How are Strategy Maps Linked to Strategic and Organizational Change? A Review of the Empirical Literature on the Balanced Scorecard
Corporate Ownership & Control, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 439-446
8 Pages Posted: 8 Feb 2015 Last revised: 7 Mar 2015
Date Written: July 6, 2014
Proponents of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) emphasize that the BSC translates strategy into action, but that Strategy Maps are a crucial mean to sustainable change. This literature review investigates how Strategy Maps are linked to strategic and organizational change. We aim at a better understanding of BSC implementations, gaps in practice, as well as remedies.
Built upon the theoretical framework of Kaplan and Norton, we conduct a systematic literature review of initially 332 empirical studies between 1992 and 2013.
We find that only 15 studies have dealt with the topic of Strategy Maps. Yet, BSC implementations that actually use Strategy Maps appear to be rather successful. Strategy Maps induce sustainable change, foster a better understanding of the BSC, facilitate evaluations of the external environment, create greater commitment, lower resistance, and are superior to a stand-alone BSC in communicating strategy. Nevertheless, we identify the common measure bias as a usual pitfall that leads to inappropriate evaluations of lower-level actors.
We assert that BSC implementations need a Strategy Map to be successful. We also highlight that there has been only little research on the topic, and that present findings might be inconclusive due to the confined range of methodology (single-organization case studies).
Keywords: Balanced Scorecard, Strategy Maps, Organizational Change, Sustainable Change, Literature Review, Common Measure Bias, Performance Measurement System, Management Control System, Diffusion, Strategy Communication, Resistance, Middle Manager
JEL Classification: M10, M40, M48, M52
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation