conceptual foundations of the balanced scorecard. Handbooks of management accounting research, v. 3, p. 1253-1269, 2009.
______. Strategy maps: converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004.
______. The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, v. 70, n. 1, p. 7191, 1992.
______. The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.
______. The execution premium: linking strategy to operations for competitive advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2008.
______. The strategy-focused organization: how balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press, 2001.
KENNEDY, M.; FISS, P. Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: the logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. Hospitals. Academy of Management Journal, v. 52, n. 5, p. 897-918, 2009.
LANDER, M. W.; KOENE, B. A. S.; LINSSEN, S. N. Committed to professionalism: organizational responses of mid-tier accounting firms to conflicting institutional logics. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 38, n. 2, p. 130-148, 2013.
LAPSLEY, I; WRIGHT, E. The diffusion of management accounting innovations in the public sector: a research agenda. Management Accounting Research, v. 15, n. 3, p. 355-374, 2004.
LATOUR, B. Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987.
LEE, C.-L.; YANG, H.-J. Organization structure, competition and performance measurement systems and their joint effects on performance. Management Accounting Research, v. 22, n. 2, p. 84-104, 2011.
LOUNSBURY, M. A tale of two cities: competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. The Academy of Management Journal, v. 50, n. 2, p. 289-307, 2007.
______. Institutional rationality and practice variation: new directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 33, n. 4-5, p. 349-361, 2008.
LOUNSBURY, M.; CRUMLEY, E. T. New practice creation: an institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, v. 28, n. 7, p. 993-1012, 2007.
LOUNSBURY, M.; VENTRESCA, M. The new structuralism in organizational theory. Organization, v. 10, n. 3, p. 457-480, 2003.
MALMI, T. Balanced scorecards in Finnish companies: a research note. Management Accounting Research, v. 12, n. 2, p. 207-220, 2001.
MALMI, T. Activity-based costing diffusion across organizations: an exploratory empirical analysis of Finnish firms. Accounting, organizations and society, v. 24, n. 8, p. 649-672, 1999.
MODELL, S. Bundling management control innovations: a field study of organisational experimenting with total quality management and the balanced scorecard. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, v. 22, n. 1, p. 59-90, 2009.
______. The politics of the balanced scorecard. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 8, n. 4, p. 475-489, 2012.
NADLER, D. A.; TUSHMAN, M. L. A model for diagnosing organizational behavior. Organizational Dynamics, v. 9, n. 2, p. 35-51, 1980.
NORREKLIT, H. The balance on the balanced scorecard a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Management Accounting Research, v. 11, n. 1, p. 65-88, 2000.
NORREKLIT, H.; MITCHELL, F. The balanced scorecard. In: Hopper, T.; Scapens, R. W.; Northcott, D. (Eds.). Issues in management accounting, 3rd ed. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2007. p. xxii, 458.
NØRREKLIT, H.; NØRREKLIT, L.; MELANDER, P. US ‘fair contract’ based performance management models in a Danish environment. Financial Accountability & Management, v. 22, n. 3, p. 213-233, 2006.
NØRREKLIT, H.; NØRREKLIT, L.; MITCHELL, F.; BJØRNENAK, T. The rise of the balanced scorecard! Relevance regained? Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, v. 8, n. 4, p. 490-510, 2012.
OLIVER, C. The antecedents of deinstitutionalization. Organizational Studies, v. 13, n. 4, p. 563-588, 1992.
PACHE, A. C.; SANTOS, F. When worlds collide: the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, v. 35, n. 3, p. 455-476, 2010.
PRESTON, A. M.; COOPER, D. J.; COOMBS, R. W. Fabricating budgets: a study of the production of management budgeting in the national health service. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 17, n. 6, p. 561-593, 1992.
QU, S.Q.; COOPER, D. J.; EZZAMEL, M. Creating and popularising a global management accounting idea: The case of the Balanced Scorecard. Research Executive Summary Series, v. 6, n. 13, p 1-5, 2010.
RIGBY, D.; BILODEAU, B. Management tools and trends: 2011. Boston, MA: Bain & Co, 2011.
ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: The Free Press, 1995.
SEO, M.-G.; CREED, W. E. D. Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: a dialectical perspective [institutional theory]. Academy of Management Review, v. 27, n. 2, p. 222-247, 2002.
SMETS, M. et al. Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing conflicting-yet-complementary logics in practice. Academy of Management Journal, v. 58, n. 3, p. 932-970, 2015.
SPECKBACHER, G.; BISCHOF, J.; PFEIFFER, T. A descriptive analysis on the implementation of balanced scorecards in German-speaking countries. Management Accounting Research, v. 14, n. 4, p. 361-388, 2003.
STURDY, A. The adoption of management ideas and practices: theoretical perspectives and possibilities. Management Learning, v. 35, 155-179, 2004.
SUDDABY, R. Challenges for institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, v. 19, n. 1, p. 14-20, 2010.
SUDDABY, R.; ELSBACH, K. D.; GREENWOOD, R.; MEYER, J. W.; ZILBER, T. B. Organizations and their institutional environments – bringing meaning, values, and culture back in: introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, v. 53, n. 6, p. 1234-1240, 2010.
SUNDIN, H.; GRANLUND, M.; BROWN, D. A. Balancing multiple competing objectives with a balanced scorecard. European Accounting Review, v. 19, n. 2, p. 203-246, 2010.
TAYLER, W. B. The balanced scorecard as a strategy-evaluation tool: the effects of implementation involvement and a causal-chain focus. The Accounting Review, v. 85, n. 3, p. 1095-1117, 2010.
TAYLOR, M. The dynamics of US managerialism and American corporations. In: SLATER, D.; TAYLOR, F. J. (Eds.). Consensus and coercion in the projection of American power. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999. p. 51-66.
THORNTON, P. H. The rise of the corporation in a craft industry: conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, v. 45, n. 1, p. 81-101, 2002.
THORNTON, P. H.; JONES, C.; KURY, K. Institutional logics and institutional change in organizations: transformation in accounting, architecture, and publishing. In: THORNTON, P. H.; JONES, C. (Eds.). Transformation in cultural industries. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, v. 23, p. 125-170, 2005.
THORNTON, P. H.; OCASIO, W. Institutional logics. In: GREENWOOD, R.; OLIVER, C.; SUDDABY, R.; SAHLIN, K. (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2008. p. 99-129.
THORNTON, P. H.; OCASIO, W.; LOUNSBURY, M. The institutional logics perspective: a new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
TOLBERT, P. S.; ZUCKER, L. G. Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 28, n. 1, p. 22-39, 1983.
WAGNER, E. L.; MOLL, J.; NEWELL, S. Accounting logics, reconfiguration of ERP systems and the emergence of new accounting practices: a socio-material perspective. Management Accounting Research, v. 22, n. 3, p. 181-197, 2011.
WONG-ON-WING, B.; GUO, L.; LI, W.; YANG, D. Reducing conflict in balanced scorecard evaluations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, v. 32, n. 4-5, p. 363-377, 2007.
WONG, J.; CHIANG, R. H. L.; MCLEOD, A. A strategic management support architecture: integration of the balanced scorecard and enterprise resource planning. International Journal of Business Information Systems, v. 4, n. 5, p. 581-595, 2009.
ZEFF, S. A. The contribution of the Harvard Business School to management control, 1908-1980. Journal of Management Accounting Research, v. 20, n. especial, p. 175-208, 2008.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
Os direitos autorais para artigos publicados nesta revista são do autor, com direitos de primeira publicação para a revista. Em virtude de aparecerem nesta revista de acesso público, os artigos são de uso gratuito, com atribuições próprias, em aplicações educacionais e não-comerciais. A revista permitirá o uso dos trabalhos publicados para fins não-comerciais, incluindo direito de enviar o trabalho para bases de dados de acesso público. Os artigos publicados são de total e exclusiva responsabilidade dos autores.
• O(s) autor(es) autoriza(m) a publicação do artigo na revista;
• O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
• A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
• É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigo às normas da publicação;
• O(s) autor(es) declaram que o artigo não possui conflitos de interesse.
