2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2009.08.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance measurement systems and their relation to strategic learning: A case study in a software-developing organization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
31
0
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
31
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Senior managers promote the interactive use of PMS to stimulate organizational learning and encourage new strategies (Simons, 1995). Additionally, a PMS fundamentally influences the chance for the alteration of organizational practices (Fried, 2010). Considering the above argument, we assume that interactive use of PMS can promote organizational learning and offer the following assumption:…”
Section: Interactive Performance Measurement Systems and Organizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Senior managers promote the interactive use of PMS to stimulate organizational learning and encourage new strategies (Simons, 1995). Additionally, a PMS fundamentally influences the chance for the alteration of organizational practices (Fried, 2010). Considering the above argument, we assume that interactive use of PMS can promote organizational learning and offer the following assumption:…”
Section: Interactive Performance Measurement Systems and Organizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Designers of MCS suppose a certain impact of the MCS on behavior in its context of use (Fried 2010;Fried et al 2013). However, Cat1 studies hardly take into consideration that the design and the actual use of MCS in the context of innovation differ and assume that a MCS constantly produces the same output.…”
Section: Categorization 1: Types Of Managerial Control In the Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In hospitals for example, the perspective held by some physicians, nurses and scientists, is that externally-defined performance measurements are simply unpractical to use (Loeb, 2004). There is the argument that medical professionals tend to believe that, what gets measured in healthcare organisations is frequently the easiest and cheapest aspects of care, which are commonly of least importance in improving quality (Loeb, 2004) and that the intangible and long-lasting outcomes are ignored, due to the difficulty of measuring them (De Bruijn, 2002;Fried, 2010). Furthermore, there is the problem that patients with seemingly similar conditions may respond in different ways to similar clinical treatment.…”
Section: Accreditation As a Regulatory Control Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%