The Balanced Scorecard: A New Zealand Perspective

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC), first introduced by Kaplan and Norton in 1992, is described as a comprehensive performance measurement system as well as a strategic management tool. Over the past decade, the BSC has attracted increasing attention in mainstream management accounting research. A review of the literature identifies five main areas of criticism relating to the BSC. Using particularly Nørreklit’s (2000, 2003) criticisms of the BSC’s assumptions, this research gained views (using both a pilot and follow up survey of New Zealand companies) on the number and titles of perspectives in the BSC; the existence and understanding of cause‐and‐effect relationships; whether or not the BSC was perceived as a strategic control model; the number of performance measures and perceptions of the ability to judge performance based on those measures; and the credibility and effectiveness of the BSC as a management solution. The findings show that the BSC is not used extensively by the firms studied but those that do use it take full advantage of the BSC’s flexibility, using broader perspective names, as needed, to incorporate the desired aspects of organisational performance. There appears to be no concern over whether the cause‐and‐effect relationships meet a set of academic criteria relating to empirical verification and logical independence. However, Nørreklit’s (2000) criticism that the BSC fails to increase strategy awareness finds some support. The findings also contradict the suggestion that the BSC necessitates an excessive number of performance measures which could be detrimental to managerial performance evaluation. Finally, the criticism that the BSC is merely a trend, popularised by management consulting firms, is also not supported.