This paper investigates how multiple and competing objectives are managed within an organisation, and the role that the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) plays in balancing organisational objectives. The issue of achieving multiple objectives, those which represent the interests of various stakeholders, has come to the forefront of the corporate agenda, as companies are seen increasingly as more than a source of profit for shareholders, but rather as 'citizens' playing a broader role in society. This study adopts an exploratory case study approach to understand how the BSC is used in management decision and control processes to assist with the balancing of objectives. The case organisation is a state-owned electricity company, and provides a unique setting where multiple and equally important strategic objectives exist. The results demonstrate that the BSC has the potential to help in making trade-offs and balancing objectives, but there are certain requirements for this to succeed. The paper provides insights into issues of balanced strategic management, as it discusses 'balance' in terms of both process and outcomes.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to adopt an agency theory approach to investigate the integration of environmental issues into management control systems (MCS). Prior environmental accounting research has focussed on increasing organisations’ environmental accountability by “monitoring” through external reporting to stakeholders. However, this overlooks the alignment of agents’ interests within the firm. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative case study is undertaken in a large Australian listed property trust to investigate how agents’ interests may be integrated with environmental objectives through the use of MCS. Findings From the case an analytical framework is developed to illustrate how environmental issues are incorporated into organisational behaviour through MCS. The findings include, single objective environmental MCS; multiple objective MCS, which include priorities that specify environmental and economic trade-offs; and balancing MCS, which provide overarching decision-making principles without priorities. Practical implications The findings provide examples of how an organisation may integrate environmental issues across a range of MCS and the things to consider in doing so. Originality/value This paper draws on an agency perspective as an approach to incorporate environmental issues into MCS and to align behaviour. It explains a new way in which tensions can be managed. This study is one of the first to adopt the control package approach in investigating the incorporation of environmental issues in MCS.

Research indicates that different macro‐socialisation results in systematic differences in generational characteristics, which may in turn result in different generational workplace preferences for management control systems (MCS). An exploratory study was undertaken of three generations (Baby Boomers, Generation X and Generation Y) and their MCS preferences in a large Australian professional services firm. The results found that each generation exhibited different characteristics and these differences are linked to specific generational MCS preferences for goal setting, performance evaluation, administrative controls and incentives. These findings have implications for MCS design that attracts, motivates and retains employees, improves organisational performance, and manages intergenerational conflict.

No abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this research is to understand how accounting information mobilises stakeholder salience at an industry level. Design/methodology/approach – A case study method using an explanation building approach was applied to gather information surrounding dairy industry stakeholder uses of accounting information to communicate their salience, in the historical context, leading to, and the events surrounding the milk price “war” in Australia. The Mitchell et al. (1997) stakeholder salience framework was used to advance our understanding of the different ways accounting can be mobilized by stakeholders with different types of salience attributes, at an industry level. Findings – This empirical analysis produces two insights into the relation between accounting and stakeholder salience. First, there is evidence as to how accounting information impacted on stakeholder salience at an industry level by demonstrating how accounting information (in)directly communicated and justified the increase of a stakeholder’s level of salience. Second, the Mitchell et al. (1997) model is extended by attributing levels of importance to each stakeholder attribute. It was found that, in this setting, power was the most salient attribute of the three, usurping legitimacy and urgency, leading to the outcomes observed. Research limitations/implications – This paper acknowledged the usual method limitations related to this style of qualitative research, including investigator bias and lack of statistical generalization. In addition, a second set of limitations critiques the paper’s operating framework. While the Mitchell et al. (1997) stakeholder salience model proved to be a suitable choice for this research, it is limited in the way in which stakeholder attributes are presented and used to identify stakeholders. In addition, further light may be provided on the distinctions between the different magnitudes of power, legitimacy and urgency between stakeholders after suggesting that they are not equally weighted. Practical implications – The milk price “war” remains a high-profile discussion amongst the general public. This research contributes to a better understanding of how different players (stakeholders) have their salience claims mobilized through accounting information. Practitioners in the dairy industry might reflect on the findings to enhance their legitimacy pursuits in future negotiations with their counter-parties, and better deploy accounting to achieve the same. Social implications – The findings speak more broadly to notions of social equity in stakeholder relations, for the production and distribution of a product that is ubiquitously used in society (dairy – milk). The findings from this study therefore have potential to assist policymakers better understand the strategies adopted by stakeholders to impose their influence and defend their claims in a public forum, using accounting information. Originality/value – The authors contend that the article provides evidence at an industry level, that is lacking in extant management accounting research (Collier, 2000). To this extent, an original contribution is claimed. The paper is also valuable to management accounting and management researchers studying stakeholder salience, and is one of the first to investigate this issue at an industry level, as well as express how accounting mobilises this salience.