PurposeThe aim of this paper is to debate various critical issues in the implementation and use of the balanced scorecard (BSC) as a management control tool. Because there is no self‐evident solution to these critical issues, they are termed dilemmas.Design/methodology/approachThe paper contributes to the BSC debate by collecting insights from empirical findings, as well as exploring various theoretical aspects.FindingsAfter presenting four perceived dilemmas and how they affect the implementation and use of the BSC in various settings, the paper concludes that there is a need for further debate and research on these dilemmas.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper is primarily a contribution to the debate concerning the balanced scorecard and its range of application as a management control model.Practical implicationsThe paper is motivated by an overall high rate of implementation failure in various practical settings.Originality/valueSome of the problems described have been debated before, whereas others are new. However, there has been hardly any discussion of the dilemmas in conjunction with one another. The paper is an attempt to generate important new questions about the future implementation and use of the BSC.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to further develop a conceptual framework for analysing performance management systems (PMS). The framework aims to be useful for a rich understanding of a specific organisation’s PMS. At the same time, it should preferable be simple so that it could be used even in practice. The framework adds to earlier work by Malmi and Brown (2008), Ferreira and Otley (2009), Broadbent and Laughlin (2009), Bedford and Malmi (2015) and Johanson et al. (2001). Design/methodology/approach The paper is theoretical but has also been applied to a Swedish municipality. The purpose of the latter was to understand if the framework is feasible so far. Findings The authors hold that the framework in its present form is useful to use as an analytical tool even if it needs to be subjected to further development. Research limitations/implications The paper addresses an issue that is continuously changing. This means that the suggested framework may suffer from theoretical weaknesses in some respects. To balance between a theoretically deep and exhaustive framework and a framework that is simple enough to use is a tricky question that needs further investigation. Practical implications The ambition with the framework is that it shall be useful even in practice. Originality/value The need for further research in the PMS area has been emphasised by the above researcher but also by, e.g., Van Helden and Reichard (2016). They hold that the authors need rich European cases to improve the understanding of how PMS works. The authors hold that the present framework has the potential to meet the demands from Van Helden and Reichard.

The practice of 'Management by Contract' can -as with any practice -be characterized by programmatic and technological dimensions. These dimensions contain concepts and ideas at the programmatic level, which shape the mission of the practice (concrete tasks and routines) at the technological level. Thus, the former attach the practice to the broader conceptual dimension. In this paper both of these dimensions will be analysed. The aim is to study how quality issues have been managed by contract. The first part presents some of the conceptual arguments of 'Management by Contract'. The arguments of a structure generally used (the Purchaser/Provider split) and a method often used (competitive tendering) will be discussed. The second part presents some technological effects through empirical findings. The paper concludes with an analysis of the interaction or non-interaction between these two dimensions.