does the does the balanced scorecard adoption enhance the levels of organizational climate.balanced...

7/23/2019 Does the Does the balanced scorecard adoption enhance the levels of organizational climate.Balanced Scorecard

1/29

Does the balanced scorecardadoption enhance the levels of

organizational climate,employees commitment, job

satisfaction and job dedication?Miguel Angel Calderon Molina

Department of Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Business Studies,Pablo de Olavide University, Seville, Spain

JoseManuel Hurtado Gonzalez and Beatriz Palacios FlorencioDepartment of Management and Marketing, Faculty of Business Studies,

Pablo de Olavide University, Seville, Spain, andJoseLuis Galan Gonzalez

Department of Business Administration and Marketing,Faculty of Business Studies, University of Seville, Seville, Spain

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to study the influence that balanced scorecard (BSC) adoptionhas on organizational climate, employees commitment, job satisfaction and job dedication.Design/methodology/approach Data were collected using a questionnaire sent to the employeesworking in a retail sector firm, at two different moments in time, between the years 2009 and 2010.A total of 494 questionnaires were correctly returned. The response rates were 55.6 and 60.2 percent

respectively. Tests (ANOVA) were carried out related to the constructs which make up the modelstudied, before and after the BSC implementation.Findings The results indicate a clear relationship with the satisfaction of employees within theorganization; it shows that the BSC implementation is significantly related to positive employeesaffective reactions.Originality/value The outcomes of the study are relevant both to the literature on strategic changeand business management, since they determine that the correct implementation of the BSC causesa significant change in the employees behavior and attitudes toward the firms strategic objectives.

Keywords Retailing, Balanced scorecard, Climate

Paper type Research paper

1. IntroductionManagement models have been shown to have an important influence on the

improvement of employees perceptions within their work environment (Poister andHarris, 1997). Different studies, such as those carried out by Gardner and Carlopio(1996), and Guimaraes (1996), have analyzed the employees affective reactions (forexample, job satisfaction, commitment, intention to leave the company) when facedwith the organizations efforts to implement a management model. The resultconcluded that the employees participation in the implementation were significantly

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747.htm

Management Dec

Vol. 52 No. 5,

pp. 983

r Emerald Group Publishing Li

0025

DOI 10.1108/MD-06-2013

This work has been financed by the Ministry of Education and Science of Spain through theProject ECO2012-38414.

98

BSC adopti


2/29

related to the affective reactions. In this line, Karia (1999) analyzed the impact of thepractices of management models on the attitudes connected with the employeeswork. These conclusions are consistent with other studies ( Junet al., 2006; Ooiet al.,2007a, 2008), which have found that management models raise the level of the

employees satisfaction and other variables related to perceptions about theorganization in which they work.

Nevertheless, along with the positive arguments and opinions, there are trendswhich defend the opposite proposal. Some authors have stated that management modelscreate restrictions in the employees behavior (Kivimaki et al., 1997; Ooiet al., 2008), andare capable of decreasing their satisfaction. It is worth highlighting a survey carriedout in eight organizations which had developed management programs for more thantwo years. Its conclusion was that these programs did not improve all aspects of jobsatisfaction (Lam, 1995; Ooi et al., 2008). Luthans (1996) assessed the impact of amanagement model on a health sector firm to study if it influenced the businessperformance volume and organizational commitment. The results show that the impacton job satisfaction was not significant.

These contradictory results show how it is interesting to analyze the possible impactof the implementation of a particular management system, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC)on specific aspects associated with the attitudes and behavior of the workers;implementing a BSC represents a strategic change in one of the four aspects which areconsidered when defining strategic change: the control system. Moreover, the BSChas been adopted as a valuable tool by thousands of organizations throughout the worlddue to providing a means to have a more complete picture of the organization. Somereports estimate that 40 percent of the Fortune top 1,000 companies will, by the end of2007, have used some form of the BSC (Thompson and Mathys, 2008, 2013).

As a consequence, the aim of our research is to study the influence whichimplementing a management model specifically the BSC has on the followingvariables: employees satisfaction, commitment, satisfaction with supervision,

competitive climate among the employees and job dedication. The results of thisstudy could be relevant as they can resolve if the implementation of the BSC bringsabout a significant change in the employees behavior and attitudes toward the firmsstrategic aims.

The paper is structured as follows. The next section present the rational for our studyand the hypotheses, which are constructed based on a review of the literature. Data,sample and methodology are described in Section 3. Results are discussed in Section 4.The final sections offer the discussions, conclusions and limitations of the paper.

2. Theoretical model and hypothesesAs we have previously mentioned, there have been numerous studies that havecentered on the defining of work involvement. In this vein, we are going to center on the

research of Lawler (1986, 1992, 1996) and on the studies of Vandenberg et al. (1999).Therein it was a question of the fundamental aspects which bring about an increase inthe involvement of employees. This, in turn, influences the organizations effectiveness.

Figures 1 and 2 gather the models which set up the relationships pointed out.

2.1 The BSC and employee satisfactionVarious studies reveal that the team work which the implementation of the BSC entailshas a strong influence (Yi-Feng and Islam, 2012). This is because it facilitates theworking together of the employees in search of a common goal (Karia and

984

MD52,5


3/29

Source:Vandenberg et al.(1999)

Fit management

Training opportunities

Flexibility

Incentive Practices

Work design

Commercial practices

High involvement in thework process

Power Organizational commitment

Job satisfaction

Turnover Intention

Information

Rewards

Knowledge

Psychological fit in theworkplace

Efficacy in the

organization

Business volume

Patrimony profitability

FigureFactors which influe

employee involvem

Source:Meyer and Allen (1991)

Antecedents of normative

commitment

Antecedents of calculatedcommitment

Calculated commitment

Normative commitmentEmployees health and

welfare

+

+

Antecedents of affective

commitment

Correlation of organizational commitment

Affective commitmentVolume of business and

turnover intentions

Job Behavior

Job Satisfaction

Labor participation

Organizational commitment

Personal characteristics

Labor experience


Alternatives

Investments


The experience of

socialization Organizational investments

+

+

Assistance

OCB

Performance

FigureMeyer and Allen mo

of organizatiocommitm

98

BSC adopti


4/29

Ahmad, 2000; Karia and Asaari, 2006; Ooiet al., 2007b, 2008). To work together meansan improvement in the attitude of the employees (Osland, 1997), which renders betterand produce positive outcomes, such as the employees increased performance andhigher job satisfaction (Choi, 2012). This allows collaboration between the managers

and the rest of the workers (Ooi et al., 2008).Likewise, various studies indicate that there is a significant and positive relationship

between organizational culture and employee satisfaction when the BSC is implemented(Lawleret al, 1992; Ooiet al, 2007b). This fact reinforces the importance of involving themanagement team to favor organizational culture. This is promoted by implementingthe BSC (Ooiet al., 2008).

In the same way, these results uphold the evidence of the points of view of Yusofand Juhary (2000). According to these authors, culture is not only able to change andguide individual behavior, it also significantly contributes to thoughts, feelings, thesatisfaction level and the degree of interaction within the organization.

On the other hand, the results of this study show as well that with the BSCsimplementation, the employees are better informed about the decisions which the

organization makes. BSCs implementation can add a greater communication andunderstanding of the employees about the firms strategy. Having a better knowledgeand more information about the behavior the organization desires provides greatersatisfaction in the employees (Forstenlechner et al., 2009; Alhyari et al., 2013).This means that the sensation of job ambiguity diminishes and, as a result, they willexperience higher satisfaction levels.

Moreover, employee satisfaction objective is considered the driver of the otherdimensions in the BSC. Rusbult et al. (1988) consider that job satisfaction is a criticalvariable in the understanding of the organizations global effectiveness. In any case, alesser job satisfaction is related to a greater intention of leaving the firm. This generates agreater turnover (Pasewark and Strawser, 1996), an increase of work insecurity (Ameenet al., 1995) and greater levels of absenteeism (Staw, 1984).

The previous literature provides a detailed framework of management concepts,such as the BSC, highlighting the role of employee satisfaction in organizations andthe impact which task characteristics have on work results, such as job satisfaction(Spector, 1997). Hackman and Oldhams model details five main work dimensionswhich include feedback. In this model, feedback is defined as the degree to which theindividual, when carrying out activities required in their job, obtain direct and clearinformation about the effectiveness of their performance. In this vein, research hasshown that feedback has a positive influence on job satisfaction.

Therefore, through strategy communication, it is expected that the BSC will impactjob satisfaction in two ways. The first will be based on this communication having tohelp the managers to understand the behavior the organization wants. Prior researchhas found that clarifying job expectations through the role that facilitating information

plays leads to greater levels of job satisfaction (Sawyer, 1992; Ameen et al., 1995).Second, there not being enough information to appropriately carry out the work acts

as a limiting factor (Spector, 1997; Penney and Spector, 2005). Lau and Tan (2003)found support for their argument that feelings of success coming from disposing ofinformation are related to greater levels of job satisfaction, thus improving theireffectiveness. So, we propose:

H1. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase in theemployees satisfaction.

986

MD52,5


5/29

2.2 The BSC and employee commitmentOrganizational commitment has been defined in different ways. We can understandit as being the feelings which employees have about the obligation of staying in theorganization (Allen and Meyer, 1990). The literature traditionally differentiates

between attitudinal and behavioral commitment (Scholl, 1981; Mowday et al., 1982;Reichers, 1985).

The commitment model which this work deals with links together twoapproaches attitude and behavior as well as the relationship that is set up betweenthem. Hence, according to Meyer and Allen (1991), organizational commitment can adoptthree different forms (the three-component model). Affective commitment refers toidentifying with the firm (a feeling of belonging) and emotional attachment to theorganization. Continuance or calculated commitment refers to the employeescommitment based on recognizing the costs associated with leaving the organization.Normative commitment refers to a kind of feeling of obligation with the organization.

It is interesting to know which aspects are the ones that, in change processes suchas the implementation of a management model like the BSC are related to/affect the

commitment which the employees have with the organization. There is a trend whichdefends the negative impact that the change process has on the employees.These can be the effects of the increase of work which this entails, as well as theconflicts and uncertainty which it generates (Spector, 2002). For example, authorssuch as Antonsen (2014), studied how a performance measurement system used bymany organizations the BSC (BSC) may influence employees critically reflectivework behavior. There is also the loss of control, the uncertainty of the employeesabout their future in the organization and the fear of failure in the face of thepossible changes which their post requires (Coch and French, 1984), the threats which canbe perceived at an individual level (Ledford et al., 1990), and the threats toward theindividuals sensation of control and the later abolition of the psychological contract ofthe employees with their organization (Ashford et al., 1989). In contrast, authors such as

Beer (1980), Novelli et al. (1995) and Wanous et al. (2000) indicate that the negativereactions which are produced by change processes are the result of a poor implementation.

In any case, it interests us to know about the change in organizational commitmentwhich stems from a successful implementation of the BSC. Organizational commitment iscentered on the employees perception of their alignment or attachment level with theorganization (Buchanan, 1974). It is found that this is negatively related to turnover(Cohen, 1993) and positively related to the employees social behavior (OReilly andChatman, 1986), work satisfaction (Fordet al., 2003), motivation (Mowdayet al., 1979) andattendance (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990).

Therefore, if we take into consideration both the implementation process and itsresults, such as the magnitude of the change which is produced and what level or levelsof the organization it affects, we will have a comprehensive view of the factors which

influence organizational commitment (Fedoret al., 2006).

2.3 The BSC implementation processIn numerous cases, we find that how organizations have managed the implementationprocess is as important or more important than what has been done (Fedor et al., 2006).In this sense, the way in which dealing with the employees and their involvement duringthe change process is managed has been shown to be a powerful decisive factor of thereactions which the employees have facing the main changes which are produced in theorganization (Brockneret al., 1994).

98

BSC adopti


6/29

The BSC implementation effectiveness can be improved by using system thinkingand a causal loops diagram. These tools help managers to understand the relationshipsbetween measures and strategic objectives and clarify how managers decision-makingimpacts on indicators and performance (Kunc, 2008).

Kaplan and Norton (1996) consider that a correct implementation of the BSC shouldinclude the following steps during the first 12 months:

(1) board commitment and vision clarified;

(2) communicate corporate BSC to middle managers;

(3) develop business unit scorecards;

(4) eliminate non-strategic investments and launch corporate change programs;

(5) communicate the BSC to the entire company;

(6) establish individual performance objectives; and

(7) conduct monthly and quarterly reviews.

In our case study, we consider of interest the changes identified in managers andemployees habits as well as behavior during the implementation process: the CEO heldseveral strategic meetings with the board members to clarify the vision and strategy.The company launched an internal communication program to get the employeesand managers engaged, and established cross-functional teams to generate ideas andcommitment. The board approved a strategic meeting calendar on a regular basis aswell. Finally, the company also linked strategic objectives to individual measures toimprove the focus on the BSC and performance.

2.4 Results or consequences of the BSC implementationNumerous surveys have provided evidence of the BSCs popularity and widespread

implementation by different types of organizations (Rigby and Bilodeau, 2011).The implementation results influence on the employees reactions has not beenfrequently tackled directly ( Judgeet al., 1999), although there is literature in whichit is mentioned that the results of a correct implementation impact the employees (Adamsand Rosenbaum, 1962; Adams, 1963), and the results-related judgments have beenassociated with different organizational variables, such as the employees commitment(Ambrose, 2002).

Another question to take into account is the impact of the changes on the organizationsdifferent levels. This can be independent according to how it affects the department levelor the work units or at an individual level (Fedor et al., 2006).

When the results stemming from the BSCs implementation contribute to creatinga better life for the employees, they consider that the organization upholds values andgoals in line with their own. This makes them show an interest in change being produced.Furthermore, the study of the employees attitudes after the implementation such ascommitment has to be more closely linked to the circumstances which are nearest tothe people (Fedor et al., 2006) than those which are more indirect or at a higher level(e.g. the department or business unit) (Caldwellet al., 2004).

2.4.1 The BSC and normative commitment. Wiener (1982) suggested that the feelingof obligation to remain in the organization could be the result of the interiorization ofthe normative pressures exerted on an individual prior to joining the organization orstraightaway after their joining. If we recognize that this investment of the organization,

988

MD52,5


7/29

in the case of the implementing of a management model such as the BSC improvesorganizational performance, we can consider that that a situation of imbalance hasbeen created between the employee and the organization (Herscovitch and Meyer, 2002).This creates in the employees a feeling of obligation which corresponds to commitment,

until the debt has been paid (Scholl, 1981). This is why we understand that:

H2a. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase innormative commitment.

2.4.2 The BSC and affective commitment. According to Allen and Meyer, 1990, affectivecommitment refers to the emotional attachment of employees after identifying with theorganization and participating in it.

Until now, the literature which examines the relation between the practices inimplementing a management system and the attitudes of the employees such ascommitment has been scant (Morrow, 1997). According to Dale (1999), the factors whichare triggered off throughout the BSC implementation process such as teamwork

(Osland, 1997; Karia, 1999), internal communication (Oakland and Oakland, 2001),organizational trust (Karia and Ahmad, 2000; Tan and Tan, 2000) and the employeesparticipation (Cassar, 1999) and even, corporate culture (Ortega-Parra and Sastre-Castillo,2013) are the key to achieving an improvement of the organizational functioningand, specifically, of the aspects related to the perspective or people orientation. Thesearguments allow us to propose that:

H2b. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase inaffective commitment.

2.4.3 The BSC and calculated commitment. Continuance (or calculated) commitmentreflects the recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organization. Thus,

Rusbult and Farrell (1983) pointed out that the investment the firm carries outconcerning the employees, as well as the lack of greater alternatives outside it, are thetwo main antecedents of continuance commitment. According to the studies of Meyerand Allen (1991), individuals whose priority to remain in the organization is based on ahigh continuance commitment will be able to make a considerable effort to remain inthe organization if they consider that continuity in the employment requires a greaterlevel of performance, such as we find after the BSCs implementation.

Nevertheless, following the studies of Meyer et al. (2002) continuance commitmentseems to have a clear relation to or even be negatively related to an increase in thedesirable behavior of the employees. This is why these results must be interpretedsomewhat cautiously:

H2c. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase incalculated commitment.

2.5 The BSC and the employees satisfaction with supervisionThe BSC implementation process implies the development of a method of employeetraining. This creates a series of benefits concerning their performance and jobattitudes. Most research has been centered on studying the empowerment ofindividuals as a functional unit. However, there has been less literature related to theconcept of team empowerment. One of the factors which act as an antecedent of team

98

BSC adopti


8/29

empowerment is the behavior of their leaders or people in charge during the BSCimplementation process. This can create a series of benefits which are reflected in anincrease of the employees satisfaction with their supervision. When the leaders takeinto consideration the teams ideas, the employees trust their skills more or experience

greater energy and verve in their power (Guzzo et al., 1993).When there is participative leadership, in which the leaders allow the established

team their own performance and aims to be attained, the employees experience agreater autonomy (Manz and Sims, 1987; Huan, 2012) and increase their capacity asmembers who decide what to achieve and how much effort is necessary in relation tothe performance (Guzzo et al., 1993).

Guzzo et al. (1993) argue that transforming leaders, as is the case we aredealing with, are those who give energy, inspire and transmit high-performanceexpectations and have a direct influence on power. Authors, such as, show thattransformational leadership can nurture a trusting climate. This in turn promotesemployee knowledge-exchange behaviors. Nevertheless, for many leaders, in any case, toempower/capacitate their team can mean a loss of power (Hardy and Leiba-OSullivan,

1998). To be able to differentiate between the outcomes of capacitating the teamsmembers causes results in performance, productivity, proactivity and customer service.It also has consequences for attitudinal results, satisfaction with the teamwork (Tymon,1988; Spreitzer et al. 1997) and organizational and team commitment (Steers, 1977;Bradley and Benson, 1999).

The researchers who have studied supervision have found that supervisors workwith the supervised using a variety of styles, perspectives and roles (Bernard andGoodyear, 2004). The individual differences modulate the supervision process and itsresults (Goodyear and Bernard, 1998). In this sense, Delini and Hulse-Killacky (2005)tried to understand how individual differences such as the supervision style bringabout specific results.

What type of power relationship is that which produces an increase of employees

satisfaction with supervision? A study led by Busch (1980) indicated that supervisionbased on experience or on being a model is positively related to satisfaction withthe employees supervision. Coercive power, on the other hand, is negatively related tosatisfaction with supervision. Supervision styles based on rewards and legitimacywere not consistent regarding satisfaction with supervision.

According to Williams (2002), the main motive for people leaving an organization isthat they are not being treated correctly by their bosses. Another of the contributionsof this study is that people who remain in their jobs, working for bosses with lowleadership, have less job and personal life satisfaction, a lower level of commitment,greater conflicts between work and the family and higher levels of psychologicalanxiety (Tepper, 2000).

To sum up, satisfaction with supervision is a global assessment. Individuals carry

this out based on different thoughts, beliefs and exchanges that take place betweentheir superior and them. Therefore:

H3. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase in employeessatisfaction with supervision.

2.6 The BSC and the competitive climate among employeesClimate has generally been described as a set of specific attributes of a specificorganization (Campbell et al., 1970) and has been operationalized in terms of the

990

MD52,5


9/29

perceptions of each person (Kozlowski and Doherty, 1989). Most of the definitionsdefend the notion that the perception of the climate influences peoples behavior(Forehand and Gilmer, 1964). There are also authors who uphold that the relationshipis bidirectional (Schneider and Reichers, 1983).

Competitiveness within organizations is necessary for firms to be able to survivethe changes that the current society demands.

In this way, managers are implementing management systems based not onlyon the traditional concepts of objective indicators about the business progress, theyhave also started to look at the indicators of the intangibles which permit its success.These are core competences (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990), organizational learning(Wick, 1993), participation in management programs (Lawler, 1993), the employeesknowledge (Nonaka, 1991) and organizational capacities (Ulrich and Lake, 1990).

On numerous occasions there has been theorizing about which capacities anorganization must have to be competitive. In our case, we will take as a reference a listof six main capacities to be competitive (Ulrich, 1993). This is because we consider thatall of them are developed through the BSC implementation process: to create a shared

attitude about what our customers want; to generate the necessary competencesrequired to perform each job; to guarantee that the rewards concerning the employeesbehavior are consistent with the business strategy; to establish action mechanisms andprotocols: organizational structure, decision-making processes and strategy-alignedinternal communication; to develop the capacity to anticipate/adapt to changesand leadership shared by all the organization, so that the commitment with theorganization is shared.

In this way, we understand that after the implementation of these measures via theBSC model, the employees will perceive a more competitive and professionalizedclimate. This will allow them to increase their level of performance and thus theorganization will become more competitive.

It is to be expected that introducing management models of change such as the

BSC into the organization will increase the work capacity of its employees.This will result in a greater productivity and continuous improvement (Garget al., 2002).The results of the research carried out by Arnold et al. (2009) indicate that the effect of therole ambiguity which is produced when changes in the job routine are established onwork efficacy is influenced by the climate perceived. After the BSCs implementation, theambiguity of the role is less when the competitive climate is greater. Implementing theBSC strategy map helps to reduce managers ambiguity with regard to the objectivesthey need to pursue (Hurtado-Gonzalezet al., 2012). This indicates a potential benefit inthe reduction of stress and an increase in the perception of the competitive climate.Additionally, the influence of work satisfaction on employees performance is affected bythe competitive climate perceived. So:

H4. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an improvement inthe competitive climate.

2.7 The BSC and the employees job dedicationJob dedication has been defined in different ways in numerous studies (for a review,see Kanungo, 1982; Morrow, 1983). In this research it is upheld that dedication refersto: a psychological identification with the job, the jobs psychological importance,and the importance of performance for the individuals self-image (Lodahl andKejner, 1965).

99

BSC adopti


10/29

Form another point of view, it is understood that the employees dedication is therelative strength of identification which they show to their organization. We may statethat there is an exchange relationship between the individual and the organization inwhich this dedication is exchanged in the search for the results desired (Flaherty and

Pappas, 2000).A series of benefits are achieved when participative methods are used in a firm

throughout the implementation process of a management system. These can be a decreaseof absenteeism and turnover (Markset al., 1986), a greater individual performance (Bushand Spangler, 1990), an improvement of job attitudes (Steel and Lloyd, 1988) and astronger relationship between the employee and the organization.

Hence, when the participation practices are integrated into the organizationssystems, work environments are created which are more effective than the isolatedefforts to make employees be more participative (Ledford and Lawler, 1994). Fromanother perspective, it is noted that it is the role which leaders perform in the changeprocess transformational leadership that is the main and decisive factor in theincrease of the employees job dedication. In this context, transformational leadership

brings about changes in the attitudes and assumptions which the organizationsmembers have and develops the employees commitment to the organizations mission,goals and aims (Tracy and Hinkin, 1994).

Practicing transformational leadership when the BSC implementation process isstarted up positively affects the employees degree of dedication (Lee, 2005).

After the implementing of management models of change such as is the caseof the BSC the employees develop an orientation toward continuous improvement,placing the emphasis on proactivity as a way of preventing problems and facingchallenges, as well as seeking new and better ways of carrying out their work(Lawler, 1994). In this context, after the implementing of this management model, theemployees change the way in which they interpret their work, producing a changeinsofar as they understand that improvement is an inherent part of their jobs

(Coyle-Shapiro, 2002).Practices carried out in the BSC implementation which bring about an increase

in performance. The success of this models implementation is the responsibility of thetop management and will depend on its level of commitment and support towardthe employees.

With relation to empowerment, it is generally accepted that the environment inwhich the implementation process of a management model is carried out fostersthe employees empowerment. Lam (1996) pointed out that these Models increasethe participation of the employees in the decision-making processes. On theother hand, Utley et al. (1997) indicated that the organizations which count onmotivating factors are more given to achieving a successful implementation ofthe management models than those which use hygienic factors to increase their

performance. Finally, Boon et al. (2006) found that trust in the organization andempowerment presents a strong relationship with the employees propensity tocontinue in the organization.

In this way, the organizations which recognize their employees generation of ideaswhen implementing their management models are more likely to experience a positiveeffect in their performance. Accordingly, we propose that:

H5. After being correctly implemented, the BSC brings about an increase in theemployees job dedication.

992

MD52,5


11/29

3. Methodology3.1 Description of the sampleTo compile our studys data we collaborated with a retail sector firm. The datagathering was done by working out and sending a questionnaire at two different

moments in time, to study the possible impact that the BSC has on the variablesconsidered. There were 12 months between the two dispatches, as it was estimated thatthis period of time was reasonable to study the changes which are produced in thevariables under study after a year of the implementation and test phase of the BSC inthe firm.

There were 730 employees in the firms staff in 2009 and 820 in 2010. The firstdispatch of questionnaires took place in May 2009. In all, 406 duly filled out questionnaireswere received. The second dispatch was in May 2010. In all, 494 questionnaires werecorrectly returned. The response rates were 55.6 and 60.2 percent respectively (Table I).

In relation to the location and geographical distribution of the workforce, 40 percentof employees are located in Area 1, Areas 4 and 5 account for a total of 35 percent of theworkforce. Area 1 and 2 are the areas with greater seniority, reaching about 45 percent

of the workforce with a stay in the company of more than two years. On the otherhand, in Area 4 and 5 up to 70 percent of workers have less than one year in thecompany. This high number (70 percent) is explained by the great expansion made bythe company in this area in 2008-2009.

The decision to carry out the dispatches and data gathering between May and Juneand always prior to the start of the summer sales campaign planning was in order toavoid the greater workload of the employees during this period. This could haveproduced biases both in the number of questionnaires filled out and in the quality of theresponses. The dispatching and gathering of the two surveys were centralized from thefirms internal communication department. The process was carried out in 15 days.

3.2 The questionnaire

The questionnaires design had two information blocks. The first corresponded to thegeneral data of the surveys, distributed according to the situation or geographicallocation of the job where the Spanish company market was divided into eight differentareas, the staffs age ranges were 18-25, 25-40 and 40-60 years old and employeesseniority ranges from less than three months to more than six years in the firm.The second block of the questionnaire was made up of the studys variables via 46items on a 1-7 Likert scale (Table II).

The first block of the questionnaire provided relevant information about the staffsstructure and distribution. It was noted that more than 60 percent of the staff are youngpeople under 25 and have not more than two years of seniority.

3.3 MeasurementsAll of the constructs were measured by a seven-point Likert scale in which 1 meansstrongly disagree and 7 strongly agree.

The commitment construct was studied as a multidimensional variable, whosereference was the theoretical perspectives from which commitment is worked out:affective (a 0.74), normative (a 0.82) and calculated (a 0.76). The constructsmeasurements were based on the scales proposed by Belinda de Frutos and San Martn(1998). The competitive climate (a 0.67) was evaluated through the scales used byBrownet al.(1998). The job dedication constructs items (a 0.80) were taken from thestudy done by Aryeeet al.(2008). The job satisfaction construct (a 0.74) was studied

99

BSC adopti


12/29


13/29

through the scale provided by Hackman and Oldham (1974). For the labor supervisionconstruct (a 0.71), the items used were the same as those in Prison Social ClimateSurvey by Sayloret al. (1996).

4. Analysis of the resultsNext, with respect to the variables of location, age and seniority, contrast tests arecarried out related to the constructs which make up the model studied, before and afterthe BSC implementation. This tests refer to the variance analysis (ANOVA) and itsnon-parametric analogue (the Kruskal-Wallis test) when the requirements necessaryto apply parametric tests is not fulfilled. That is to say, when the Levene testssignification iso0.05. A significance level of 5 percent has been considered in all thecontrasts carried out. We use an ANOVA because this analyzes or separates thevariance components into those caused by mean differences and those brought aboutby random influences. That is to say, it is very useful for determining if the differencesbetween the means of two or more groups have any statistical significance. Onedisadvantage of this test is that it does not provide information about which groups aredifferent. To solve this problem, we apply a post hoc testing.

4.1 Before the BSC implementation (Tables III-V)The level of affective commitment swings between 4.35 and 5.05. As is to be expected,the greater the seniority in the firm, the more affectively the worker is linked to it.Therefore, as the average seniority of the staff increases, a greater emotional involvementof the employee is noted. If we take into account the levels of affective commitment in thedifferent age groups, we can notice that the oldest age group (40-60 years old) is thatwhich shows a greater level of affective commitment, with a score of 5.29.

Study variables Items

Affective commitment 6Normative commitment 5Calculated commitment 6Competitive climate 4

Job dedication 6Job satisfaction 11Satisfaction with supervision 8

Source: Own elaborationTable

Study variab

Levene test ANOVA Kruskal-WallisSig. Sig. Asymptotic sig. (bilateral)

Affective 0.139 0.006Normative 0.360 0.000Calculated 0.506 0.101Climate 0.029 0.842 0.727Dedication 0.293 0.001Satisfaction 0.862 0.032Supervision 0.371 0.522

Source:Own elaboration

TableLevene test, ANO

and non-parameKruskal-Wallis

according to

99

BSC adopti


14/29

Regarding the levels of normative commitment, the average score is relatively low(3.98), in comparison to affective commitment. We do not find significant differencesin the employees perception with respect to normative commitment in the differentgeographical areas. This indicates that the workers do not perceive that they are

obliged toward the firm. Therefore, the commitment is more emotional than debtbased. With respect to the age variable, we observe how the score increases inaccordance with the increase of the average age of the staff. That is to say, the greaterthe average age of the staff, the greater the feeling of debt toward the firm. The samething takes place with the staffs seniority. The employees with a greater level ofnormative commitment are those with an average seniority of six years or more.

The level of calculated commitment is around four points in almost all the areas.This reflects that the employees perception of the cost that leaving the firm wouldhave is not too great. The level of calculated commitment is very similar in theage groups between 18 and 40 years old there are not significant differences eitherbetween the different age groups or between the different levels of seniority in the firm.

With respect to the competitive climate, significant differences have not been found

between any of the variables studied. The firm has a very low average score of 2.68points. The scores obtained for the different geographical areas are very similar.Regarding the relationship between the competitive climate and the different agegroups studied, these have very similar values. It has also been noted that the workersperception of the competitive climate slightly increases with seniority in the firm,although when this is above six years the score drops considerably.


Affective 0.024 0.000 0.000Normative 0.784 0.000Calculated 0.303 0.730Climate 0.646 0.753Dedication 0.038 0.003 0.001Satisfaction 0.198 0.049Supervision 0.646 0.237


Table V.Levene test, ANOVAand non-parametricKruskal-Wallis testaccording to seniority


Affective 0.048 0.071 0.080Normative 0.037 0.156 0.315Calculated 0.075 0.041Climate 0.144 0.430Dedication 0.000 0.078 0.061Satisfaction 0.005 0.375 0.521Supervision 0.132 0.039


Table IV.Levene test, ANOVAand non-parametricKruskal-Wallis testaccording to location

996

MD52,5


15/29

With respect to job dedication, the employees of the different areas state thatthey have, in general, a medium-high job dedication significant differences are notidentified. It can be said that mainly there is a greater job dedication in those who areolder and have a greater seniority in the firm.

The firms employees are in general satisfied with their job. There are notsignificant differences between the geographical areas. The satisfaction average isvery similar in all the firms age groups, with an average score of 5.20. Significantdifferences are detected in the younger group of workers compared to the older group.The latter perceives a greater job satisfaction level. With respect to seniority, the scoresin the different groups analyzed are very similar, although significant differencesare detected between the group of workers with more seniority in comparison to thatwith less seniority in the firm.

The satisfaction with supervision shows intermediate levels in the differentgeographical areas. In this case, we can see that neither the superiority nor the agereflects significant differences regarding satisfaction with supervision.

Considering the average values of each of the variables studied, generally speaking

the firms workers have an intermediate level of emotional involvement with the firm.They did not have the perception of being in debt with it. Moreover they consider thatif for some reason they had to leave the firm, this would not have a high personal costfor them. If we link this perception to that obtained from the normative commitment,the cost of leaving would be more due to the market situation than to what theemployees feel that the firm is giving them. The competitive climate is excessively low.This leads the workers to think that the firm does not consider their performance to beimportant, nor does it value a greater performance in comparison to their companions.This is why the workers do not value their performance either. However, they perceivean important involvement with and dedication to their job. They are also quite satisfiedwith it and with the behavior of their supervisors.

4.2 After the BSC implementationIn Tables VI-VIII and Figures 1 and 2 we present the results of the statistical tests thatallow the determining of there being significant differences or not.

Affective commitment as is to be supposed, the greater the seniority within thefirm, the more affectively linked to it the worker feels. Therefore, as the averageseniority increases, a greater emotional involvement of the employee is noted. If wetake into account the affective commitment levels in the different age groups, we can

Levene test ANOVA Kruskal-WallisSig. Sig. Asymptotic Sig. (bilateral)

Affective 0.004 0.000 0.000Normative 0.037 0.000 0.000Calculated 0.684 0.693Climate 0.144 0.000Dedication 0.542 0.006Satisfaction 0.016 0.008 0.010Supervision 0.001 0.000 0.000


TableLevene test, ANO

and non-parameKruskal-Wallis

according to

99

BSC adopti


16/29

note that the employees of the older group (40-60 years old) are the ones who show agreater affective commitment level.

Regarding the normative commitment levels, the average score is relatively low(4.39), in comparison to affective commitment. This indicates that the workers do not

perceive that they have an obligation toward the firm. Therefore, the commitment tothe firm is more emotional than debt based. The employees who show themselvesas feeling a greater obligation to the firm although with an intermediate level ofcommitment are those of the headquarter services with a score of 4.76. Regardingage, we observe how the score increases as the staffs average age increases, except forthe oldest group (40-60 years old). However, with respect to the staffs seniority, theemployees with a greater level of normative commitment are those with an averageseniority of six years or more.

The level of calculated commitment obtains the least score: 3.44. This tells us thatthe employees perception of the cost of leaving the firm is not too great. Significantdifferences in calculated commitment levels have been identified between the staffsdifferent age groups. As with age, the seniority variable reflects significant differences

in the scores.With regards to the competitive climate, there are two groups of geographical areas

with different levels of competitive climates. These levels can indicate to us that theemployees in general are concerned to an average extent about their performance.Regarding the different age groups studied, these present very similar scores, althoughit is worth highlighting that the lowest level is that of the highest age group. It is also


Affective 0.157 0.009Normative 0.624 0.000Calculated 0.045 0.021 0.019Climate 0.028 0.000 0.000Dedication 0.000 0.002 0.005Satisfaction 0.000 0.995 0.999Supervision 0.237 0.007


Table VII.Levene test, ANOVAand non-parametricKruskal-Wallis testaccording to location


Affective 0.000 0.000 0.000Normative 0.679 0.000Calculated 0.852 0.222Climate 0.383 0.000Dedication 0.242 0.255Satisfaction 0.001 0.299 0.487Supervision 0.167 0.000


Table VIII.Levene test, ANOVAand non-parametricKruskal-Wallis testaccording to seniority

998

MD52,5


17/29

seen that the workers perception of the competitive climate increases slightly withseniority in the firm.

Concerning job dedication, the employees of the different areas state that theygenerally have a medium-high level of job dedication. We can consider that the greater

the age and seniority, the greater the job dedication.Generally speaking, the firms employees are satisfied with their job. Significant

differences have not been identified between the employees in different geographicalareas and the job satisfaction levels. The satisfaction average is very similar in thegroups between 18 and 40 years old. Significant differences have been identified inthe 40-60 years old group score: 4.06. Significant differences with respect to seniorityare not seen.

Satisfaction with supervision: regarding the seniority variable, the most significantdifferences are between the perceptions of the employees with less seniority in the firmcompared to the group of employees who have been in the firm for more than six years.The age variable also produces significant differences, mainly between the workersbetween 25 and 40 years old and those in the oldest age group.

Considering the average scores of each of the variables studied, in general the firmsworkers have an intermediate level of emotional involvement with the firm. They donot have a feeling of obligation toward it. Furthermore, they consider that there wouldnot be a high personal cost involved in leaving the firm. If we link this perceptionto that obtained from the normative commitment, it can be considered that the cost ofleaving the firm would be more due to the market situation than to what the employeesfeel they are contributing to the firm. The competitive climate attains intermediatelevels in all the variables studied. This leads the workers to think that the firm givesimportance to the workers performance and that it values a greater performance bothindividually and collectively. This is why the workers also value their performance.Moreover, they perceive a strong involvement with and dedication to their job, are quitesatisfied with it and with the work of their supervisors.

4.3 Comparative analysis of the surveysThe Table IX shows the results of the statistical tests for both samples.

The table shows that the differences in the variables have increased after the BSCimplementation. It is also noted that specific classification variables, such as age orlocation, play a relevant role in the employees opinions.

Age Seniority LocationBefore After Before After Before After

Affective X X X X X XNormative X X X X XCalculated X X XClimate X X XDedication X X XSatisfaction X X XSupervision X X X X

Notes: Before, prior to the BSC implementation; After, subsequent to the BSC implementation;X, there are significant differencesSource:Own elaboration

Table Comparative summary

the constructs in whthere are difference

averages before and athe implementa

99

BSC adopti


18/29

On the other hand, analyzing the evolution of the variables studied over the 12 monthsbetween the two surveys, we can see how an average increase has taken place in all thestudys variables.

During the BSC implementation, the company focussed intensively on growth

strategy. The company launched important programs and made strategic decisions,such as purchasing a competitor to increase its competitive position in the Spanishmarket, as well as introducing the internalization process by opening new stores onPortugal, France and the UK. On the other hand, the company reinforced partnershipswith strategic shoes manufacturers and increased the investments in the R&D anddesigning departments. As a result of these initiatives the company grew in both storesand employees.

To check if there are significant differences between the constructs before and afterthe implementation a t-test was carried out for related samples. The results of thetest showed that there were significant differences in all the constructs analyzed(sig. 40.05) (Table X).

We can note how the increase of affective commitment varies considerably

depending on the geographical areas, the age group and the seniority in the firm. TheAreas 2, 4 and 7 increase between 4 and 5 percent, the 25-40 age group grows 4.5percent, while the oldest age group rises by 7 percent. The group of up to four years ofseniority has the greatest growth 5.8 percent and the groups with a seniorityequal to or below one year grow 4.36 percent. Normative commitment reflects a similarbehavior in all the geographical areas and has an average growth of 8 percent.However, the 60 percent decrease in the oldest age group attracts our attention. Thisbehavior is logical if we observe the results obtained in calculated commitment for thesame age group: 30.7 percent. That is to say, this reflects the older workers perceptionof not owing anything to the firm. Nevertheless, there would be a high cost for them inleaving the firm for any reason. Calculated commitment behaves differently dependingon the areas, age and seniority in the firm. Regarding seniority, it is noted how the

greatest decrease in the group of up to one year is logical: 11.6 percent. Highlightedover the rest of the variables is the increase attained in the organizations competitiveclimate. This has an average increase of 50 percent, whether in areas, age groups orstaff seniority. This strong increase can be explained by the implementation of the BSC,as this model gives the people in the organization a greater knowledge of the factorswhich are critical for the firm and establish the measurement mechanisms ofindividual and organizational performance, as well as feedback mechanisms forlearning and improvement. Job dedication continues having a medium-high level in allthe organization, although a slight set back stands out. This is brought about by the

Before After Sig. (bilateral)

Affective 4.89 5.07 0.007Normative 3.98 4.35 0.000Calculated 4.04 4.28 0.000Climate 2.67 4.00 0.000Dedication 5.51 5.72 0.000Satisfaction 5.20 5.36 0.002Supervision 5.03 5.46 0.000

Source:Own elaborationTable X.T-test for related samples

1000

MD52,5


19/29

important decrease produced in the oldest age group: this descends 41.27 percent in theperiod studied. Job satisfaction behaves similarly with respect to areas, age andseniority, except in the oldest group which, as with the job dedication variable, suffers adecrease of 35 percent. Satisfaction with supervision has evolved around 8 percent in

all the firms, except in the oldest group, which decreases 8.33 percent.

5. DiscussionFrom the revision of the literature carried out in this work, it has been verifiedthat there is a generalized consensus about the significant and positive relationshipbetween the organizations culture and the employees satisfaction when managementmodels are implemented in organizations. According to the literature, the implementationof management models in organizations has been shown to bring about an influence inthe improvement of the organizational climate. It has a positive effect on the employeesaffective reactions and improves their attitudes in all the aspects linked to theirsatisfaction with and commitment to the organization. However, until now little researchhas been carried out that contributes empirical evidence about the effect that the right

implementation of a management model such as is the case of the BSC has on thegreater involvement of the workers in the organizations strategy. There has also beenscant investigation into the effect of each of the elements that the change processenhances in the organization, such as the workers commitment to the organization, thecompetitiveness levels that they develop and the satisfaction not only with their workand the importance of their tasks but also with the leadership capacities of theirhierarchical superiors.

In this research, a positive relationship has been shown between job satisfactionand the employees perception of the alignment between the performancemeasurements and the organizations strategy. This statement clearly shows that thecommunication process carried out in the BSC implementation allows employees tohave better information about the decisions the organization makes. The sensation of

ambiguity in the workplace diminishes and results in greater levels of job satisfaction.Therefore, the increase in the job satisfaction brought about after the BSCsimplementation can be explained through a greater communication and understandingof the employees about the firms strategy. Having a better knowledge and moreinformation about the behavior the organization desires provides greater satisfactionin the employees. Also, the employees active participation and the permanentinformation during the implementation process could explain the increase of commitment.

6. ConclusionsThe results of our study demonstrate that an appropriate implementation of theBSC in which different actions of internal communication are carried out throughoutthe implementation process, training workshops for the managers take place andtransversal work teams with an active participation in the project are set up fostersan improvement of the employees commitment, organizational climate, jobsatisfaction, satisfaction with supervision and job dedication.

As practical implications, one of the factors which acts as an antecedent of theempowerment of the teams is the behavior of their leader or people in charge duringthe implementation process and management. This caused a positive and significantrelationship of the employees satisfaction with supervision. In our work, an increaseof the employees satisfaction level with supervision is obtained after the BSCsimplementation. This increase can be justified by the setting up of a process of specific

100

BSC adopti


20/29

meetings per department for the establishing and setting out of the performanceaims and measurements to be attained. These are linked to the firms strategic aims.Also, the BSCs implementation process facilitates the organizations leaders in theircommunication and clarification process with the employees about the organizations

aims. This hence creates a work environment which promotes motivation anddedication.

Besides, the BSC deployment toward internal processes means the alignment of thecompanys strategic objectives with the performance measures of the employees andvalue generating processes. These processes allow linking BSC to the compensationsystems measures. Therefore, the BSC allows the aligning of firm performance with aremuneration policy and, as a result, the levels of employee calculated commitmentas they can objectively measure what the company will contribute in exchange forimprovements in individual and collective performance. Additionally the low turnoverof staff, together with the increases in employee satisfaction with work and supervisiondirectly affect the improvement of the organizational climate. After being implemented,the BSC contributes to the organizations employees having a greater knowledge

about the factors which are critical for the firm. Mechanisms are thus set up for themeasurement of both individual and organizational performance and the feedbackprocesses for learning and continuous improvement. This in turn may positively affectmeasures of growth, productivity and profitability. Furthermore, these improvementsin the levels of individual and organizational efficiency caused by the implementation ofthe BSC generate an improvement in the levels of competitiveness and positioningof the company in the markets.

Related to the theoretical implications, we think our work has notable contributionsto the appraisal performance theory. Even though job performance improvementdepends on human resources practices, the BSC, by means of a better awareness ofboth the organizations overall strategic goals and the employees tasks, can contributewith more precise appraisal measurements, resulting in a better performance management.

At the same time, the results are controlled by the employee. The BSC can contribute toa more transparent appraisal system in terms of easily explained goals leading toperceptions of greater justice and fairness. Also it offers clear information of standards andexpectations, so that everyone involved will understand what is expected and what isrewarded. Such contributions are consistent with those proposed by the appraisal systems.At the same time, it permits frequent appraisals and feedback which can help employees tosee how they are improving, hence increasing their motivation, organizational climate,commitment and job satisfaction, and, finally, improving the employees performance.

With respect to the impact on society, implementing the BSC may contribute tohaving better relations with the stakeholders. Regarding employees, which is the focusof our research, a better internal environment caused by the BSC implementation,results in less stressed, more engaged and satisfied employees, as well as their being

more trained in their tasks, more proactive in generating creative ideas and innovation,developing skills according to the job and having growth expectations of developmentwithin the company.

Related to other stakeholders, the BSC allows for a closer relationship withcustomers, because it allows an understanding of their needs, achieves greatersatisfaction, evaluates the service and products, and so predicts their future needs.In relation to suppliers, they can access more documented and easier indicators ofquality and efficiency. This will allow them to be more aware of what society demandsthese days.

1002

MD52,5


21/29

Besides, it also helps them to focus on adding value and social consciousness. It doesso through the creation of new regulatory and social processes and by establishingspecific indicators related to corporate social responsibility.

7. Limitations and future researchWe recognize that this study has some limitations. First, our analysis was carriedout in the retail sector, which may affect the generalization of its results. However,management models implementation is a phenomenon that affects almost all activities,and consequently we could anticipate that its contributions to the field of strategicchange and business management will be applicable to other firms that share the samestructural features. Nevertheless, it would be interesting to undertake similar researchin other sectors/areas to compare the results. Since we offer evidence from a firmof a western European country, it would be fruitful to extend this study to otherinstitutional settings (i.e. extend the study to emerging markets).

On the other hand, causal relationships could be identified between the variablesand the moderator effect that the BSC has on them, as well as the effect that thevariables studied have on both individual and organizational performance.Furthermore, the effects produced by the implementation of the BSC could also beanalyzed over a longer timescale.

References

Adams, J.S. (1963), Toward an understanding of inequity, Journal of Abnormal and SocialPsychology, Vol. 67, pp. 422-436.

Adams, J.S. and Rosenbaum, W.B. (1962), The relationship of worker productivity tocognitive dissonance about wage inequities, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 46,pp. 161-164.

Alhyari, S., Alazab, M., Venkatraman, S., Alazab, M. and Alazab, A. (2013), Performance

evaluation of e-government services using balanced scorecard: an empirical study in Jordan,Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 512-536.

Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990), The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuanceand normative commitment to the organization, Journal of Occupational Psychology,Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 1-18.

Ambrose, M.L. (2002), Contemporary justice research: a new look at familiar questions,Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 803-812.

Ameen, E.C., Jackson, C., Pasewark, W.R. and Strawser, J.R. (1995), An empirical investigation ofthe antecedents and consequences of job insecurity on the turnover intentions of academicaccountants, Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 65-82.

Antonsen, Y. (2014), The downside of the balanced scorecard: a case study from Norway,Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 40-50.

Arnold, T., Flaherty, K.E., Voss, K.E. and Mowen, J.C. (2009), Role stressors and retailperformance: the role of perceived competitive climate,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 2,pp. 194-205.

Aryee, S., Sun, L. and Chen, Z. (2008), Abusive supervision and employee contextualperformance: the mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of workunit structure, Management and Organization Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 393-411.

Ashford, S.J., Lee, C. and Bobko, P. (1989), Content, causes and consequences of job insecurity:a theory-based measure and substantive tests,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32No. 4, pp. 232-244.

100

BSC adopti


22/29

Beer, M. (1980), Organizational Change and Development: A System Review, Goodyear, SantaMonica, CA.

Belinda de Frutos, M.A. and San Martn, R. (1998), Analisis factorial confirmatorio de lasdimensiones del compromiso con la organizacion, Psicologica , Vol. 19 No. 3,

pp. 345-366.Bernard, J.M. and Goodyear, R.K. (2004), Fundamentals of Clinical Supervision, 3rd ed., Allyn &

Bacon, Boston, MA.

Boon, O.K., Veeri, A., Yin, L.K. and Vellapan, L.S. (2006), Relationship of TQM practices andemployees propensity to remain: an empirical case study, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18No. 5, pp. 528-541.

Bradley, L.K. and Benson, R. (1999), Beyond self-management: antecedents and consequences ofteam empowerment,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 58-74.

Brockner, J., Konovsky, M., Cooper-Schneider, R., Folger, R., Martin, C. and Bies, R.J. (1994),Interactive effects of procedural justice and outcome negativity on victims and survivorsof job loss, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 397-409.

Brown, S.P., William, L. and Slocum, J.W. (1998), Effects of trait competitiveness and perceivedintraorganizational competition on sales-person goal setting and performance, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 62, pp. 88-89.

Buchanan, B. (1974), Building organizational commitment: the socialization of managers inwork organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 533-346.

Busch, P. (1980), The sales managers bases of social power and influence upon the sales force,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 91-101.

Bush, K. and Spangler, R. (1990), The effects of quality circles on performance and promotions,Human Relations, Vol. 43, pp. 573-582.

Caldwell, S.D., Herold, D.M. and Fedor, D.B. (2004), Towards and understanding of the relationshipbetween organizational change, individual differences and changes in person-environmentfit: a cross-level study,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 868-882.

Campbell, J., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. and Weick, K.E. (1970), Managerial Behavior,Performance and Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Cassar, V. (1999), Can leader direction and employee participation co-exist? Investigatinginteraction effects between participation and favorable work-related attitudes amongMaltese managers, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 7, pp. 57-68.

Choi, S. (2012), Demographic diversity of managers and employee job satisfaction: empiricalanalysis of the federal case, Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 33 No. 3,pp. 275-298.

Coch, L. and French, J.R.P. Jr (1984), Overcome resistance to change,Human Relations, Vol. 1 No. 4,pp. 512-532.

Cohen, A. (1993), Organizational commitment and turnover: a meta analysis, Academy of

Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 1140-1157.

Coyle-Shapiro, J. (2002), Changing employee attitudes: the independent effects of TQM & profitsharing on continuous improvement orientation, The Journal of Applied BehavioralScience, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 55-77.

Dale, B.G. (1999), TQM: an overview, in Dale, B.G. (Ed.), Managing Quality, 3rd ed.,Blackwell-Business, Oxford, pp. 3-33.

Delini, M.F. and Hulse-Killacky, D. (2005), The relationship of supervisory styles to satisfactionwith supervision and the perceived self-efficacy of masters-level counseling students,Counselor Education and Supervision, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 293-304.

1004

MD52,5


23/29

Fedor, D.B., Cadwell, S. and Herold, D.M. (2006), The effects of organizational changes on employeecommitment: a multilevel investigation, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 1-29.

Flaherty, K.E. and Pappas, J.M. (2000), The role of trust in salesperson-sales manager,relationships, The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 20 No. 4,

pp. 271-278.Ford, J.K., Weissbein, D.A. and Plamondon, K.E. (2003), Distinguishing organizational form

strategy commitment: linking officers commitment to community policing to job behaviorsand satisfaction,Justice Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 159-185.

Forehand, G.A. and Gilmer, B. (1964), Environmental variation in studies of organizationalbehavior, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 62 No. 6, pp. 361-382.

Forstenlechner, Lettice, F. and Bourne, M. (2009), Knowledge pays: evidence from a law firm,Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 56-68.

Gardner, D. and Carlopio, J. (1996), Employee affective reactions to organizational qualityefforts, International Journal of Quality Science, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 39-49.

Garg, S., Vrat, P. and Kanda, A. (2002), Trade-offs between multiskilling and inventory inassembly line operations under demand variability, International Journal of Operationsand Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 565-583.

Goodyear, R.K. and Bernard, J.M. (1998), Clinical supervision: lessons from the literature,Counselor Education and Supervision, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 6-22.

Guimaraes, T. (1996), TQMs impact on employee attitude, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 8 No. 5,pp. 20-25.

Guzzo, R.A., Yost, P.R., Campbell, R.J. and Shea, G.P. (1993), Potency in groups: articulating aconstruct, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 87-106.

Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1974), The job diagnosis survey: an instrument for thediagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects, Technical Report, No. 4,Department of administrative science, Yale University, New Haven.

Hardy, C. and Leiba-OSullivan, S. (1998), The power behind empowerment: implications for

research and practice,Human Relations, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 451-483.Herscovitch, L. and Meyer, J.P. (2002), Commitment to organizational change: extension of a

three-component model, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 474-487.

Huan, X. (2012), Helplessness of empowerment: the joint effect of participative leadership andcontrollability attributional style on empowerment and performance,Human Relations,Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 313-334.

Hurtado-Gonzalez, J.M., Calderon-Molina, M.A. and Galan-Gonzalez, J.L. (2012), The alignment ofmanagers mental models with the balanced scorecard strategy map, Total Quality

Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 23 Nos 5-6, pp. 613-628.

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Pucik, V. and Welbourne, TM. (1999), Managerial coping withorganizational change: a dispositional perspective, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84No. 1, pp. 107-122.

Jun, M., Cai, S. and Shin, H. (2006), TQM practice in maquiladora: antecedents ofemployee satisfaction and loyalty, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 6,pp. 791-812.

Kanungo, R. (1982), Measurement of job and work involvement, Journal of Applied Psychology,Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 341-349.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy, CaliforniaManagement Review, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 53-79.

Karia, N. (1999), The impact of TQM practice on employees work-related attitudes,unpublished MBA research report, University Science Malaysia, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

100

BSC adopti


24/29

Karia, N. and Ahmad, Z.A. (2000), Quality practices that pay: empowerment and teamwork,Malaysian Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 66-76.

Karia, N. and Asaari, M.H.A.H. (2006), The effects of total quality management practices onemployees work-related attitudes, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 30-43.

Kivimaki, M., Maki, E., Lindstrom, K., Alanko, A., Seitsonen, S. and Jarvinen, K. (1997),Does the implementation of total quality management (TQM) change the wellbeing andwork-related attitudes of health care personnel? Study of a TQM prize-winning surgicalclinic, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 456-470.

Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Doherty, M.L. (1989), Integration of climate and leadership: examinationof a neglected issue, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74, pp. 546-553.

Kunc, M.H. (2008), Using systems thinking to enhance the value of strategy maps, ManagementDecision, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 761-778.

Lam, S.K. (1995), The impact of total quality management on front-line supervisors and theirwork,Total Quality Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 45-50.

Lam, S.K. (1996), Total quality management and its impact on middle managers and front-lineworkers, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 37-46.

Lau, C.M. and Tan, S.L.C. (2003), The effects of participation and job-relevant information on therelationship between evaluative style and job satisfaction,Review of Quantitative Financeand Accounting, Vol. 21 No. 8, pp. 17-34.

Lawler, E.E. III (1986), High-Involvement Management: Participative Strategies for ImprovingOrganizational Performance, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Lawler, E.E. III (1992), The Ultimate Advantage: Creating the High Involvement Organization ,Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Lawler, E.E. III (1993), Power and the emergence of commitment behavior in negotiatedexchange, American Sociological Review, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 465-481.

Lawler, E.E. (1994), Total quality management and employee involvement: are they compatible?,Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 68-76.

Lawler, E.E. III (1996), The Ground Up: Six Principles for Building the New Logic Corporation ,Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Lawler, E.E. III, Mohrman, S. and Ledford, G. (1992), Employee Involvement and TotalQuality Management: Practices and Results in Fortune 1000 Corporations , Jossey-Bass,San Francisco, CA.

Ledford, G.E. and Lawler, E.E. (1994), Research employee participation: beating a dead horse?,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, pp. 633-363.

Ledford, G.E. Jr, Mohrman, S.A., Mohrman, A.M. and Lawler, E.E. (1990), The Phenomenon ofLarge Scale Organizational Change, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Lee, J. (2005), Effects of leadership and leader-member exchange on commitment, Leadership &Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 Nos 7/8, pp. 655-673.

Lodahl, T. and Kejner, M. (1965), The definition and measurement of job involvement, Journal

of Applied Psychology, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 24-33.

Luthans, B.C. (1996), A longitudinal study of the impact of TQM and downsizing on a healthcare organization, PhD thesis, The University of Nebraska Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.

Manz, C.C. and Sims, H.P. Jr (1987), Leading workers to lead themselves: the externalleadership of selfmanaging work teams, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 32,pp. 106-128.

Marks, M.L., Mirvin, P.H., Hackett, E.J. and Grady, J.F. Jr (1986), Employee participation in aquality circle program: impact on quality of work life, productivity and absenteeism,

Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 61-69.

1006

MD52,5


25/29

Mathieu, J.E. and Zajac, D.M. (1990), A review and meta analysis of the antecedents, correlatesand consequences of organizational commitment, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 108 No. 2,pp. 171-194.

Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991), A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment,Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 61-98.Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002), Affective, continuance, and

normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates,and consequences, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 20-52.

Morrow, P.C. (1983), Concept redundancy in organizational research: the case of workcommitment,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 486-500.

Morrow, P.C. (1997), The measurement of TQM principles and work-related outcomes, Journalof organizational Behaviors, Vol. 18, pp. 363-396.

Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1982),Employee-organization Linkages: The Psychologyof Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover, Academy Press, New York, NY.

Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M. and Porter, L.W. (1979), The measurement of organizationalcommitment,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 224-247.

Nonaka, I. (1991), The knowledge creating company,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69, pp. 96-104.

Novelli, L. Jr, Kirkman, B.L. and Shapiro, D.L. (1995), Effective implementation of organizationalchange: an organizational justice perspective, In Cooper, C.L and Rousseau (Eds), Trendsin Organizational Behavior, Wiley, New York, NY, Vol. 2, pp. 15-36.

Oakland, J.S. and Oakland, S. (2001), Current people management activities in worldclassorganizations,Total Quality Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 773-788.

Ooi, K.B., Arumugam, V., Safa, M.S. and Bakar, N.A. (2007a), HRM and TQM: association withjob involvement,Personnel Review, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 939-962.

Ooi, K.B., Arumugam, V., Teh, P.L. and Chong, A.Y.L. (2008), TQM practices and its associationwith production workers, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108 No. 7,pp. 909-927.

Ooi, K.B., Bakar, N.A., Arumugam, V., Vellapan, L. and Loke, K.Y. (2007b), Does TQM influenceemployees job satisfaction? An empirical case analysis, International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 62-77.

OReilly, C.A. III and Chatman, J.A. (1986), Organizational commitment and psychologicalattachment: the effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocialbehavior, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 492-499.

Ortega-Parra, A. and Sastre-Castillo, M.A. (2013), Impact of perceived corporate culture onorganizational commitment,Management Decision, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp. 1071-1083.

Osland, A. (1997), Impact of total quality attitude management and training and work contexton attitude supervisor, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 5 No. 3,pp. 291-301.

Pasewark, W.R. and Strawser, J.R. (1996), The determinants and outcomes associated with job

insecurity in a professional accounting environment, Behavioral Research in Accounting,Vol. 8, pp. 91-113.

Penney, L. and Spector, R. (2005), Job stress, incivility, and counterproductive work behavior(CiWB): the moderating role of negative affectivity, Journal of Organizational Behavior,Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 777-796.

Poister, T.H. and Harris, R.H. (1997), The impact of TQM on highway maintenance: benefit/costimplications, Public Administration Review, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 294-302.

Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990), The core competence of the corporation,Harvard BusinessReview, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 79-91.

100

BSC adopti


26/29

Reichers, A.E. (1985), A review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 465-476.

Rigby, D. and Bilodeau, B. (2011), Management Tools and Trends 2011, Bain & Company, Boston,Massachusetts, available at: www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_BRIEF_Management_Tools.pdf

(accessed July 5, 2012).Rusbult, C.E. and Farrell, D. (1983), A longitudinal test of the investment model: the

impact of job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in reward,costs, alternatives and investments, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 3,pp. 429-438.

Rusbult, C.E., Farrell, D., Rogers, C.I. and Mainous, A. (1988), Impact of exchange variables onexit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: an integrative model of responses to declining jobsatisfaction, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 599-627.

Sawyer, J.E. (1992), Goal and process clarity: specification of multiple constructs of roleambiguity and a structural equation model of their antecedents and consequences,

Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 130-142.

Saylor, W., Gilman, G. and Camp, D. (1996), Prison Social Survey: Reliability and Validity of Work

Environment Constructs, Office of Research and Evaluation, Federal Bureau of Prison.

Schneider, B. and Reichers, A.E. (1983), On the etiology of climates, Personnel Psychology,Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 19-39.

Scholl, R.V. (1981), Differentiating commitment from expectancy as a motivating force,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 589-599.

Spector, P.E. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences , SagePublications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.

Spector, P.E. (2002), Employee control and occupational stress, American Psychological Society,Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 153-156.

Spreitzer, G.M., Kizilos, M.A. and Nason, S.W. (1997), A dimensional analysis of the relationshipbetween psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction and strain, Journal

of Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 679-704.Staw, B. (1984), Organizational behavior: a review and reformation of the fields outcome

variables,Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 35, pp. 627-666.

Steel, R.P. and Lloyd, R.F. (1988), Cognitive, affective and behavioral outcomes of participationin quality circles: conceptual and empirical findings, The Journal of Applied BehavioralScience, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 1-17.

Steers, R.M. (1977), Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment,AdministrativeScience Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 46-56.

Tan, H.H. and Tan, C.S.F. (2000), Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor andtrust in organization,Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, Vol. 126 No. 2,pp. 241-260.

Tepper, B.J. (2000), Consequences of abusive supervision, Academy of Management Journal,

Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 298-319.

Thompson, K.R. and Mathys, N.J. (2008), The aligned balanced scorecard: an improvedtool for building high performance organizations,Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 37 No. 4,pp. 378-393.

Thompson, K.R. and Mathys, N.J.S. (2013), Its time to add the employee dimension to thebalanced scorecard, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 135-144.

Tracy, J.B. and Hinkin, T.R. (1994), Transformational leaders in the hospitality industryJournal of Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 2,pp. 18-24.

1008

MD52,5


27/29

Tymon, W.G. (1988), An empirical investigation of a cognitive model of empowerment,unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.

Ulrich, D. (1993), Human resource planning: an architecture for competitiveness, workingpaper, School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Ulrich, D. and Lake, D. (1990), Organizational Capability: Competing from the Inside/Out, Willey,New York, NY.

Utley, D.R., Wesbrook, J. and Turner, S. (1997), The relationship between Herzbergs two-factorstheory and quality improvement implementation, Engineering Management Journal,Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 5-13.

Vandenberg, R.J., Richardson, H.A. and Eastman, L.J. (1999), The impact of high involvementwork processes on organizational effectiveness, Group and Organization Management,Vol 24 No. 3, pp. 300-339.

Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E. and Austin, J.T. (2000), Cynicism about organizational change:measuring antecedents and correlates, Group and Organizational Management, Vol. 25No. 2, pp 132-153.

Wick, C. (1993), The Learning Edge: How Smart Managers and Smart Companies Stay Ahead,McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

Wiener, Y. (1982), Commitment in organizations: a normative view, Academy of ManagementReview, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 418-428.

Williams, G. (2002), Whale watching, Entrepreneur, Vol. 32.

Yi-Feng, Y. and Islam, M. (2012), The influence of transformational leadership on job satisfaction,Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 386-402.

Yusof, A.B.A. and Juhary, A. (2000), Managing culture in organization,Malaysian ManagementJournal, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 60-65.

Further reading

De Frutos, B., Ruiz, M.A. and San Martn, R. (1998), Analisis factorial confirmatorio de las

dimensiones del compromiso con la organizacion, Revista Psicologica, Vol. 19 No. 19,pp. 345-366.

Hsi-An, S., Chiang, Y.-H. and Chen, T.-J. (2012), Transformational leadership, trusting climate,and knowledge-exchange behaviors in Taiwan, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 1057-1073.

Meander, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991), A three-component conceptualization of organizationalcommitment,Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1, pp. 61-98.

Meander, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolaytskand, L. (2002), Affective, continuance,and normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates,and consequences, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61, pp. 20-52.

Tracand, J.B. and Hinkin, T.R. (1994), Transformational leaders in the hospitality industry,Journal of Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 2,pp. 18-24.

About the authors

Dr Miguel Angel Calderon Molina is an Associate Director at TATUM, a Spanish consultancy

firm, and an Assistant Professor at the Pablo de Olavide University at Seville (Spain), as well as

ESIC (Seville). As an expert on BSC, he has participated in many executive programs for

c

does the does the balanced scorecard adoption enhance the levels of organizational climate.balanced...

Documents