IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v70y2018icp92-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The interplay between strategic risk profiles and presentation format on managers' strategic judgments using the balanced scorecard

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng, Mandy M.
  • Humphreys, Kerry A.
  • Zhang, Yichelle Y.

Abstract

Managers are increasingly aware that strategic judgments need to be made in the context of risk assessments. It has been proposed that strategic performance management systems, such as the balanced scorecard (BSC), offer a useful framework for integrating strategic risk and performance information to provide managers with a more comprehensive overview of their strategy. In this study, we conduct an experiment to investigate whether integrating strategic risk information in a BSC affects managers' responses to different strategic risk profiles when making strategy evaluation and recommendation judgments. Specifically, we provide strategic risk information either as a stand-alone list (a stand-alone approach), or incorporated in a BSC (an integrated approach). We also vary the risk profile of the strategy provided, by manipulating whether the strategy has relatively higher risks associated with performance drivers (high performance driver risks) or relatively higher risks associated with performance outcomes (high performance outcome risks). Our results show that managers make less favorable strategy evaluation and recommendation judgments with high performance driver risks than with high performance outcome risks when strategic risk information is integrated in a BSC, but not when the strategic risks are presented as a stand-alone list. While we find a significant difference in strategic risk profile effects between the two presentation formats for strategy recommendation judgments, this difference is not significant for strategy evaluation judgments. Overall, our study shows that how organizations choose to combine the reporting of strategic risk and performance information is important for managers making strategic judgments.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng, Mandy M. & Humphreys, Kerry A. & Zhang, Yichelle Y., 2018. "The interplay between strategic risk profiles and presentation format on managers' strategic judgments using the balanced scorecard," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 92-105.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:92-105
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2018.05.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368218302654
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2018.05.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank D. Hodge & Patrick E. Hopkins & David A. Wood, 2010. "The Effects of Financial Statement Information Proximity and Feedback on Cash Flow Forecasts," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 3-3, March.
    2. Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2003. "Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 337-386, December.
    3. Knechel, W. Robert & Salterio, Steven E. & Kochetova-Kozloski, Natalia, 2010. "The effect of benchmarked performance measures and strategic analysis on auditors' risk assessments and mental models," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 316-333, April.
    4. R. Alan Webb, 2004. "Managers' Commitment to the Goals Contained in a Strategic Performance Measurement System," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4), pages 925-958, December.
    5. Faccio, Mara & Marchica, Maria-Teresa & Mura, Roberto, 2016. "CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 193-209.
    6. Mertins, Lasse & Salbador, Debra & Long, James H., 2013. "The outcome effect – A review and implications for future research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 2-30.
    7. Hall, Matthew, 2011. "Do comprehensive performance measurement systems help or hinder managers' mental model development?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36703, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Frank D. Hodge & Patrick E. Hopkins & David A. Wood, 2010. "The Effects of Financial Statement Information Proximity and Feedback on Cash Flow Forecasts," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 101-133, March.
    9. Ghosh, Dipankar & Lusch, Robert F., 2000. "Outcome effect, controllability and performance evaluation of managers: some field evidence from multi-outlet businesses," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 411-425, May.
    10. Cardinaels, Eddy, 2008. "The interplay between cost accounting knowledge and presentation formats in cost-based decision-making," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 582-602, August.
    11. Mary A. Malina & Hanne S. O. Nørreklit & Frank H. Selto, 2007. "Relations among Measures, Climate of Control, and Performance Measurement Models," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 935-982, September.
    12. Lipe, Marlys Gascho & Salterio, Steven, 2002. "A note on the judgmental effects of the balanced scorecard's information organization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 531-540, August.
    13. Chenhall, Robert H., 2005. "Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: an exploratory study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 395-422, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Posch, Arthur, 2020. "Integrating risk into control system design: The complementarity between risk-focused results controls and risk-focused information sharing," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    2. Bedford, David & Bisbe, Josep & Sweeney, Breda, 2022. "Enhancing external knowledge search: The influence of performance measurement system design on the absorptive capacity of top management teams," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Jassem Suaad & Zakaria Zarina & Che Azmi Anna, 2020. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecard Architecture and Environmental Investment Decision-Making," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 193-210, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hall, Matthew, 2010. "Accounting information and managerial work," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28539, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Lisa-Marie Wibbeke & Maik Lachmann, 2020. "Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 275-328, September.
    3. Krumwiede, Kip R. & Swain, Monte R. & Thornock, Todd A. & Eggett, Dennis L., 2013. "The effects of task outcome feedback and broad domain evaluation experience on the use of unique scorecard measures," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 205-217.
    4. Blankespoor, Elizabeth & deHaan, Ed & Marinovic, Iván, 2020. "Disclosure processing costs, investors’ information choice, and equity market outcomes: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    5. Hall, Matthew, 2010. "Accounting information and managerial work," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 301-315, April.
    6. Qi Chen & Tracy R. Lewis & Katherine Schipper & Yun Zhang, 2017. "Uniform Versus Discretionary Regimes in Reporting Information with Unverifiable Precision and a Coordination Role," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 153-196, March.
    7. LIN, Zhijun & YU, Zengbiao & ZHANG, Liqun, 2014. "Performance outcomes of balanced scorecard application in hospital administration in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-15.
    8. Victor S. Maas & Niels Verdoorn, 2017. "The effects of performance report layout on managers’ subjective evaluation judgments," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(7), pages 731-751, November.
    9. Cassell, Cory A. & Myers, Linda A. & Seidel, Timothy A., 2015. "Disclosure transparency about activity in valuation allowance and reserve accounts and accruals-based earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 23-38.
    10. Hoque, Zahirul, 2014. "20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: Trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 33-59.
    11. Hall, Matthew, 2008. "The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 141-163.
    12. Martin, Rachel, 2019. "Examination and implications of experimental research on investor perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 145-169.
    13. Parsons, Linda M. & Tinkelman, Daniel, 2013. "Testing the feasibility of small multiples of sparklines to display semimonthly income statement data," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 58-76.
    14. Koonce, Lisa & Leitter, Zheng & White, Brian J., 2019. "Linked balance sheet presentation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1).
    15. Laitinen, Erkki K., 2014. "Influence of cost accounting change on performance of manufacturing firms," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 230-240.
    16. Bedford, David S. & Bisbe, Josep & Sweeney, Breda, 2019. "Performance measurement systems as generators of cognitive conflict in ambidextrous firms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 21-37.
    17. Maria Misiuda & Maik Lachmann, 2022. "Investors’ Perceptions of Sustainability Reporting—A Review of the Experimental Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-24, December.
    18. Margaret A. Abernethy & Jan Bouwens & Laurence Van Lent, 2013. "The Role of Performance Measures in the Intertemporal Decisions of Business Unit Managers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 925-961, September.
    19. Sompong Pornupatham & Hun-Tong Tan & Thanyaluk Vichitsarawong & G-Song Yoo, 2023. "The Effect of Cash Flow Presentation Method on Investors’ Forecast of Future Cash Flows," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1877-1900, March.
    20. Sharul Effendy Janudin & Farahaini Mohd Hanif & Noor Shafeeza Zainuddin, 2016. "Developing Contemporary Performance Measurement System Performance Model for Co-operatives in Malaysia: Is it Necessary?," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 6(11), pages 436-448, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:92-105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.