Accountability and Role Effects in Balanced Scorecard Performance Evaluations When Strategy Timeline Is Specified

Geoffrey Bartlett, Eric Johnson, Philip Reckers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study experimentally examines if fixation on lagging financial measures (relative to leading non-financial measures) as reported in prior balanced scorecard literature is mitigated when evaluators are provided with a strategy implementation timeline (a non-manipulated variable). The experiment manipulates whether or not evaluators are subject to process accountability as well as the role to which evaluators are assigned (i.e. supervisor or subordinate). We predict and find that, in general, the provision of an implementation timeline results in evaluators placing more weight on strategically linked, leading non-financial measures within a subordinate's time span of control compared to strategically linked, lagged financial measures beyond the subordinate's controllable time horizon. However, we also find that evaluators in the role of a supervisor differentiate less between strategically linked non-financial measures that fall within the subordinate's control and strategically linked financial measures beyond the subordinate's control when held accountable compared to supervisors not held accountable. On the other hand, participants in the role of a subordinate were able to differentiate appropriately between these measures when held accountable. Our results extend prior research by considering how linking a timeline to strategy implementation may assist evaluators when assessing performance in the presence of both leading and lagging strategic measures. Further, reference to an implementation timeline may influence role and accountability effects. Implications for future research in multidimensional strategic performance evaluation are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)143-165
Number of pages23
JournalEuropean Accounting Review
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Performance evaluation
Evaluator
Accountability
Balanced score card
Financial measures
Supervisors
Non-financial measures
Strategy implementation
Experiment
Placing
Time horizon
Span of control

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Accounting

Cite this

Accountability and Role Effects in Balanced Scorecard Performance Evaluations When Strategy Timeline Is Specified. / Bartlett, Geoffrey; Johnson, Eric; Reckers, Philip.

In: European Accounting Review, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2014, p. 143-165.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c34a5ed4f03b440c93a4c263d38018f4,
title = "Accountability and Role Effects in Balanced Scorecard Performance Evaluations When Strategy Timeline Is Specified",
abstract = "This study experimentally examines if fixation on lagging financial measures (relative to leading non-financial measures) as reported in prior balanced scorecard literature is mitigated when evaluators are provided with a strategy implementation timeline (a non-manipulated variable). The experiment manipulates whether or not evaluators are subject to process accountability as well as the role to which evaluators are assigned (i.e. supervisor or subordinate). We predict and find that, in general, the provision of an implementation timeline results in evaluators placing more weight on strategically linked, leading non-financial measures within a subordinate's time span of control compared to strategically linked, lagged financial measures beyond the subordinate's controllable time horizon. However, we also find that evaluators in the role of a supervisor differentiate less between strategically linked non-financial measures that fall within the subordinate's control and strategically linked financial measures beyond the subordinate's control when held accountable compared to supervisors not held accountable. On the other hand, participants in the role of a subordinate were able to differentiate appropriately between these measures when held accountable. Our results extend prior research by considering how linking a timeline to strategy implementation may assist evaluators when assessing performance in the presence of both leading and lagging strategic measures. Further, reference to an implementation timeline may influence role and accountability effects. Implications for future research in multidimensional strategic performance evaluation are discussed.",
author = "Geoffrey Bartlett and Eric Johnson and Philip Reckers",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1080/09638180.2013.809977",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "143--165",
journal = "European Accounting Review",
issn = "0963-8180",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accountability and Role Effects in Balanced Scorecard Performance Evaluations When Strategy Timeline Is Specified

AU - Bartlett, Geoffrey

AU - Johnson, Eric

AU - Reckers, Philip

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - This study experimentally examines if fixation on lagging financial measures (relative to leading non-financial measures) as reported in prior balanced scorecard literature is mitigated when evaluators are provided with a strategy implementation timeline (a non-manipulated variable). The experiment manipulates whether or not evaluators are subject to process accountability as well as the role to which evaluators are assigned (i.e. supervisor or subordinate). We predict and find that, in general, the provision of an implementation timeline results in evaluators placing more weight on strategically linked, leading non-financial measures within a subordinate's time span of control compared to strategically linked, lagged financial measures beyond the subordinate's controllable time horizon. However, we also find that evaluators in the role of a supervisor differentiate less between strategically linked non-financial measures that fall within the subordinate's control and strategically linked financial measures beyond the subordinate's control when held accountable compared to supervisors not held accountable. On the other hand, participants in the role of a subordinate were able to differentiate appropriately between these measures when held accountable. Our results extend prior research by considering how linking a timeline to strategy implementation may assist evaluators when assessing performance in the presence of both leading and lagging strategic measures. Further, reference to an implementation timeline may influence role and accountability effects. Implications for future research in multidimensional strategic performance evaluation are discussed.

AB - This study experimentally examines if fixation on lagging financial measures (relative to leading non-financial measures) as reported in prior balanced scorecard literature is mitigated when evaluators are provided with a strategy implementation timeline (a non-manipulated variable). The experiment manipulates whether or not evaluators are subject to process accountability as well as the role to which evaluators are assigned (i.e. supervisor or subordinate). We predict and find that, in general, the provision of an implementation timeline results in evaluators placing more weight on strategically linked, leading non-financial measures within a subordinate's time span of control compared to strategically linked, lagged financial measures beyond the subordinate's controllable time horizon. However, we also find that evaluators in the role of a supervisor differentiate less between strategically linked non-financial measures that fall within the subordinate's control and strategically linked financial measures beyond the subordinate's control when held accountable compared to supervisors not held accountable. On the other hand, participants in the role of a subordinate were able to differentiate appropriately between these measures when held accountable. Our results extend prior research by considering how linking a timeline to strategy implementation may assist evaluators when assessing performance in the presence of both leading and lagging strategic measures. Further, reference to an implementation timeline may influence role and accountability effects. Implications for future research in multidimensional strategic performance evaluation are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899944513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899944513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/09638180.2013.809977

DO - 10.1080/09638180.2013.809977

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84899944513

VL - 23

SP - 143

EP - 165

JO - European Accounting Review

JF - European Accounting Review

SN - 0963-8180

IS - 1

ER -