Institutional contradiction and BSC implementation: comparative organizational analysis

Purpose This paper aims to explain institutional contradictions in the balanced scorecard (BSC) implementation process between organizations, which successfully implemented BSC. The purpose of this paper is to identify a comprehensive set of potential determinants influencing the successful implementation of BSC. Design/methodology/approach This study is an exploratory investigation into the BSC implementation based on a dialectical perspective. It uses the triangulation of data collection including interviews, documents and surveys. This also includes a comprehensive scrutiny of the relevant literature; a comprehensive analysis of case studies of BSC implementations in four organizations; and interviews and documents evidences that have already implemented or are in the process of implementing BSC. Findings The BSC was successfully implemented in the organizations, when the accounting systems introduced in these organization had already been institutionalized, that is, accepted and used on day-to-day basis. The dialectical perspective postulates that for change to become institutionalized in the organization, it needs to overcome the problem of embedded agency. This process of change is possible due to the accumulation of institutional contradiction that enables human praxis to introduce change (Seo and Creed, 2002). Originality/value This paper contributes to the literature on organizational and accounting change that emphasis the crucial role that institutional contradiction plays in the process of BSC implementation. The findings of this study will help management in making crucial decisions and in resource allocations that are required to make the BSC implementation a success.