Go to page
 

Bibliographic Metadata

Title
Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?
AuthorHansen, Erik G. ; Schaltegger, Stefan
Published in
Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, Vol. 150, Issue 4, page 937-952
PublishedSpringer Netherlands, 2018
LanguageEnglish
Document typeJournal Article
Keywords (EN)Balanced scorecard / Corporate sustainability / Corporate social responsibility / CSR / Strategy maps / Objective function / Integrative view / Performance measurement / Performance management / Management control / Trade-offs
ISSN1573-0697
URNurn:nbn:at:at-ubl:3-1690 Persistent Identifier (URN)
DOI10.1007/s10551-017-3531-5 
Restriction-Information
 The work is publicly available
Files
Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood? [0.88 mb]
Links
Reference
Classification
Abstract (English)

In a recent systematic review of the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) literature in this journal, we developed a typology of architectures as a basis for the process of SBSC design, implementation, use, and evolution. This paper addresses a comment by Hahn and Figge (2016) designed to stimulate further research. We argue that the existing literature demonstrates that the SBSC management tool can play an important role in corporate sustainability. The SBSC architecturesas representations of goals and prioritiesform an integral and iterative part of the corporate sustainability strategy-making process and therefore cannot be isolated from it. However, the concept as such should not be overloaded (e.g. as a tool for radical change). In this paper, we first reflect on the potentials and constraints of the SBSC in relation to (1) radical or transformational change and (2) measuring performance outcomes on the level of humanearth systems. Second, we discuss the importance of SBSC architecture concerning (1) how it enables the integration of sustainability into business organisations; (2) how both strictly hierarchical cause-and-effect chains and less hierarchical designs can allow companies to seek inclusive profits; and (3) the contingency-based use of generic architectures (i.e. using the sustainability strategy and value system to determine a fitting architecture) in contrast to its use as a diagnostic tool (i.e. the architecture revealing the sustainability strategy and value system).

Stats
The PDF-Document has been downloaded 3 times.
License
CC-BY-License (4.0)Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License