Integrating the balanced scorecard and enterprise risk management: Exploring the dynamics between management control anchor practices and subsidiary practices

This paper analyses the interplay between the balanced scorecard (BSC) and enterprise risk management (ERM) by employing a longitudinal case study of a large energy corporation (Global Energy). In contrast to prior research largely focusing on the ‘why’ question of BSC-ERM integration (i.e., benefits and potential pitfalls), we shift our attention to the ‘how’ question – unpacking processes underlying BSC-ERM integration over time, and the potential difficulties experienced by organisational actors during such processes. At the heart of our empirical findings was a hierarchically arranged management control infrastructure. The BSC served as the management control anchor practice (Ahrens, 2018), which was highly visible, including at the local business unit level. ERM, in comparison, assumed the role of a subsidiary practice struggling to gain visibility and traction, especially at the local level. BSC-ERM integration efforts spurred antagonistic social relationships among different actors, with our case highlighting two key additional factors – organisational structure and common mindset – that were of importance in analysing how BSC-ERM integration played out. Whilst prior work cautions that integration between ERM and other control practices may suppress alternative and potentially useful perspectives on risk, we found no such ill effects. Instead, ERM as a subsidiary control practice significantly increased its impact in Global Energy when integrated with the more established and impactful BSC anchor practice. We also extend prior literature on management control anchor practices by showing how ERM, as the subsidiary practice, did not simply execute predefined scripts determined by the anchor practice, but substantially influenced and changed the BSC anchor practice. The literature generally assumes that the anchor practice remains stable. However, in our case, input from ERM managers and the ERM practice led to significant changes in BSC performance evaluation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management Accounting Research
Published
2024-12-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2024.100924
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Accounting and Organizational Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.64

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Integrating the balanced scorecard and enterprise risk management: Exploring the dynamics between management control anchor practices and subsidiary practices

Anita Meidell, Christian Huber, Kalle Kraus
5 citations
Management Accounting Research
Accounting and Organizational Management
2.64
article

Integrating the balanced scorecard and enterprise risk management: Exploring the dynamics between management control anchor practices and subsidiary practices

Anita Meidell, Christian Huber, Kalle Kraus
article en
5 citations

Abstract

This paper analyses the interplay between the balanced scorecard (BSC) and enterprise risk management (ERM) by employing a longitudinal case study of a large energy corporation (Global Energy). In contrast to prior research largely focusing on the ‘why’ question of BSC-ERM integration (i.e., benefits and potential pitfalls), we shift our attention to the ‘how’ question – unpacking processes underlying BSC-ERM integration over time, and the potential difficulties experienced by organisational actors during such processes. At the heart of our empirical findings was a hierarchically arranged management control infrastructure. The BSC served as the management control anchor practice (Ahrens, 2018), which was highly visible, including at the local business unit level. ERM, in comparison, assumed the role of a subsidiary practice struggling to gain visibility and traction, especially at the local level. BSC-ERM integration efforts spurred antagonistic social relationships among different actors, with our case highlighting two key additional factors – organisational structure and common mindset – that were of importance in analysing how BSC-ERM integration played out. Whilst prior work cautions that integration between ERM and other control practices may suppress alternative and potentially useful perspectives on risk, we found no such ill effects. Instead, ERM as a subsidiary control practice significantly increased its impact in Global Energy when integrated with the more established and impactful BSC anchor practice. We also extend prior literature on management control anchor practices by showing how ERM, as the subsidiary practice, did not simply execute predefined scripts determined by the anchor practice, but substantially influenced and changed the BSC anchor practice. The literature generally assumes that the anchor practice remains stable. However, in our case, input from ERM managers and the ERM practice led to significant changes in BSC performance evaluation.

Management Accounting ResearchVol. 66
Stockholm School of Economics (SE), Copenhagen Business School (DK), Monash University (AU), Norwegian School of Economics (NO)
Equinor
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Accounting and Organizational Management
2.64
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.