IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/03-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic alignment of manufacturing processes in a Balanced Scorecard-based compensation plan: a theory illustration case

Author

Listed:
  • V. DECOENE
  • W. BRUGGEMAN

Abstract

The present paper integrates the operations management and the management control literature in order to focus on the issue of strategic alignment of manufacturing processes in a Balanced Scorecard-based compensation plan. The specific objectives for this paper are twofold. First, the study offers a theoretical foundation for the thesis that alignment of manufacturing processes with business strategy will result in higher organizational performance. Second, a case study at a Belgian manufacturing division of a Danish Corporate Company shows that it is not possible to realize higher organizational performance when there is no strategic alignment of manufacturing processes.

Suggested Citation

  • V. Decoene & W. Bruggeman, 2003. "Strategic alignment of manufacturing processes in a Balanced Scorecard-based compensation plan: a theory illustration case," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 03/200, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:03/200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_03_200.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jfinan:v:43:y:1988:i:3:p:593-616 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Bonner, Sarah E. & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2002. "The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(4-5), pages 303-345.
    3. Abernethy, Margaret A. & Lillis, Anne M., 1995. "The impact of manufacturing flexibility on management control system design," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 241-258, May.
    4. Baker, G.P. & Jensen, M.C. & Murphy, K.J., 1988. "Compensation And Incentives: Practice Vs. Theory," Papers 88-05, Rochester, Business - Managerial Economics Research Center.
    5. Perera, S. & Harrison, G. & Poole, M., 1997. "Customer-focused manufacturing strategy and the use of operations-based non-financial performance measures: A research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 557-572, August.
    6. Chenhall, Robert H., 2003. "Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 127-168.
    7. Epstein, Marc & Manzoni, Jean-François, 1998. "Implementing corporate strategy:: From Tableaux de Bord to balanced scorecards," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 190-203, April.
    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. Denis Choffel & François Meyssonnier, 2005. "Dix Ans De Debats Autour Du Balanced Scorecard," Post-Print halshs-00581157, HAL.

    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. Gerdin, Jonas & Greve, Jan, 2004. "Forms of contingency fit in management accounting research--a critical review," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 303-326.
    2. Naranjo-Gil, David & Hartmann, Frank, 2007. "Management accounting systems, top management team heterogeneity and strategic change," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(7-8), pages 735-756.
    3. Kourtit, K. & Waal, A. de & Nijkamp, P., 2009. "Strategic Performance Management and Creative Industry," Serie Research Memoranda 0020, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    4. Henri, Jean-Francois, 2006. "Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 529-558, August.
    5. Cooper, Christine, 2015. "Entrepreneurs of the self: The development of management control since 1976," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 14-24.
    6. Paolo Perego & Frank Hartmann, 2009. "Aligning Performance Measurement Systems With Strategy: The Case of Environmental Strategy," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(4), pages 397-428, December.
    7. Mundy, Julia, 2010. "Creating dynamic tensions through a balanced use of management control systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 499-523, July.
    8. Widener, Sally K., 2004. "An empirical investigation of the relation between the use of strategic human capital and the design of the management control system," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 377-399.
    9. Arnold, Markus & Artz, Martin, 2019. "The use of a single budget or separate budgets for planning and performance evaluation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 50-67.
    10. Iryna Alves & Sofia M. Lourenço, 2022. "The use of non-financial performance measures for managerial compensation: evidence from SMEs," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 151-187, June.
    11. van Veen-Dirks, Paula, 2010. "Different uses of performance measures: The evaluation versus reward of production managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 141-164, February.
    12. Agostino, Deborah & Arnaboldi, Michela, 2012. "Design issues in Balanced Scorecards: The “what” and “how” of control," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 327-339.
    13. Fleming, Damon M. & Chow, Chee W. & Chen, Gongmeng, 2009. "Strategy, performance-measurement systems, and performance: A study of Chinese firms," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 256-278, September.
    14. Gerdin, Jonas & Greve, Jan, 2008. "The appropriateness of statistical methods for testing contingency hypotheses in management accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 995-1009.
    15. Buhovac, Adriana Rejc & Groff, Maja Zaman, 2012. "Contemporary performance measurement systems in central and eastern Europe: a synthesis of the empirical literature," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 17(1), pages 68-103.
    16. Verbeeten, F.H.M., 2005. "New’ Performance Measures: Determinants of Their Use and Their Impact on Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-054-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    17. Gerdin, Jonas, 2005. "Management accounting system design in manufacturing departments: an empirical investigation using a multiple contingencies approach," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 99-126, February.
    18. Abdel-Maksoud, Ahmed & Dugdale, David & Luther, Robert, 2005. "Non-financial performance measurement in manufacturing companies," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 261-297.
    19. Jafar Ojra & Abdullah Promise Opute & Mohammad Mobarak Alsolmi, 2021. "Strategic management accounting and performance implications: a literature review and research agenda," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, December.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rug:rugwps:03/200. 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: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.html .

    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.