The Implementation and Adaptation of the Balanced Scorecard

in a Government Agency

Nur Haiza Muhammad Zawawi , University of Malaysia Terengganu

Zahirul Hoque , La Trobe Business School, La Trobe University

Despite considerable progress in understanding the adoption and practice of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC)
as a performance management tool in government organisations, how a well-designed BSC can become a
sustainable organisational practice remains under explored and of central importance. Through a qualitative
field study carried out within a government agency (Alpha), this paper demonstrates that Alpha’s senior
management implemented a BSC framework because they believed it would benefit the agency to realise its
broader organisational and socio-economic goals, namely sustainable organisational efficiency and social status.
We conclude that an organisation’s performance management systems can travel across internal organisational
boundaries over time and could be assimilated by organisational actors to become a sustained internal control
mechanism in a complex socio-political setting.

B
eing a very large and socially and politically sen- in itself. Ax and Bjørnenak (2005) suggest that the supply
sitive government agency, it’s a broad spectrum
side (propagators) effect on the diffusion process can be
of services delivered to the community . . . I
enhanced by modifying two characteristics of manage-
know that there are several measures that we developed
for use in monitoring and managing our strategies and ment accounting innovation to the interests of potential
performance, it’s quite a lot . . . The more measures adopters, namely (a) the design characteristics or
that you have, the more fragmented peoples’ attention technical specifications and (b) the rhetorical elements;
to those are and it can become problematic to measure, this is also supported by scholars such as Bourguignon
monitor and manage the broad organisational strate- et al. (2004), Andon et al. (2007) and Modell (2009).
gic initiatives and their effectiveness. - A senior Alpha Despite this progress in the performance manage-
executive1 ment research literature, the development of a BSC
in creating a sustainable organisational system within
This statement reflects the complexity of constructing
a government organisation whose primary role is
and operating a performance management system in
to operate as a provider of community services in
a large government entity. Realising the importance
several purchaser–provider arrangements is of central
of developing a sustainable performance management
importance. Prior studies in the field are relatively silent
system, in 1997 this entity implemented a Balanced
on this phenomenon. Therefore, we contribute to the
Scorecard (BSC) framework for its nationwide op-
public sector performance management literature in the
erations. This paper reports on an empirical study
following ways.
that examines the development, adoption and design
First, drawing on Abrahamson’s (1991) framework
changes of a BSC in a government entity2 (hereafter
of innovation diffusion, we provide empirical evidence
Alpha3 ). Specifically, it adds to the body of knowledge
on a government agency’s BSC implementation and
for the public sector by providing empirical evidence on
adaptation and thereby draw attention to the sustain-
how and why the BSC has changed over time to promote
ability of the BSC practice in the public sector context.
organisational system efficiency and effectiveness. Past
Abrahamson (1991) suggests that the attributes of
studies reveal that organisations deal with issues such as
whether they use the right key performance indicators
(KPIs), and that they measure what they ought to
measure (e.g., Papalexandris et al. 2004; Andon et al. Correspondence: Zahirul Hoque, Department of Accounting
2007; Hoque and Adams 2011). Offering a reason for and Data Analytics and Centre for Public Sector Governance,
the considerable attention received by the BSC concept Accountability and Performance, La Trobe Business School,
College of Arts, Social Sciences and Commerce, La Trobe
worldwide, Nørreklit (2003: 291) claims that it is the University, Bundoora, VIC 3018, Australia. Tel: + 61 3 9479 3433;
manner in which the idea of the BSC is presented as ‘per- email: [email protected]
suasive rhetoric’ rather than it being a convincing theory Accepted for publication 19 December 2018.

Australian Accounting Review No. 92 Vol. 30 Issue 1 2020 doi: 10.1111/auar.12281 65

The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

innovation can be used for two purposes: to exemplify Martin 2000; Niven 2008). That is where the BSC comes
the efficient-choice perspective and to understand the into play: measuring an organisation’s performance
ways in which the technical aspects of the BSC play their while simultaneously communicating the results to
roles in its implementation and sustainability. While individual or organisational superordinates, therefore
the literature, in general, has shown the rise and fall of demonstrating that accountability has been exercised
management accounting innovations in the struggle to (Kaplan and Norton 2004a, 2004b, 2006a, 2006b, 2008a,
embed in organisations, we demonstrate and analyse 2008b). In a review paper, Hoque (2014) summarises
how and why a BSC has passed the test of time to the developments of the BSC. In their first publication
become institutionalised practice. Second, the case study in 1992, Kaplan and Norton introduced the idea of
pinpoints the technical attributes of a BSC practice that combining financial and non-financial performance
we found to enjoy relative superiority in a government measures into a single scorecard for the wider com-
agency. Further, this paper fills a gap in the literature munity. In a follow-up book publication in 1996, they
where most prior studies have explored the external introduced the other aspects of the BSC, which they
institutional reason(s) for the adoption of new practices described as the four strategic management processes
in public sector organisations. We identify the internal used by organisations in the implementation of a BSC.
and external actors, acting as champions and change Kaplan and Norton’s (1996) version of the BSC differed
agents, who influence the successful implementation from their 1992 version, and linked BSC dimensions to
and continuation of the BSC practice. This study will be the cause-and-effect relationship (Hoque 2014). Later
of greater use to public sector and non-profit organisa- (Kaplan and Norton 2001a, 2001b) introduced a strategy
tions globally in providing an empirical example of how map for cascading the strategies and the relevant mea-
an organisation’s performance management systems sures for four of the BSC perspectives proposed in their
such as the BSC can travel across internal organisational 1996 book. Kaplan and Norton (2001a) also expanded
boundaries over time and could be assimilated by the BSC model for not-for-profit and government or-
organisational actors to become its sustained internal ganisations. Kaplan and Norton (2001b) expanded the
control mechanism in a complex socio-political setting. four strategic management processes into five principles
which demonstrated the evolution of the BSC over the
previous eight years. These four processes were devel-
New Public Management, Balanced oped to help translate the vision, to communicate and
Scorecard and Innovation Adoption Choice educate, develop an individual business plan, and create
a double-loop learning feedback process. Through the
Within the public sector environment, the principle fifth principal leadership for change could be mobilised.
of managerialism under the banner New Public Man- These new BSC developments highlight how an or-
agement (NPM) underpins the use of performance ganisation can establish strong linkages between strategy
measurement and management systems to evaluate and and operations so that employees’ everyday activities will
manage an organisation’s achievements against targets support the organisation’s strategic objectives (Chenhall
(Hood 1995, 2002; Kelly and Wanna 2001; Lapsley 2005; Hoque 2014). According to Hoque (2014), the
and Skærbæk 2012). The traditional government diversity of ideas around the BSC concept offers a more
accountability framework prescribes that agencies’ comprehensive strategy map to measure, monitor and
heads are held accountable for the performance of their manage the performance and operations of an organi-
organisations, usually in terms of the achievement of sation so that it can survive in today’s rapidly changing
outputs and outcomes (Hood 1995). The demand for business landscape. Kaplan and Norton (2001a, 2001b)
efficiency has been escalated since global NPM reform suggest that the strategy map in a BSC could manifest the
in the 1990s. The reform emphasises accountability to critical success elements and their linkages between an
replace discretionary decisions by public sector man- organisation’s strategies. Other scholars such as Malina
agers (Hood 1995). Among other things, the reform’s and Selto (2001) suggest that the BSC is an effective
agenda is centred on fostering private sector culture in approach for strategy communication and management
public sector organisations to increase efficiency and control. They find that managers respond positively to
reduce delivery costs. NPM focuses on adopting private BSC measures by reorganising resources and activities
sector styles of management practice, establishing to improve performance on those measures. Tuomela
formal performance measurement systems, downsizing (2005) finds that the BSC is used for diagnostic and in-
public services, restraining the budget and introduction teractive control purposes and has specific implications
of corporatisation, and contracting out-of-government for belief and boundary systems. Joseph (2008) observes
operations (Hood 1995; Hoque and Adams 2011). that the BSC is used to implement stakeholder-based
The performance management system derived from management strategy by addressing stakeholder issues
organisational strategies is recognised as valuable in while providing long-term growth and profitability.
contributing to government priorities (Kloot and Funck (2007) shows how the BSC is translated to equate

66 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

the interests of different logics in a public healthcare to adopt an innovation can also be driven largely by
environment. He finds that the concept of balance is the organisation’s champions. As summarised by How-
translated as a balance between the different perspec- ell and Higgins (1990: 320), champions are individuals
tives, top-down control is mixed with a decentralised who have the capacity to inspire and enthuse others with
design, and less importance is placed on the cause their vision of the potential of an innovation, persist in
and effect relationship. It has also been acknowledged promoting their vision despite strong opposition, show
(Hoque 2014) that the BSC is a holistic and balanced extraordinary confidence in themselves and their mis-
performance management approach, which might be sion, and gain the commitment of others to support the
subject to various interpretations and modifications to innovation.
adapt to different settings. Similarly, Ax and Bjørnenak Champions are powerful individuals within an
(2005) observe that the BSC concept has been inte- organisation, such as the vice president, the CEO or the
grated with other administrative innovations to appear CFO (Zaltman et al. 1973). They are able to manage a
attractive; they describe this as a fashion-setting process. coalition of individuals to redefine the innovation and
Within the innovation diffusion literature, the restructure the organisation (Rogers 2003). Studies of
rationales of organisational efficiency (internal le- accounting change document the presence of champions
gitimacy) and external legitimacy are both captured who initiate innovations and assist their implementation
in Abrahamson’s (1991) typology on innovation (e.g., Kasurinen 2002; Brown et al. 2004). Regarding the
diffusion. Abrahamson’s (1991) typology was devised BSC, Kaplan and Norton (2006a, b, 2008a, b) suggest
to address the pro-innovation bias in innovation that champions understand the limitations of traditional
diffusion research. Pro-innovation bias emerges when performance measurement systems and thus facilitate
an innovation is assumed to benefit organisations such the building and implementation of the BSC. According
that it should be diffused and should not be re-invented to Niven (2008), champions have high credibility in
or rejected by the social system (Downs and Mohr terms of their knowledge and expertise about the system,
1976; Abrahamson 1991; Rogers 2003). Building on and therefore their roles are crucial for the success of the
the idea that some technically inefficient innovations BSC innovation and adaptation. Similarly, Zaltman et
are diffused whereas efficient innovations are rejected, al. (1973) argue that in formal organisation processes,
Abrahamson suggests that the diffusion of innovations the decision to adopt an innovation is usually made by
is not necessarily due to the efficiency factor alone. relatively few individuals in powerful positions.
Instead, it can also be explained by the social and Abrahamson’s remaining three perspectives focus
political factors within which an organisation operates. on conditions of uncertainty and assume that other
Abrahamson categorises these factors as (a) efficient organisations influence innovation diffusion. The
choice, (b) forced selection, (c) fads and (d) fashions. forced-selection perspective suggests that the adoption
The efficient-choice perspective suggests that an or- of an innovative practice is imposed by other powerful
ganisation adopts an innovation when it expects that organisations such as government bodies and profes-
the innovative system would be useful for attaining sional institutions (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Moll
the organisation’s goals under resource constraints. The and Hoque 2011). The fad and fashion perspectives
decision for the adoption is usually associated with signify that adoption occurs when an organisation
the performance gap, which is the discrepancy between imitates other organisations. The former assumes that
the organisation’s expectations and its actual perfor- the organisation imitates the choices of innovation of
mance (Abrahamson 1991; Rogers 2003). In this situ- other organisations within its group or industry, such
ation, organisations can freely and independently adopt as competitors. The latter suggests that the organisation
an innovation, and they are certain about their goals imitates other organisations outside its group such as
and the innovation’s efficiency attribute in achieving consulting firms, business schools and business mass
those goals. Seen in such a context, an organisation’s media. Hence, we conjecture that an organisation’s
innovation choice ‘can be rational and can lead to choice of adopting the BSC innovation may be the result
the selection and retention of conceptually efficient of fad and fashion phenomena or an attempt to comply
administrative technologies’ (Abrahamson 1991: 590). with regulatory authorities (forced selection).
Abrahamson (1991) suggests that ‘given existing re- Drawing on Abrahamson’s notion of innovation diffu-
source constraints, agents rationally choose the innova- sion, we anticipate that an organisation’s adoption of the
tion that will allow them to most efficiently produce the BSC and changes to its design are likely to be influenced
outputs that are useful for attaining their goals’ (p. 592). by either senior management’s efficient choice to close
In the management accounting literature, there is also the organisation’s performance gaps or legitimation of
the view (Cavalluzzo and Ittner 2004; Abernethy and their organisation’s design choices to external ‘institu-
Bouwens 2005) that top management tends to imple- tions’ within which the organisation operates, or both.
ment a new system believing that the system will improve Nevertheless, the requirements of a not-for-profit or
organisational efficiency and performance. The decision government organisation and its relationship with its


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 67
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

Table 1 Number of interviewees based on job positions the interview data were cross-referenced with the
Length of
archival documents (see Appendix). Further, we also
Number of interview sought feedback from Alpha management on our draft
Participant position participants (hours) findings; no contradictory comments were received.
Senior managersa 3 2.35
Mid- and lower-level managersb 13 11.50 The research site: Alpha
Team leaders 2 2
General employees 3 3
Total 21 19.25
Alpha was chosen for empirical investigation for two
main reasons. First, as a government agency, it is so-
a Includes national managers; b Includes business managers cially and politically sensitive to its country’s economy
and politics. Second, Alpha is a complex organisation in
stakeholders would likely vary significantly from that terms of its size and activities. Alpha conducts commu-
of Kaplan and Norton’s original (1992) BSC model. nity and social service delivery operations through its
However, the parsimonious design of its four strategic nationwide network which includes more than 1000 ser-
management processes may still be present in these new vice delivery points, customer service centres and remote
frameworks within the case study, Alpha. We investigate area service centres. Alpha, as the provider, entered into
the presence of innovation decisions by contingent arrangements with the purchasing department (the min-
authority and the re-invention of the innovation that istry) to contribute to the successful implementation of
occurred after the adoption stage. We add original the government’s policies. The purchasing departments
and significant material to research in public sector develop and implement policies while Alpha is respon-
accounting and performance management, where there sible for delivering the payments and services specified
is still little research into issues of how and why the BSC by the purchasing departments.
has been diffused within public sector organisations The expectations of each purchasing department
generally and government community service-oriented are articulated in agreements between Alpha and the
agencies specifically. departments. As part of the agreement, Alpha’s CEO
must meet the performance targets and provide Annual
Assurance Statements at the end of each financial
Research Method
year. The agreement prescribes services, performance
outcomes and reporting mechanisms between two
Research design and data parties. This includes a range of commitment and ac-
countability measures specifying performance measures
To collect the research data, we adopted a qualitative and standards to be achieved in delivering the services.
case study method (Patton 1980). This approach We present our findings in turn.
helped us to investigate the phenomenon of interest
in its natural setting and make sense of or interpret
the phenomenon from people’s beliefs, perceptions Findings
and experiences (Patton 1980; Denzin and Lincoln
1994). We collected data from multiple sources, Strategic planning framework and Balanced
namely face-to-face interviews, internal management Scorecard adoption
documents and archival data from various government
websites. Within the organisation, to incorporate the govern-
We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with a ment’s outcomes and expectations, Alpha developed a
representative sample from various divisions and man- comprehensive planning framework covering strategic,
agement levels (see Table 1). We asked interviewees about business and operational planning. Strategic directions
the development and adoption of the BSC in their or- are formulated primarily to reflect significant changes
ganisation and what they thought about its relevance to in Alpha’s business which are largely instigated by
their daily operation (see Appendix). Overall, interviews the annual Statement of Expectations, government
lasted from 30 minutes to two hours. The interviews were priorities and the purchasing departments’ directions.
tape-recorded with the interviewees’ permission and Alpha’s Business Plan outlines key strategies and actions
were subsequently transcribed verbatim. The transcrip- to realise the strategic direction at the corporate level.
tions were managed and organised using NVivo software. The Business Plan is cascaded down to the group,
The software enabled us to classify and re-classify the division, branch and network planning as well as in
interview quotations into specific nodes derived from Individual Performance Agreements. The performance
research questions. During the analytical process, we agreement is based on Alpha’s strategic directions to set
applied annotations to certain quotations that reflected out an employee’s business outcomes and performance
our thinking and interpretations. To enhance validity, measures. The agreement supports Alpha’s performance

68 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

management system, which links employees’ per- and the whole organisation had to be involved to
formance and development with remuneration, achieve this’. Our review of Alpha’s archival documents
which reinforces their contributions to organisational confirmed these views about the driving force behind
objectives. the development and implementation of the BSC in the
At the national level, Alpha developed a BSC to achieve organisation.
its strategic priorities and to monitor the performance In the first stage of the BSC’s development, Alpha
of network operations. At the same time, the organi- attempted to come up with the right mix of drivers,
sation is committed to satisfying the needs of different KPIs and outcomes, as well as to develop an effective
stakeholders, as reflected in the organisation’s Strategic BSC model. A senior employee who was there during
Priorities in Table 2. the BSC adoption period recalled that ‘a concerted ef-
The BSC has come a long way in Alpha since it was fort was made to weave all the performance assessments
adopted in the late 1990s, several months after the com- and health checks within . . . that construct of Kaplan
pany began operations. Alpha’s Board of Directors de- and Norton’s BSC’. Several interviewees reported that Al-
cided that the organisation would use the BSC as the pha also developed a relationship with Harvard Business
organisation’s main performance management and ac- School to seek assistance in examining the links between
countability tool. Discussions with several interviewees the BSC and organisational learning. At that time, as
and examination of internal management reports re- mentioned by a BSC administrator at Alpha, ‘the BSC
vealed that the decision to adopt the BSC was largely was more closely aligned with Kaplan and Norton’s orig-
driven by Alpha’s first CEO. It is understood from inal BSC framework with some modifications on the
archival documents collected during our field study that terms to suit Alpha’s context as a nonprofit government
the first CEO had piloted the BSC when she was the head agency’.
of another government agency before joining Alpha. Re- Because of the implementation effort, as presented
garding her motivation for choosing the BSC, a cou- in Table 3, an earlier version of the BSC (1997–1998)
ple of interviewees, who have been in the organisation was comprised of five perspectives. They were business
since 1997, recalled that ‘she (the CEO) believed Alpha development, customer service, Alpha people, cost re-
needed to have reporting and controlling mechanisms duction and innovation, where the top-level results of
that were different from what had been done before’. One this information were portrayed.
interviewee remembered the CEO had once mentioned When asked how the BSC was spread among the
that ‘ . . . she [the CEO] had read Kaplan and Norton’s people in the organisation, one interviewee stated that
publications on the BSC, which probably inspired her the spread was by word of mouth and ‘show and tell’:
to suggest the implementation of the BSC tool’. Another ‘The balanced scorecard would’ve been first introduced
interviewee further revealed the CEO’s motivation to through an all-SES (Senior Executive Service) meeting
implement the BSC: ‘It was her [the CEO’s] concern called the Guiding Coalition at the time . . . [and the]
that people were used to managing one part of the busi- Business Development branch that might’ve put [the
ness with no regard for anybody else. And the BSC to BSC] together. But I can remember the people from that
her was really to have everybody looking at the whole team coming out and talking to our area leadership team
picture all the time and realising the interactive ability about the balanced scorecard’.
over all’. She further noted that, at that time, the BSC was not
A BSC administrator at Alpha believed that, as Alpha as simple as the current versions; in fact, it was ‘huge’4
was a new organisation, it was the right time to begin with ‘ . . . pages and pages and pages’, but ‘interestingly
using a BSC, to know how it was performing. She be- it was only one place [where] everybody could find
lieved at that time (1997): ‘We [Alpha] needed to have what they wanted about their bit of business in the one
something that we could use ourselves that would in- document’.
form ourselves at the various levels from the top down Observation of documents and interview comments
to the bottom, but it also could be used for us informing indicated that the BSC has undergone evolutionary
others, our key stakeholders’. stages that involved not only the BSC but also the
The interviewees remarked that the implementation organisation’s whole performance management frame-
started on a large scale where the whole organisation was work. As mentioned by a BSC administrator, the evo-
involved. She believed that the former CEO’s preference lution of the BSC was achieved through a series of
was that ‘everybody needs to be in the boat at the same internal and external reviews. We learned that the re-
time’ and thus all divisions had to be included. Our study views were conducted annually to ensure the relevance
revealed that one of Alpha’s approaches to internalise of performance measures and that they upheld the or-
the BSC was to set it as part of the organisation’s key ganisation’s strategies and goals. Along with this, there
strategies to measure and manage performance using were several occasions when major reviews were under-
the BSC. Interviewees shared the view that ‘ . . . since taken to improve the applicability and usefulness of the
1997, the BSC had become one of Alpha’s top priorities BSC.


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 69
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

Table 2 Alpha strategic priorities 2009–2010

1. Support the purchasing departments to improve service delivery.
2. Support our people to deliver the purchasing department’s commitments.
3. Contribute to and implement proposals to reduce red tape for our customers and providers.
4. Reduce fraud and non-compliance, and increase process accuracy.
5. Ensure that service delivery is sensitive and effective for disadvantaged people.
6. Improve service delivery to rural and regional locations to better meet the needs of their communities.
7. Ensure our service delivery is convenient, accessible and suits the diverse needs of individuals and providers.
8. Ensure workforce and information and communication technology systems capacity underpins Alpha’s ability to deliver
customer service in a complex and evolving environment with short- and long-term organisational objectives.

Table 3 Alpha’s BSC (1997–1998)

BSC dimension Strategic goals Critical performance measures
Business development To build partnerships with purchasing departments that deliver the r Client loyalty
required results and provide value for money
Customer service To increase customer and community involvement and satisfaction r Responsiveness
with services r Image
r Satisfaction
r Community loyalty

Alpha people To create an environment where people in Alpha are proud of their r Staff loyalty
contribution and are making a difference r Staff satisfaction
r Recognition and reward of
high-level performance

Cost reduction To return an efficiency dividend to government r Efficiency dividend

Innovation To provide innovative and personalised solutions, consistent with r Acceptance of new services
government policy

Table 4 Alpha’s strategic goals and the BSC (1999–2000)

BUDGET OUTCOMES
Effective delivery of services to eligible customers
BUDGET OUTPUTS
Efficient delivery of services to eligible customers


ALPHA’S KEY RESULT AREAS

Client partnerships Customer and community Alpha people Cost efficiency Innovation
National BSC outcomes

Client agency satisfaction Customer satisfaction An environment that Operating result Return on investment
with service (national develops our people’s with change project
level) skills and commitment
to service
Business partnership Customer satisfaction Cost planning
agreement outcomes with service (local level) effectiveness (national
and local level)

Design changes to the original Balanced Scorecard understanding at the time was on the roles of the BSC as
framework a planning and monitoring tool and the linkage between
the BSC, corporate goals and local planning. Attention
The first review was conducted in March 1999 to make was also paid to ensure that the BSC was integrated
sure that Alpha had the right measures of performance. coherently within the organisation’s performance infor-
That review also aimed to promote wider acceptance and mation infrastructure. Because of this review, in 1999–
understanding of the BSC functions across the organi- 2000, Alpha modified its national BSC, as illustrated in
sation. The review’s objectives indicate that the focus of Table 4.

70 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

In April 2001, Alpha incorporated its BSC into an There was a further recommendation to strengthen
automated web-based system. Statements from intervie- the analysis of cause-and-effect relationships by using
wees and data from the documents suggest that with detailed strategy mapping, as previous analyses had been
the new initiative, the BSC was made available to all or- largely based on performance information. The need for
ganisational levels via Alpha’s intranet. The information strategy maps became obvious when the auditor found
that thus became available included the achievement of that Alpha’s strategic goals were not clearly linked to its
results and analysis at the local level by community seg- business objectives. Alpha’s response at that time was:
ment, area and customer service centres, as well as at a na- ‘A couple of strategy mapping exercises some with good
tional level. Archival data collected from Alpha indicated results [whereas] others have been less effective. Alpha
that there had previously been inconsistencies with the found that developing a strategy map for all the strategic
reports created by different areas and network groups. goals against the classic perspectives [of the BSC] be-
With the new online system, however, as stated by several came complex to explain to people and cumbersome to
interviewees, the performance management reporting manage’.
became more consistent in manner and in quality, en- At that stage, Alpha was working on mapping its in-
abling comparison and ongoing monitoring by the man- ternal capability to determine the direct contribution
agement team. Interviewees also found the information of key internal business processes to the organisation.
technology to be useful. A business manager regarded the The organisation was more comfortable using a strategy
BSC as practical, in that he needed to go to only one spot map on a smaller scale of initiatives as it was found to
to discover performance on a specific measure. He could be more effective than the whole picture of the organisa-
choose to select the performance of Alpha as a whole, tion. Following the audit, Alpha conducted an internal
which could be broken down into 15 individual areas and review to incorporate the auditor’s recommendations,
further to specific services delivered by Alpha. A general which resulted in a more strategic focus and the in-
employee who was responsible for gathering information clusion of both lead and lag indicators and a strategy
on a measure across the areas held a similar view, as she map.
could see Alpha’s overall performance on that measure. In July 2005, Alpha introduced a more functional ver-
Later, from information provided by the BSC admin- sion of the BSC, called the Operational Scorecard, to give
istrators, a government audit was performed on Alpha’s an overview of its business line performance. As shown in
BSC in 2002. The purpose of this audit was to provide Table 5, the corporate scorecard covers the strategic mea-
an independent assessment of a business process that sures derived from strategic priorities, whereas the Oper-
supported the delivery of organisational outputs. One ational Scorecard captures mainly operational measures
of the reasons Alpha’s operation received attention from focused on network performance and workflow data,
the government auditor was because of the substantial building capability for the government, demonstrating
amount of government outlay involved, which needed value for money, etc. The Operational Scorecard is used
to be managed effectively and efficiently. Meanwhile, the by operational managers for reporting on actual perfor-
reason for the audit of the BSC was to assist Alpha in mance against planned performance and provides a con-
optimising the use of the BSC as well as to suggest areas sistent source of data for the Area and Customer Service
that needed improvement. A large part of the audit work Centre managers. According to one national manager,
concerned the use of the BSC, including the measures, ‘investing in the Operational Scorecard makes it much
targets and their linkage to organisational goals, cause- closer to the team leaders and Customer Service Advisors
and-effect relationships and the alignment of the BSC in Alpha’.
at different divisional levels. Although there were some Our interviews with a BSC administrator suggested
issues that needed attention, the overall conclusion by that Alpha acquired the knowledge for developing the
the auditor was that Alpha’s BSC ‘demonstrated many BSC tool through research, and such development was
elements of better practice’. an internal affair. She stated:
One issue that appeared significant from interviews
with BSC administrators was the auditor’s emphasis on We study; we do research . . . [on] what is existing series
the need for the BSC to be more strategic in focus, de- and practice of the BSC usage in organisations gener-
veloped around organisational socio-political goals. An- ally. And we know that Kaplan and Norton’s views have
other important recommendation was for the use of an been embedded over time . . . There’re ways of appro-
aching . . . the BSC . . . It needs an amendment to it
appropriate balance of lead and lag performance indi-
and we follow the theories, we know, but we also know
cators, as the auditor found that there was more focus
that there are certain things that we must be account-
on lag indicators and less on lead indicators in Alpha’s able for to the Parliament . . . There is very little training
BSC. Further, the audit revealed that the measures were available through formal means. So, we must create our
largely operational, and therefore advised Alpha to also own training and our own development . . . Part of
include contributions from corporate support and ad- that is research, part of that is a discussion with other
ministration to the organisation’s business success. organisations.


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 71
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

Table 5 Alpha’s strategy map and the BSC (2005–2006)

ALPHA’S OUTCOME
Building capability for purchasing departments Building confidence in Alpha

1. Respond to government direction 2. Protect the integrity of outlays

1A Statement of expectations 2A Payment correctness
1B Achievement of purchasing departments’ KPIs 2B Debt raised as a proportion of program outlays
3. Be valued by people
3A Favourability of media attention

Strengthening our customer focus in

line with government direction Demonstrating value for money Developing a networked organisation

4. Deliver the welfare to work 6. Connect with purchasing 8. Ensure the best service offer at the
agenda departments so customers get the best price
4A Speed of referrals to the job right help 8A Purchasing department satisfaction
network 6A Extent to which Alpha is engaged with service offering provided by Alpha
5. Respond to customers’ needs and with third party organisations to 9. Manage resources effectively and
expectations consistent with deliver customer outcomes efficiently
government policy 7. Make it easy for business and the 9A Variance from the budget
5A Customer satisfaction with Alpha’s community sector to do business
services with Alpha
7A Increased number of third party
organisations dealing with Alpha

Service delivery Relationship Information

management Governance management Change management management

10. Ensure better 11. Demonstrate that 12. Manage our 13. Effective 14. Support
practice processes Alpha is controlling relationship with implementation of evidence-based
are consistently its business purchasing Alpha’s strategic decision making
applied 11A Implementation departments priorities 14A Management
10A Overall service of Strategic 12A Increase in 13A Number of information requests
quality performance Committee action satisfaction with strategic priorities met within the
in areas items Alpha as surveyed achieved agreed timeframe
13B Level of staff
understanding of
Alpha’s purpose and
their contribution to it

Learning and growth

15. Create an environment that enables staff to work safely 16. Build a culture that values leadership, collaboration
and productively and development
15A Increase in workforce capability 16A Staff Support Index
15B Compensation cost per full-time equivalent staff member

Over the course of its evolution, the BSC has improved think it’s just more like a list of information one after
in terms of readability, accessibility, presentation and the other in the scorecard. And then when somebody
information delivery. One interviewee, referring to the clever came out with the idea of mapping under one
development of the BSC, stated: ‘I think it’s sort of pick page, I think that’s probably when it really like, took the
up lots of bits and pieces. We were just being probably a lead and started running around the organisation. ‘Cos
people see really quickly how it all came together.
bit sceptical about . . . so much information. I remember
taking ages and ages, ages to be updated and reloaded, The current BSC, labelled the ‘Strategic BSC’ (SBSC),
etc. Whereas now it’s just uploaded quickly . . . And then is a comprehensive strategic management system within
you could drill into it as we would say . . . You can click Alpha. Several interviewees, however, admitted that set-
on something and then the information would come in ting meaningful targets for the SBSC was always a prob-
more detail to you’. lem for Alpha. Summarising the current position of the
She also described how the strategy map has changed BSC in Alpha, a BSC administrator stated:
the way the BSC works:
It is a complex system and there is always room for im-
I think just making it readable was probably the big provement. Certainly, in a lot of ways, I think Alpha is,
difference. So, in those days what we called the map, from our previous experience and meetings with other
which is, the various boxes and the blue screen . . . I areas of public services, has a robust BSC. Having said

72 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

that, we are always looking to improve the BSC by reg- there [pointing to the strategy map], be summed for the
ularly evaluating our targets to make it more relevant overall level of payment of correctness and this one here,
and useful, to make it more [readable] for users and to delivering payments and services on time. So, these all
make sure that we continue to measure information. If break down further and more information underneath
you ask if the system is perfect, I would say not. them’.
For the 2007/08 fiscal year there were two main per- Another reason for changes to the BSC is to accom-
spectives within Alpha’s SBSC: (a) Stakeholders and De- modate different government initiatives. Interviewees
liverables; and (b) People and Infrastructure, as shown in revealed that Alpha makes the required changes to its
Table 6. The perspectives represent the view of organisa- BSC to comply with the government’s changes to public
tional performance to be achieved to realise the outcome. sector policies. One interviewee stated:
The Deliverables and Stakeholders perspective pertains
to the actions that need to be taken to satisfy both the From a government perspective, the accountability that
deliverables or the government and the stakeholders, they expect us to achieve and to show that we have
which are the purchasing departments, other govern- achieved is from our portfolio budget statement. And
ment agencies, third party agencies and customers. The this time, as you know with Operation Sunlight, the ex-
isting government wants us to make significant changes
People and Infrastructure perspective focuses on people,
in the portfolio budget statement and we’ve done that.
systems, resources and culture appropriate to delivery
It’s been signed off by the minister and published. How
to the stakeholders and to deliverables. The strategy the organisation then identifies and constructs their own
map illustrates the basic cause-and-effect relationships internal measuring frameworks is up to each organisa-
among the perspectives, where the two perspectives are tion . . . It would be not very wise not to have a clear
categorised into Driver or Lead and Results or Lag. line of sight from the portfolio budget statement down
Within Alpha, the terminology and glossary of through all aspects of the organisation and various de-
the BSC elements were developed as part of the partments . . . [So], the external reporting is through
organisation’s guideline for a structured planning and the annual report to Parliament or the PBS [portfolio
performance process. This included specific and clear budget statement].
definitions and criteria for good measures, targets, strate-
gic initiatives, lead indicators, lag indicators and cause- Despite changes to the BSC, especially the perfor-
and-effect relationships. The guideline and a ‘tool kit’ mance measures, according to one interviewee, the key
were used to assist people involved in the organisation’s aspects of ‘client department performance, IT capabil-
strategic planning and performance management and ity, people capability, financial management and then
in developing operational performance measures. usually something about commitment to the purpose’
The people involved in this process ranged from the remain the focus of the BSC; these aspects are also doc-
executive, general managers, national managers and op- umented in different versions of the BSC (see Tables 3,
erational managers to managers with responsibilities for 4 and 5). Although certain BSC performance measures
business partnership agreements and statements of in- reflect Alpha’s external stakeholders, several interviewees
tent. The performance information of the organisational believed that the BSC very much represents the organi-
areas measured by the SBSC is contributed by the people sation scene as it is designed to be.
in charge of the respective areas or business owners,
using a template developed by the BSC team. The BSC Use of the BSC
team analyses the reports and plays coordinating and
facilitating roles in developing performance measures, In terms of design, the BSC is considered by interviewees
making a significant effort to ensure that the measures to be in line with ‘good practice and good theory’.
are appropriate. This requires a reiterative process The current position of the BSC in the organisation is
between team members and business owners who ac- reflected in interviewees’ words: that it is ‘remarkable’
tively provide feedback in the selection of performance what the BSC can do; that the organisation ‘has a robust
measures. BSC’ which is ‘pretty established’ now and it is ‘quite an
The above evidence shows that the BSC at Alpha is achievement that the organisation is able to get to that
revised almost every year, normally in response to the stage’.
organisation’s strategic priorities, purchasing depart- At Alpha, the people consistently understood, in a
ment requirements and government initiatives. Alpha general sense, the BSC and its functions as an internal
receives certain inputs from the purchasing departments performance management tool. One interviewee men-
regarding the development of performance measures tioned that the BSC served as ‘universal communication’
to be included in the BSC. An interviewee explained: across the organisation in which ‘you don’t have to have
‘A lot of the measures that have been required by the everybody’s name on it to know that you contribute to
client departments would be with the BSC as well. So, the BSC’. A BSC administrator explained how the BSC
they probably find some of them would sit maybe over was mobilised and utilised in the organisation: ‘What we


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 73
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

Table 6 Strategy map and the BSC (2007–2008)

ALPHA’S OUTCOME
↑ ↑ ↑
Strengthening customer
Stakeholders and focus in line with Developing a networked Results through
Deliverables Building confidence in Alpha government direction organisation People

1. Achievement against the 5. Improve access to 7. Support development

Statement of services by implementing and implementation of [a
Expectations [Alpha’s program] government program]
1A Achievement against the 5A Achievement against 7A Achievement against
Statement of Expectations the program’s milestones [the program’s key
and Statement of Intent 6. Make it easier for milestones]
2. Achievement of customers to deal with 8. Build better connections
purchasing department Alpha with the community
KPIs 6A The overall level of 8A The proportion of areas
2A Achievement of customer satisfaction that have implemented the
Purchasing Department KPIs 6B Increase in online endorsed community
3. Protect the integrity of transactions engagement initiatives
outlays
3A The overall level of
payment correctness
3B Reduction in customer
errors
4. Manage new budget
initiatives
4A The proportion of
budget initiatives meeting
agreed milestones

↑ ↑ ↑
Demonstrating value for money
9. Continue to build confidence in our service delivery costs, resource management and business processes
9A (i) Revenue within budget
(ii) Expenditure within budget
(iii) Net operating result within budgeted gross revenue

↑ ↑
People and Infrastructure Building capability for purchasing departments

10. Attract, train and retain skilled people to 12. Enable Alpha’s IT services and capability
deliver customer outcomes 12A The proportion of problems resolved
10A Time to fill the vacancy within agreed timeframes
10B Ensure employees have received 12B The proportion of IT services meeting
appropriate support to do their job effectively agreed service levels for staff
10C Employee-initiated separation rate within 12C Timeliness of Service Desk incident
industry benchmarks resolution – Level 1
10D Increase in employees who have 12D Management information requests met
performance agreement verified within agreed timeframes
11. Demonstrate united leadership and team
work at all levels
11A The proportion of leadership program
attendees who have demonstrated improved
leadership skill
11B Increase in workforce availability

were trying to do was to allow for a shared understanding it encourages discussion within the organisation about
of what [Alpha] plans to do to achieve those objectives. It priorities, strategic priorities and expectations’.
[the BSC] provides a common language to communicate We found that the BSC assisted the organisation
strategic objectives, plans and targets. It shows how to achieve its KPIs, the partnership agreement’s
[Alpha’s] objectives link to our financial requirements, specifications and the organisation’s own objectives.
the combination of measures that are there, and ideally, First, it enabled information on Alpha’s directions and

74 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

performance to be circulated to people inside and outside have measures in place and ways for the measure. There
the organisation. This was important, as many KPIs were are others to whom you are accountable; they need to
used throughout the organisation, and the BSC brought be satisfied that you’re expressing your accountability in
attention to critical areas. Then, results were aggregated a right way. On another way, for more internal way, we
to show the organisation’s overall performance. Another need to know how we are going, we need to know what
the good things are that we’re doing, so that would be a
BSC administrator stated that ‘one of the reasons you
celebration.
have a BSC is to try and show how the various things
[Alpha] is trying to do link together’. This enabled people It is evident that Alpha rates the importance of having
to see how their work contributed to the achievement a structured way of demonstrating performance and ac-
of organisational objectives. An interviewee explained: countability highly. It is important not only to signal to
I think that [the BSC] makes people move much more stakeholders that the organisation is heading in the right
quickly than before when we had no such process of direction but also to provide assurance that the organisa-
fixing problems because you can see the picture clearly. tion has an appropriate way of measuring and managing
It’s like, where it’s working, where is not working and its performance. The use of the BSC in such matters is
work out why they are. The greater accountability is consistent with the way the BSC is used to promote per-
absolutely . . . You can’t hide behind excuses because formance accountability within the organisation. These
you compare [peers] alongside to peers for the same findings suggest that, internally, the BSC helped improve
piece of work with the same tools that are available to the accountability and performance of Alpha’s people,
you. So, the question would be “why not” for “why if
and externally, it also showed external stakeholders Al-
you are doing better than everybody else”.
pha’s commitment to transparency and public account-
Following is the view of purchasing departments ability (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Hood 1995).
about the power of the BSC:
In general, the BSC most commonly has an internal fo- Discussion and Conclusion
cus although, in the case of [Alpha], it is used as the
basis for performance information in the Annual Re- Drawing on Abrahamson’s (1991) innovation diffusion
port. The BSC also contains information on client KPIs framework we anticipated that Alpha’s decision to im-
drawn from the partnership agreement between them plement the BSC would likely be the result of efficient
and [Alpha]. [Department C] noted that it is impor- management choice. Our study reveals that the intro-
tant that the BSC drive the development and use of
duction of the BSC in the organisation was driven by
management information to inform decision making
a single internal person (the CEO), who then engaged
within [Alpha] with a view to achieving greater con-
sistency in the provision of services to all purchasers. other key internal personnel to implement it. It is evi-
Department B also indicated that it saw advantages in dent that the first CEO played the predominant role as
its newly developing KPIs being included in the BSC to the BSC champion. She initiated the adoption, brought
ensure appropriate attention to them in [Alpha]. (The it to the board and stakeholders for approval and fa-
Government Auditor’s Report 2003) cilitated its implementation. The evidence presented
above indicates that the BSC was instigated top-down
As subunit managers also regularly report against their all the way through the organisation. Not only did the
operational BSC, they and their employees are held re- relevant personnel, especially the BSC administrators,
sponsible for their performance. One interviewee related equip themselves with BSC knowledge, various resources
this to accountability: ‘When you know that they will be were also allocated to effectively apply and enhance the
recorded, and the report will be analysed and checked by framework.
the executive. And it’s accountability to implement the Further, the study revealed that the first CEO’s de-
measure that we agree to implement’. cision to implement the BSC was because she believed
This accountability aspect is especially notable when ‘the BSC would embrace all the organisation’s strategic
it is used to monitor the performance of Alpha’s intra- goals and meet different stakeholders’ requirements’. As
network operation at area service office and BSC, which reported, our interviews with several people suggest that
are at the frontline of the organisation. Therefore, the the attributes of the BSC that clearly triggered the adop-
BSC is used not only to express accountability to exter- tion provided a relative advantage (Rogers 2003). Apart
nal bodies such as governments but also to ensure and from the benefits expected from the BSC, the CEO ex-
demonstrate accountability internally. One BSC admin- plained that the functionality of the BSC surpassed other
istrator recapitulated: performance measurement models, for instance, in its
It’s got to be [for Alpha to be successful in the BSC] be- ability to manage the performance of different aspects
cause it’s our governance framework and accountability of businesses/service centres and the linkage of strategic
framework. If you are accountable, your organisation goals to operational performance measures. Moreover,
is accountable to others like the parliament. You got to the CEO realised the interpretive viability of the BSC


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 75
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

when she encouraged the development of scorecards that to meet the needs of internal and external stakeholders.
met specific internal and external needs. Because of external and internal reviews, Alpha’s earlier
From a theoretical point of view, the element of forced (pre-2010) version of the BSC was simplified and, with
selection (Abrahamson 1991) was not the primary rea- the help of information technology, its benefits were
son for Alpha’s decision to adopt the BSC. Instead, the more readily appreciated by users. The benefits and func-
decision was largely based on the capability of the BSC tionality of the BSC have increased exponentially since
to drive changes resulting from the efficient service de- the introduction of the strategy map, which facilitates
livery requirements of the purchasing departments. Our analysis of cause and effect and links the organisation’s
evidence confirms that the possibility that adoption of strategy to local business plans. Moreover, the features
the BSC by Alpha was driven by government regulation of the BSC have been enhanced in terms of readability,
or other external pressures is less compelling because accessibility, presentation and information delivery.
in this case, the CEO, as well as the respondents inter- In its early years, Alpha experimented with the BSC,
viewed, had shown great faith in the ability of the BSC using the whole system and involving the whole organi-
to provide operational efficiency across all service cen- sation. Kaplan and Norton’s (1996) BSC framework was
tres, and thus the decision to adopt was not made to adapted for the first version of the BSC within Alpha.
imitate other organisations (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Gradually, over the years, it was refined to the version that
Abrahamson 1991). could represent the organisation and drive the desired
When we examined the capability of the BSC as a new behaviour. The BSC was trialled by finding appropriate
tool for the organisation and its people, we found that structures and measures for the organisation, including
the BSC was implemented a few months after Alpha was balancing lead and lag indicators. The trialability of the
created, and the personnel at the time of this study in the BSC in this sense was prominent in helping Alpha to
organisation perceived the BSC to be part of their daily develop the tool that best suited the organisation. This
work. It is understood that in the early years there were finding is also consistent with Bol and Moers (2010)
measures in place to address the issue of compatibility. who found that learning through experimentation with
The BSC was originally part of the organisation’s an innovation influences diffusion later. Elsewhere in the
strategic priorities to use the system for measuring literature, the BSC has been translated and adapted to
performance. Now, we find that the BSC was one of different organisations (e.g., Jazayeri and Scapens 2008;
the organisation’s central means of communicating Modell 2009).
formally and informally with its employees, especially In conclusion, the BSC’s sustainability over time can
when referring to the performance of individual service best be explained by its conceptual superiority (Rogers
delivery branches across the country. Our empirical 2003; Barretta and Busco 2011; Busco and Quattrone
evidence suggests that the BSC is regarded as familiar 2015) and organisation-wide acceptance. We found in
and fits closely with organisational situations and needs. this study that the reality offered by the BSC lies in theo-
Even though there have been changes in CEOs and the retical soundness (see also Kasurinen 2002; Barretta and
management team as well as changes in the organisa- Busco 2011; Busco and Quattrone 2015). In other words,
tion’s external environment over the years, the BSC has Alpha’s decision to adopt the BSC was more consistent
been sustained, but with certain adaptations to suit the with the efficient choice perspective (Abrahamson
changes occurring in Alpha. During our interviews with 1991), suggesting that the champion was certain about
senior Alpha executives we learnt that Alpha’s senior the benefits of the tool for the organisation. However, we
managers were convinced of the theoretical soundness of do not reject the possibility of persuasive rhetoric, as put
the BSC developments over the years and adapted them forward by Nørreklit (2000, 2003) or rhetoric influence
to suit their needs. In this case study, we found that the on the diffusion (Green 2004; Green and Li 2011); but
BSC reached a ‘sustainable’ level within the organisation. in this study we found that the attributes of the BSC
The study reveals that discussions about the BSC across models and senior management’s perceived economic
the organisation revolved around its practical applica- benefits of their implementation and adaptation played
tion and the performance measures in use; the effort of a significant role in BSC diffusion and sustainable
putting the BSC into place has become a story of the past. practice across the organisation. In our study, Abra-
The BSC had been embedded within management con- hamson’s (1991) innovation diffusion framework was
trol activities, where mechanisms and documentations useful in analysing the perspectives of the BSC adopter
were in place to cascade the organisation’s strategies to to demonstrate that organisations will not always
local levels as well as to collate information from the attempt to imitate innovations, and system efficiency,
whole organisation for managers’ decision making. and the characteristics of the innovation and the role
Table 7 highlights major points of change to the BSC. of propagators are paramount in the effectiveness of the
As summarised in this table, Alpha have undertaken system (Ax and Bjørnenak 2007; Birkinshaw et al. 2008).
several major changes to the key dimensions of the BSC, Future research may be undertaken to extend this
focusing on building the capability of the organisation study by comparing this ‘successful’ example with

76 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

Table 7 Major points of changes to the BSC at Alpha

Development timeline BSC dimension(s) Key changes to the BSC
1997–1998 Business development Multi-dimensional perspectives/KPIs
Customer service
People
Cost reduction
Innovation
1999–2000 Client partnership Explicit focus on strategy-driven BSC/KPIs
Customer and community
People
Cost efficiency
Innovation
2005–2006 Building capability for purchasing departments/clients Linking strategy map to the BSC/KPIs
People
Value for money
Innovation
Learning and growth
2007–2008 Building capability for purchasing departments/clients Outcome-focused BSC and sustainability
Value for money
Innovation
Learning and growth

another government agency that tried the BSC and dis- version of this paper also benefited from comments
carded it; this endeavour would enhance our under- from participants at Curtin University’s School of
standing of the implementation of the BSC in public Accounting Seminar 2011, Monash University Forum
sector organisations. for Management Accounting 2012, Global Accounting
Further, there is limited empirical knowledge to and Organisational Change Conference 2012, and La
demonstrate that multiple stakeholders’ objectives can Trobe University Centre for Public Sector Governance,
be managed while organisations are trying to achieve Accountability and Performance Annual Public Sector
their business goals (Sundin et al. 2010). Future study, Symposium 2012.
therefore, can extend our study by offering insights
into how the BSC could accommodate the demands Notes
of multiple external stakeholders. Kaplan and Norton
(2008a, b, 2012) suggest that the BSC can be used for 1 For reasons of confidentiality, and as agreed with the case study
organisation, the actual position titles of interviewees are not
companies to focus on economic, environmental and disclosed.
social value. The findings in this study offer new insight 2 Since the conclusion of the field study, the BSC framework and
into how an organisation’s accounting or management other systems referred to in the paper may have changed, and
practice can travel across organisational spaces over time do not necessarily reflect any or all current systems within the
and could be assimilated by organisational champions subject research site.
3 For reasons of confidentiality, the name is a pseudonym and the
and other key internal diffusers to become its sustained location is unspecified.
management control mechanism in complex public 4 Emphasised by several interviewees.
sector and non-profit organisations.
References
Data Sharing and Data Accessibility
Abernethy, M.A. and Bouwens, J. 2005, ‘Determinants of Ac-
For confidentiality reasons, as agreed with the subject counting Innovation Implementation’, Abacus, 41 (3): 217–40.
case organisation, interview data and internal manage-
ment reports collected during this study are not available Abrahamson, E. 1991, ‘Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Dif-
fusion and Rejection of Innovations’, Academy of Management
for public sharing. However, a copy of the interview pro-
Review, 16 (3): 586–612.
tocol used is available on request from the corresponding
author. Andon, P., Baxter, J. and Chua, W.F. 2007, ‘Accounting Change
as Relational Drifting: A Field Study of Experiments with
Acknowledgements Performance Measurement’, Management Accounting Research,
18 (2): 273–308.
The authors are grateful to Kenneth Merchant for his Ax, C. and Bjørnenak, T. 2005, ‘Bundling and Diffusion
comments on an earlier version of this paper. An earlier of Management Accounting Innovations: The Case of the


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 77
The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque

Balanced Scorecard in Sweden’, Management Accounting Re- Since Alvesson 1993’, Journal of Management Studies, 48 (7):
search, 16 (1): 1–20. 1662–97.
Ax, C. and Bjørnenak, T. 2007, ‘Management Accounting Inno- Hood, C. 1995, ‘The “New Public Management” in the 1980s:
vations: Origins and Diffusion’, in T. Hopper, D. Northcott and Variations on a Theme’, Accounting, Organizations and Society,
R. Scapens (eds), Issues in Management Accounting, Pearson 20 (2): 93–109.
Education Limited, Harlow, England: 45–64.
Hood, C. 2002, The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public
Barretta, A. and Busco, C. 2011, ‘Technologies of Government Management, Oxford University Press, New York.
in Public Sector’s Networks: In Search of Cooperation Through
Hoque, Z. 2014, ‘20 Years of Studies on the Balanced Score-
Management Control Innovations’, Management Accounting
card: Trends, Accomplishments, Gaps and Opportunities for
Research, 22 (4): 211–9.
Future Research’, The British Accounting Review, 46 (1):
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G. and Mol, M.J. 2008, ‘Management 33–59.
Innovation’, Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 825–45.
Hoque, Z. and Adams, C. 2011, ‘The Rise and Use of Bal-
Bol, J.C. and Moers, F. 2010, ‘The Dynamics of Incentive Con- anced Scorecard Measures in Australian Government De-
tracting: The Role of Learning in the Diffusion Process’, Ac- partments’, Financial Accountability and Management, 27 (3):
counting, Organizations and Society, 35 (8): 721–36. 308–34.
Bourguignon, A., Malleret, V. and Nørreklit, H. 2004, ‘The Howell, J.M. and Higgins, C.A. 1990, ‘Champions of Techno-
American Balanced Scorecard Versus the French Tableau de logical Innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (2):
Bord: The Ideological Dimension’, Management Accounting Re- 317–41.
search, 15 (2): 107–34.
Jazayeri, M. and Scapens, R.W. 2008, ‘The Business Values
Brown, D.A., Booth, P. and Giacobbe, F. 2004, ‘Technological Scorecard within BAE Systems: The Evolution of a Performance
and Organizational Influences on the Adoption of Activity- Measurement System’, The British Accounting Review, 40 (1):
based Costing in Australia’, Accounting and Finance, 44 (3): 48–70.
329–56.
Joseph, G. 2008, ‘A Rationale for Stakeholder-based Manage-
Busco, C. and Quattrone, P. 2015, ‘On the Adoption of Man- ment in Developing Nations’, Journal of Accounting & Organi-
agement Accounting Practices: The Balanced Scorecard as a zational Change, 4 (2): 136–61.
Rhetorical Machine’, Contemporary Accounting Research, 32
(3): 1236–62. Kaplan, R.S. 2012, ‘The Balanced Scorecard: Comments on
Balanced Scorecard Commentaries’, Journal of Accounting &
Cavalluzzo, K.S. and Ittner, C.D. 2004, ‘Implementing Per- Organizational Change, 8 (4): 539–45.
formance Measurement Innovations: Evidence from Govern-
ment’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29 (3–4): 243–67. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton D.P. 1992, ‘The Balanced Scorecard:
Measures That Drive Performance’, Harvard Business Review,
Chenhall, R.H. 2005, ‘Integrative Strategic Performance Mea- 70 (1): 71–9.
surement Systems, Strategic Alignment of Manufacturing,
Learning and Strategic Outcomes: An Exploratory Study’, Ac- Kaplan, R.S. and Norton D.P. 1996, The Balanced Scorecard:
counting, Organizations and Society, 30 (5): 395–422. Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, MA.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. 1994, ‘Introduction: Entering
the Field of Qualitative Research’, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2001a, ‘Commentary: Trans-
Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publica- forming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measure-
tions, Thousand Oaks: 1–18. ment to Strategic Management: Part I’, Accounting Horizons,
15 (1): 87–104.
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. 1983, ‘The Iron Cage Revis-
ited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2001b, ‘Commentary: Trans-
Organizational Fields’, American Sociological Review, 48 (2): forming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measure-
147–60. ment to Strategic Management: Part II’, Accounting Horizons,
15 (2): 147–60.
Downs, G.W. and Mohr, L.B. 1976, ‘Conceptual Issues in the
Study of Innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21 (4): Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2004a, ‘Measuring the Strategic
700–14. Readiness of Intangible Assets’, Harvard Business Review, 82
(2): 52–63.
Funck, E. 2007, ‘The Balanced Scorecard Equates Interests in
Healthcare Organizations’, Journal of Accounting & Organiza- Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2004b, Strategy Maps: Convert-
tional Change, 3 (2): 88–103. ing Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes, Harvard Business
Green, S.E. 2004, ‘A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion’, Academy School Press, Boston, MA.
of Management Review, 29 (4): 653–69.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2006a, ‘How to Implement a
Green, S.E. and Li, Y. 2011, ‘Rhetorical Institutionalism: New Strategy without Disrupting Your Organization’, Harvard
Language, Agency, and Structure in Institutional Theory Business Review, 84 (3): 100–9.

78 Australian Accounting Review 

C 2019 CPA Australia
N.H.M. Zawawi & Z. Hoque The Balanced Scorecard in a Government Agency

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2006b, Alignment: Using the Bal- Rogers, E.M. 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition, Free
anced Scorecard to Create Corporate Synergies, Harvard Business Press, New York.
School Press, Boston, MA.
Sundin, H., Granlund, M., and Brown, D.A. 2010, ‘Balancing
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2008a, ‘Mastering the Manage- Multiple Competing Objectives with a Balanced Scorecard’,
ment System’, Harvard Business Review, 86 (1): 62–77. European Accounting Review, 19 (2): 203–46.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2008b, The Execution Premium: Tuomela, T.-S. 2005, ‘The Interplay of Different Levers of Con-
Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Har- trol: A Case Study of Introducing a New Performance Mea-
vard Business School Press, Boston, MA. surement System’, Management Accounting Research, 16 (3):
293–320.
Kasurinen, T. 2002, ‘Exploring Management Accounting
Change: The Case of Balanced Scorecard Implementation’, Zaltman, G., Duncan, R. and Holbek, J. 1973, Innovations and
Management Accounting Research, 13 (3): 323–43. Organizations, Toronto, John Wiley & Sons.
Kelly, J. and Wanna, J. 2001, ‘Are Wildavsky’s Guardians and
Spenders Still Relevant? New Public Management and the Pol-
itics of Government Budgeting’, In L.R. Jones, J. Guthrie and P. APPENDIX
Steane (eds), Learning From International Public Management
Reform, Elsevier, Oxford, UK. Topics discussed during the interviews
Kloot, L. and Martin, J. 2000, ‘Strategic Performance Man-
agement: A Balanced Approach to Performance Management r Mission, vision, goals and objectives of Alpha
Issues in Local Government’, Management Accounting Research, r Organisational structure, accountability, governance
11 (2): 231–51. and performance
Lapsley, I. and Skærbæk, P. 2012, ‘Foreword: Why the Public
r The functions of branches/divisions
Sector Matters’, Financial Accountability & Management, 28 r Management accounting systems used
(4): 355–9. r Internal budgeting process
r Performance measurement systems of branches/
Malina, M.A. and Selto, F.H. 2001, ‘Communicating and Con-
trolling Strategy: An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of divisions/organisations
r Employee performance measurement systems
the Balanced Scorecard’, Journal of Management Accounting
Research, 13: 47–89.
r Employee involvement with BSC projects
r The development of BSC dimensions and KPIs
Modell, S. 2009, ‘Bundling Management Control Innova- r The BSC implementation process and its sustainabil-
tions: A Field Study of Organizational Experimenting with
ity
Total Quality Management and the Balanced Scorecard’, r Use of the BSC in various decisions
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 22 (1):
r Factors that triggered adoption of the BSC
59–90.
r Internal and external influences on the adoption, im-
Moll, J. and Hoque, Z. 2011, ‘Budgeting for Legitimacy: The plementation and design of the BSC
Case of an Australian University’, Accounting, Organizations r Attributes of the BSC
and Society, 36 (2): 86–101. r Changes in the BSC over the years
Niven, P.R. 2008, Balanced Scorecard: Step-by-step for Govern- r Strengths and weaknesses of the BSC
ment and Nonprofit Agencies, 2nd edition, John Wiley & Sons, r Participants’ demographic information, for exam-
New Jersey. ple, education and training, age range, professional
Nørreklit, H. 2000, ‘The Balance on the Balanced Scorecard: experience
A Critical Analysis of Some of Its Assumptions’, Management
Accounting Research, 11 (1): 65–88. List of archival documents sighted and examined
Nørreklit, H. 2003, ‘The Balanced Scorecard: What is the Score?
A Rhetorical Analysis of the Balanced Scorecard’, Accounting, (a) Annual reports (including annual reports of client
Organizations and Society, 28: 591–619. departments)
(b) Portfolio budget statements
Papalexandris, A., Ioannou, G. and Prastacos, G.P. 2004,
(c) Alpha’s strategic directions and business plan
‘Implementing the Balanced Scorecard in Greece: A Soft-
(d) Alpha’s planning and performance framework
ware Firm’s Experience’, Long Range Planning, 37 (4):
351–66. (e) Alpha employees’ agreements
(f) Government audit reports
Patton, M.Q. 1980, Qualitative Evaluation Methods, Sage Pub- (g) Publications by other government departments
lications, Beverly Hills, CA. (h) Alpha website


C 2019 CPA Australia Australian Accounting Review 79
Copyright of Australian Accounting Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.