Balanced scorecard: theoretical perspectives and public management implications

By Åge Johnsen. 2001

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Political Science and International Relations, Public Administration

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6fdc341dc565151b6150cab447aeda9897682f3f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

1. Margaret Woods
2. M. Wisniewski
3. Snjólfur Ólafsson
4. Hui Hu
5. Jesmin Islam

In Political Science and International Relations

1. Margaret Woods
2. M. Wisniewski
3. Snjólfur Ólafsson

In Public Administration

1. Margaret Woods
2. M. Wisniewski
3. Snjólfur Ólafsson
4. Hui Hu
5. Jesmin Islam

Citations in the corpus

• Developing balanced scorecards in local authorities: a comparison of experience (2004, background): “If the balanced scorecard is to be used effectively in the public sector there are a number of key issues to be addressed and yet, as Johnsen (2001) comments “The public management context has hitherto received scant scholarly attention regarding use of the BSC”.”
• A contingency theory perspective on the risk management control system within Birmingham City Council (2009, background): “Kaplan and Norton (2001) observed that public sector bodies encountered “considerable difficulty in clearly defining their strategy” and this view is echoed by other researchers (Chan, 2004; Wisniewski and Olafsson, 2004), alongside an inability to couple operational performance indicators to strate”
• Performance Measurement Myths in the Public Sector: A Research Note (2004, unknown): “2 Whilst some authors (e.g., Sanderson, 2001) seem to regard participative consensus-building as antithetical to tightly coupled implementation modes, the Balanced Scorecard literature propounds that the two are consistent (Johnsen, 2001).”