Bundling and diffusion of management accounting innovations—the case of the balanced scorecard in Sweden

Abstract

Most changes in accounting are the direct or indirect consequences of diffusion processes. A study of how management accounting innovations are being adjusted and bundled together with other ideas to facilitate entry into new markets may help us to a better understanding of the popularity and adoption of management accounting practices. The present study looks at the communication, diffusion and transformation of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) in Sweden from a supply side perspective. The high interpretative viability (Benders and van Veen, 2001) of the BSC allows for different interpretations and uses of the concept that could potentially increase the supply side effect in the diffusion process, e.g. by including elements that reduce barriers and resistance to change. We have identified three elements that the propagators of the BSC include in their Swedish BSC package, in order to make the innovation more attractive to a potential Swedish adopter market.

Performance measurement design within its organisational context—Evidence from China

“…Some researchers argue that a new model needs to be rooted in the management and the organisation, so that both language and comprehension can develop (Norreklit, 2000;Malina and Selto, 2001). Embedding other techniques within new models has been suggested as an important tool for reinforcing the diffusion process in a Swedish case (Ax and Bjornenak, 2005). The present case study shows that the acknowledgment of contributions from existing practice helps to secure the support of practitioners and to improve comprehension of the new system, thereby reducing resistance.…”

“…While most models take shareholders' expectations as the objective, many organisations have recognized the need to satisfy multiple and potentially competing goals (Chenhall, 2003). There might be other stakeholders, apart from shareholders, who are important (Ax and Bjornenak, 2005;Emmanuel et al, 1990;Norreklit, 2000), and "the relative importance given to different goals may well reflect the relative power of different stakeholders" (Otley, 1999, p. 366).…”

“…For example, some scholars have built performance measurement models based on stakeholder theory and started from stakeholder analysis (e.g. Atkinson et al, 1997;Neely et al, 2002); Ax and Bjornenak (2005) reveal that one of the Swedish versions of the balanced scorecard combine it with the stakeholder model, with the term "balanced" interpreted as a "balance" among stakeholders. However, because stakeholder theory fails to provide corporate managers with a single objective which might result in managerial confusion, conflict, or even competitive failure, most stakeholder models are only used in the public sector (Jensen, 2001;McAdam et al, 2005).…”

7 Adoption and diffusion of the balanced scorecard innovation among businesses in Møre og Romsdal

“…The former represents the technical specification of an innovation and the latter the «theory» of the usefulness of the design characteristics (Bjørnenak and Olson 1999). According to Ax and Bjørnenak (2005), the process of changing or adding design characteristics or rhetorical elements is referred to as the bundling process.…”

“…consultants, conferences, software producing companies, etc. (Ax and Bjørnenak 2005). Madsen (2012) addresses the diffusion of the BSC concept in Norway in the period 1992-2011.…”