The design and use of performance measurement innovations and organizational outcomes in Nigerian listed companies
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(2).2021.08
-
Article InfoVolume 19 2021, Issue #2, pp. 91-103
- Cited by
- 732 Views
-
575 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Performance measurement innovations (PMI) provide frameworks for the improvement of organizational performance. While developed economies have widely accepted PMI, little is known about their design and use in developing economies. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the design and use of PMI and organizational outcomes among listed firms in Nigeria. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was adopted for the analysis using cross-sectional survey data comprising 126 corporate managers in the sampled listed companies. The results showed that all the path coefficients for design of PMI and customer perspective (β = 0.325, p < 0.0001), financial (β = 0.314, p < 0.0001), internal business process (β = 0.346, p < 0.0001), and learning and growth perspectives (β = 0.367, p < 0.0001) were significantly positive. This suggests that designing performance measures to include a diversity of measurement incorporating financial and non-financial measures would positively affect organizational outcomes. Besides, diagnostic use was found to have a negative effect on customer perspective (β = –0.315, p < 0.01), while the interactive use (β = 0.411, p < 0.01) of PMI demonstrated a positive effect on it. This implies that using PMIs in a diagnostic manner brings about a negative image of the customer perspective, but it is divergent for interactive use.
Acknowledgment
The authors sincerely appreciate Covenant University, Nigeria, for sponsoring this publication.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M14, M41
-
References33
-
Tables8
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Final bootstrapped structural model showing the significance
-
- Table 1. Summary of relevant studies on diagnostic and interactive uses, design of performance measurement innovations, and organizational outcomes
- Table 2. Quality assessment for the final measurement model
- Table 3. HTMT ratios
- Table 4. Path coefficients for design and organizational outcomes
- Table 5. Path coefficients for nature of use and organizational outcomes
- Table 6. Coefficient of determination and predictive relevance
- Table 7. Inner Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)
- Table A1: List of Indicators in the Final Structural Model
-
- Acquaah, M. (2013). Management control systems, business strategy and performance: A comparative analysis of family and non-family businesses in a transition economy in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4(2), 131-146.
- Ajibolade, S. O. (2013). Management accounting systems design and company performance in Nigerian manufacturing companies: A contingency theory perspective. British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 14(2), 228-244.
- Bisbe, J., & Otley, D. (2004). The effects of the interactive use of management control systems on product innovation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29, 709-737.
- Braam, G. J. M., & Nijssen, E. J. (2004). Performance effects of using the balanced scorecard: a note on the Dutch experience. Long Range Planning, 37(4), 335-349.
- Çakmak, Z., & Akgün, I. H. (2018). A theoretical perspective on the case study method. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(1), 96-102.
- Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. London: Sage.
- Franco-Santos, M., Lucianetti, L., & Bourne, M. (2012). Contemporary performance measurement systems: A review of their consequences and a framework for research. Management Accounting Research, 23(2), 79-119.
- Guenther, T. W., & Heinicke, A. (2019). Relationships among types of use, levels of sophistication, and organizational outcomes of performance measurement systems: The crucial role of design choices. Management Accounting Research, 42, 1-25.
- Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24.
- Henri, J.-F. (2006a). Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(6), 529-558.
- Henri, J.-F. (2006b). Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(1), 77-103.
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135.
- Hiebl, M. R., & Richter, J. F. (2018). Response Rates in Management Accounting Survey Research. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 30(2), 59-79.
- Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F., & Randall, T. (2003). Performance Implications of Strategic Performance Measurement in Financial Services Firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(7-8), 715-741.
- Kaplan, R., & Norton, D. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard – Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 79.
- Kaplan, S. K., & Mikes, A. (2014). Towards a Contingency Theory of Enterprise Risk Management (Working Paper No. 13-063).
- Kazár, K. (2013). PLS Path analysis and its application for the examination of the psychological sense of a brand community. Procedia Economics and Finance, 17, 183-191.
- Koufteros, X., Verghese, A. J., & Lucianetti, L. (2014). The effect of performance measurement systems on firm performance: A cross-sectional and a longitudinal study. Journal of Operations Management, 32(6), 313-336.
- Lopez-Valeiras, E., Gonzalez-Sanchez, M. B., & Gomez-Conde, J. (2016). The effects of the interactive use of management control systems on process and organizational innovation. Review of Managerial Sciences, 10, 487-510.
- Mohamed, R., Hui, W. S., Rahman, I. K. A., & Aziz, R. A. (2014). The relationship between strategic performance measurement system and organizational capabilities: The role of beliefs and boundary control systems. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 7(1), 107-142.
- Nisha, N. (2017). An Empirical Study of the Balanced Scorecard Model: Evidence from Bangladesh. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 9(1), 68-84.
- Owolabi, F. O., Adetula, D. T., & Taleatu, A. (2016). Balanced score card and performance evaluation in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria. In Proceedings of the 28th International Business Information Management Association Conference, 9-10 November 2016, Seville, Spain.
- Oyerinde, D. T. (2011). Value- relevance of accounting information in the Nigerian stock market (Doctoral Thesis). Covenant University, Nigeria.
- Oyerogba, E. O. (2015). Management accounting practices in the developing economies: The case of Nigerian listed companies. Journal of Accounting and Management, 5(2), 76-85.
- Simons, R. (1995, March-April). Control in an Age of Empowerment. Harvard Business Review.
- Simons, R. (2000). Performance Measurement & Control Systems for Implementing Strategy. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
- Soderberg, M., Kalagnanam, S., Sheehan, N. T., & Vaidyanathan, G. (2011). When is a balanced scorecard a balanced scorecard? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(7), 688-708.
- Speckbacher, G., Bischof, J., & Pfeiffer, T. (2003). A descriptive analysis on the implementation of balanced scorecards in German-speaking countries. Management Accounting Research, 14(4), 361-387.
- Tuomela, T. (2005). The interplay of different levers of control: A case study of introducing a new performance measurement system. Management Accounting Research, 16(3), 293-320.
- Uwuigbe, U. (2011). An empirical investigation of the association between firms’ characteristics and corporate social disclosures in the Nigerian financial sector. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 13(1), 60-74.
- Webster, C. (2006). An empirical analysis of the relationships between the interactive use of performance measurement systems, creativity and performance: the intervening role of psychological empowerment (Working Paper).
- Weill, P., & Olson, M. H. (1989). An assessment of the contingency theory of MIS. Journal of Management Information Systems, 6(1), 59-86.
- Widener, S. K. (2007). An empirical analysis of the levers of control framework. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7-8), 757-788.