The status of adoption of balanced scorecard (BSC) in Pakistan is still blurry and keeping different adoption, diffusion and strategic theories in mind, a theoretical framework and four hypotheses were proposed. The target population was organisations of all types and 268 organisations listed in the Karachi Stock Exchange were selected randomly. All constructs were measured through a questionnaire. The results suggest that environmental complexity, competition and consultancy institutions were serving as barriers in the adoption of BSC. However, the factor network personality, a part of the environmental factors, was not significant and was not a barrier. The managers of consultancy institutions can view this study as a benchmark because by reviewing the result they can decide whether it is time to launch a campaign to exert the pressure for adoption of BSC or not to propagate the significance of the BSC tool by stopping further allocation of resources.
AnandM., SahayB., & SahaS. (2005). Balanced scorecard in Indian companies. Vikalpa, 30(2), 11.
2.
AskaranyD. (2006). Characteristics of adopters and organizational changes. Thunderbird International Business Review, 48(5), 705–725.
3.
AzharS.M. (2008). Strategic orientation and performance: The case of equifinality a developing market perspective. The Business Review, Cambridge, 10(2), 120–128.
4.
BarnettW.P. (1997). The dynamics of competitive intensity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 128–160.
5.
BaruchY. (1999). Response rate in academic studies—A comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52(4), 421–438.
6.
BessantJ., & RushH. (1995). Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer. Research Policy, 24(1), 97–114.
7.
CapeloC., & DiasJ.F. (2009). A feedback learning and mental models perspective on strategic decision making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 629–644.
8.
ChildJ. (1972). Organizational structures, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6(1), 1–22.
9.
ChoY., HwangJ., & LeeD. (2011). Identification of effective opinion leaders in the diffusion of technological innovation: A social network approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(1), 97–106.
10.
CyertR.M., & MarchJ.G. (1992). A behavioral theory of the firm. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell.
11.
DaftR.L. (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193–210.
12.
DaftR.L., & BeckerS.W. (1978). The innovative organization: Innovation adoption in school organizations. New York: Elsevier.
13.
DamanpourF. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: Developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Science, 42(5), 693–716.
14.
DamanpourF., & GopalakrishnanS. (1998). Theories of organizational structure and innovation adoption: The role of environmental change. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15(1), 1–24.
15.
Den HertogP. (2000). Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 4(4), 491–528.
DiMaggioP.J., & PowellW.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 28(2), 147–160.
18.
DruckerP.F. (2001). Management challenges for the 21st century. New York: Harper Paperbacks.
19.
DuncanR.B. (1972). Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 313–327.
20.
EcclesR.G. (1991). The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 131–137.
21.
EuskeK., LebasM., & McNairC. (1993). Performance management in an international setting. Management Accounting Research, 4(4), 275–299.
22.
FeldsteinP.J. (2011). Health care economics (7th ed.). Delmar Publishers.
23.
FrambachR.T., & SchillewaertN. (2002). Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 163–176.
24.
FreelM.S. (2005). Perceived environmental uncertainty and innovation in small firms. Small Business Economics, 25(1), 49–64.
25.
GatignonH., & RobertsonT.S. (1989). Technology diffusion: An empirical test of competitive effects. The Journal of Marketing, 53(1) 35–49.
26.
GreveH.R. (1998). Managerial cognition and the mimetic adoption of market positions: What you see is what you do. Strategic Management Journal, 19(10), 967–988.
27.
GroverV., GoslarM., & SegarsA. (1995). Adopters of telecommunications initiatives: a profile of progressive US corporations. International Journal of Information Management, 15(1), 33–46.
28.
HairJ.F., BlackW., BabinB., & AndersonR. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
HowellsJ. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728.
31.
JaworskiB.J., & KohliA.K. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of marketing, 57(3), 53–70.
32.
JoshiP. (2001). The international diffusion of new management accounting practices: The case of India. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 10(1), 85–109.
33.
KaplanR. S. (1983). Measuring manufacturing performance: a new challenge for managerial accounting research. Accounting Review, 58(4), 686–705.
34.
KaplanR.S., & NortonD.P. (1992). The balanced scorecard —Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79.
35.
KaplanR.S., & NortonD.P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75–85.
36.
KennerleyM., & NeelyA. (2002). A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(11), 1222–1245.
37.
KimberlyJ.R., & EvaniskoM.J. (1981). Organizational innovation: The influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative innovations. Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 689–713.
38.
MalinaM., & SeltoF. (2001). Communicating and controlling strategy: An empirical study of the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 13(1), 47–90.
MascarenhasB. (1984). Flexibility: Its relationship to environmental dynamism and complexity. International Studies of Management & Organization, 14(4), 107–124.
41.
MilesR.E., & SnowC.C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
42.
MillerD., & FriesenP.H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal, 3(1), 1–25.
43.
MintzbergH. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
44.
MintzbergH., & WatersJ.A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), 257–272.
45.
MooreG.C., & BenbasatI. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.
46.
NeelyA. (1999). The performance measurement revolution: Why now and what next?International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(2), 205–228.
47.
OthmanR. (2008). Enhancing the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard with scenario planning. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 57(3), 259–266.
48.
PandeyI. (2005). Balanced scorecard: Myth and reality. Vikalpa, 30(1), 51–66.
49.
PfefferJ., & SalancikG.R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.
50.
PhillipsL.W. (1981). Assessing measurement error in key informant reports: A methodological note on organizational analysis in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4), 395–415.
51.
PorterM.E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 137–145.
52.
PorterM.E. (1998). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance: With a new introduction. New York: Free Press.
53.
PunniyamoorthyM., & MuraliR. (2008). Balanced score for the balanced scorecard: A benchmarking tool. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 15(4), 420–443.
54.
QadriM.M., TashfeenM.A., & ImamA. (2013). Organizational determinants as a barrier of balanced scorecard adoption for performance measurement in Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(20), 7–22.
55.
RavichandranT. (2000). Swiftness and intensity of administrative innovation adoption: An empirical study of TQM in information systems. Decision Sciences, 31(3), 691–724.
56.
RigbyD., & BilodeauB. (2013). Management tools and trends 2009. Retrieved from http://www.bain.com/management_tools/Management_Tools_and_Trends_2013_Global_Results
57.
RobertsonT.S., & GatignonH. (1986). Competitive effects on technology diffusion. The Journal of Marketing, 50(3), 1–12.
58.
RogersE.M. (1976). New product adoption and diffusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 2(4), 290–301.
59.
RogersE.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
60.
RussellR.D., & RussellC.J. (1992). An examination of the effects of organizational norms, organizational structure, and environmental uncertainty on entrepreneurial strategy. Journal of Management, 18(4), 639–656.
61.
SonJ.Y., & BenbasatI. (2007). Organizational buyers’ adoption and use of B2B electronic marketplaces: Efficiency- and legitimacy-oriented perspectives. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 55–99.
62.
TapanyaS. (2004). Examining the factors which influence performance measurement and management in the Thai banking industry: an application of the balanced scorecard framework. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Murdoch Business School, Murdoch University, Australia. Reterived 13December2014, from http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/337/
63.
ValenteT.W., & DavisR.L. (1999). Accelerating the diffusion ofinnovations using opinion leaders. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 566(1), 55–67.
64.
Van der StedeW.A., YoungS.M., & ChenC.X. (2005). Assessing the quality of evidence in empirical management accounting research: The case of survey studies. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(7–8), 655–684.
65.
VerduA.J., Gomez-GrasJ.M., & VolberdaH.W. (2006). Managers’ environmental perceptions: An institutional perspective. International Journal of Business Environment, 1(1), 5–23.
66.
ZaltmanG., DuncanR., & HolbekJ. (1973). Innovations and organizations. New York: Wiley.
67.
ZhangZ., WaszinkA., & WijngaardJ. (2000). An instrument for measuring TQM implementation for Chinese manufacturing companies. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(7), 730–755.
