Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 820

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Communicating and Controlling Strategy: An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of the Balanced Scorecard

Open access
Malina, Mary A., Selto, Frank H.·2001·Journal of Management Accounting Research

Abstract

This paper reports evidence on the effectiveness of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) as a strategy communication and management-control device. This study first reviews communication and management control literatures that identify attributes of effective communication and control of strategy. Second, the study offers a model of communication and control applicable to the BSC. The study then analyzes empirical interview and archival data to model the use and assess the communication and control effectiveness of the BSC. The study includes data from multiple divisions of a large, international manufacturing company. Data are from BSC designers, administrators, and North American managers whose divisions are objects of the BSC. The study accumulates evidence regarding the challenges of designing and implementing the BSC faced by even a large, well-funded company. These findings may be general-izable to other companies adopting or considering adopting the BSC as a strategic and management control device. Data indicate that this specific BSC, as designed and implemented, is an effective device for controlling corporate strategy. Results also indicate disagreement and tension between top and middle management regarding the appropriateness of specific aspects of the BSC as a communication, control, and evaluation mechanism. Specific results include evidence of causal relations between effective management control, motivation, strategic alignment, and beneficial effects of the BSC. These beneficial effects include changes in processes and improvements in both the BSC and customer-oriented services. In contrast, ineffective communication and management control cause poor motivation and conflict over the use of the BSC as an evaluation device.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2308/jmar.2001.13.1.47

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 63 references

Cited by

See all 820

Metadata

Authors
Malina, M. A., & Selto, F. H.
Venue
Journal of Management Accounting Research
Published
2001-01-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
47-90
ISSN
  • 1049-2127 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-8033
OpenAlex
W3123815353
Cited by
820
References
63
FWCI
27.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Communicating and Controlling Strategy: An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of the Balanced Scorecard. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/jmar.2001.13.1.47
The paper
Malina, M. A., & Selto, F. H. (2001). Communicating and Controlling Strategy: An Empirical Study of the Effectiveness of the Balanced Scorecard. Journal of Management Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar.2001.13.1.47

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.