IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i8p3221-d346277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Innovativeness and Usage of the Balanced Scorecard Model in SMEs

Author

Listed:
  • Zdenka Dudic

    (Faculty of Economics and Engineering Management, University Business Academy, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Branislav Dudic

    (Faculty of Economics and Engineering Management, University Business Academy, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia
    Faculty of Management, Comenius University in Bratislava, 814 99 Bratislava, Slovakia)

  • Michal Gregus

    (Faculty of Management, Comenius University in Bratislava, 814 99 Bratislava, Slovakia)

  • Daniela Novackova

    (Faculty of Management, Comenius University in Bratislava, 814 99 Bratislava, Slovakia)

  • Ivana Djakovic

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21102 Novi Sad, Serbia)

Abstract

By using the balanced scorecard model, a company is able to identify its advantages, as well as its deficiencies, and thus improve its business. The introduction of innovations and the implementation of innovative activities in companies are key for gaining a competitive advantage. There is no ideal model that would measure the non-financial, non-tangible perspectives of a company (such as customer perspective, the perspective of research and innovation, and the perspective of internal processes). The main goal of this paper is researching the applicability of the balanced scorecard model in small- and medium-sized companies as the basis for a model for assessing innovative activities in the Republic of Slovakia and the Republic of Serbia. First, a hypothetical model was created based on theoretical data from world scientific articles. Then, the structural equation model (SEM model) was created, based on the conducted research in 223 companies and the obtained results.

Suggested Citation

  • Zdenka Dudic & Branislav Dudic & Michal Gregus & Daniela Novackova & Ivana Djakovic, 2020. "The Innovativeness and Usage of the Balanced Scorecard Model in SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-22, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3221-:d:346277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3221/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3221/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jintong Tang & Zhi Tang & Louis D. Marino & Yuli Zhang & Qianwen Li, 2008. "Exploring an Inverted U–Shape Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Performance in Chinese Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 32(1), pages 219-239, January.
    2. Philippe Larédo & Alexander Kleibrink & Stefan Philipp, 2017. "Promoting innovation in transition countries. A trajectory for smart specialization," Post-Print hal-01779652, HAL.
    3. Christian Rammer & Dirk Czarnitzki & Alfred Spielkamp, 2009. "Innovation success of non-R&D-performers: substituting technology by management in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 35-58, June.
    4. Alexander Kleibrink & Philippe Laredo & Stefan Philipp, 2017. "Promoting innovation in transition countries: A trajectory for smart specialisation," JRC Research Reports JRC106260, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Ricardo Malagueño & Ernesto Lopez-Valeiras & Jacobo Gomez-Conde, 2018. "Balanced scorecard in SMEs: effects on innovation and financial performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 221-244, June.
    6. Mohnen, Pierre & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Complementarities in innovation policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1431-1450, August.
    7. Chang, Dae Ryun & Cho, Hang, 2008. "Organizational memory influences new product success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 13-23, January.
    8. Wang, Chun-Hsien & Lu, Iuan-Yuan & Chen, Chin-Bein, 2010. "Integrating hierarchical balanced scorecard with non-additive fuzzy integral for evaluating high technology firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 413-426, November.
    9. Joe Tidd (ed.), 2006. "From Knowledge Management to Strategic Competence:Measuring Technological, Market and Organisational Innovation," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number p439.
    10. Forza, C. & Salvador, F., 2001. "Information flows for high-performance manufacturing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 21-36, March.
    11. Jan Lambooy, 2005. "Innovation and knowledge: Theory and regional policy," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(8), pages 1137-1152, April.
    12. Gopalakrishnan, S. & Damanpour, F., 1997. "A review of innovation research in economics, sociology and technology management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 15-28, February.
    13. Huergo, Elena & Jaumandreu, Jordi, 2004. "Firms' age, process innovation and productivity growth," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 541-559, April.
    14. Hipp, Christiane & Grupp, Hariolf, 2005. "Innovation in the service sector: The demand for service-specific innovation measurement concepts and typologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 517-535, May.
    15. Brian Cozzarin, 2004. "Innovation quality and manufacturing firms' performance in Canada," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 199-216.
    16. Eva Benková & Peter Gallo & Beáta Balogová & Jozef Nemec, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Use of Balanced Scorecard in Measuring Company Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    17. Rosenbusch, Nina & Brinckmann, Jan & Bausch, Andreas, 2011. "Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 441-457, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Suárez-Gargallo, Carlos & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2023. "A comprehensive bibliometric study of the balanced scorecard," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Anca Antoaneta Vărzaru, 2022. "An Empirical Framework for Assessing the Balanced Scorecard Impact on Sustainable Development in Healthcare Performance Measurement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Wellington L. L. Rocha & Maria Fatima L. Almeida & Rodrigo F. Calili, 2022. "Measuring and Evaluating Organizational Innovation Capacity and Performance from Systemic and Sustainability-Oriented Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    2. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    3. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    4. Edoardo Ferrucci & Roberto Guida & Valentina Meliciani, 2021. "Financial constraints and the growth and survival of innovative start‐ups: An analysis of Italian firms," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 27(2), pages 364-386, March.
    5. Khorshed Alam & Adewuyi A. Adeyinka, 2021. "Does innovation stimulate performance? The case of small and medium enterprises in regional Australia," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 496-519, September.
    6. Mooradian, Todd & Matzler, Kurt & Uzelac, Borislav & Bauer, Florian, 2016. "Perspiration and inspiration: Grit and innovativeness as antecedents of entrepreneurial success," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 232-243.
    7. Hervas-Oliver, Jose-Luis & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca & Boronat-Moll, Carles, 2012. "Process innovation objectives and management complementarities: patterns, drivers, co-adoption and performance effects," MERIT Working Papers 2012-051, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Xulia González & Daniel Miles-Touya & Consuelo Pazó, 2016. "R&D, worker training and innovation: firm-level evidence," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 694-712, November.
    9. Daniele Cerrato & Mariacristina Piva, 2012. "The internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises: the effect of family management, human capital and foreign ownership," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(4), pages 617-644, November.
    10. Hatak, Isabella & Kautonen, Teemu & Fink, Matthias & Kansikas, Juha, 2016. "Innovativeness and family-firm performance: The moderating effect of family commitment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 120-131.
    11. Sandeep Vij & Harpreet Singh Bedi, 2016. "Effect Of Organisational And Environmental Factors On Innovativeness And Business Performance Relationship," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-28, April.
    12. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500117 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Patrick Kreiser & Louis Marino & Donald Kuratko & K. Weaver, 2013. "Disaggregating entrepreneurial orientation: the non-linear impact of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on SME performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 273-291, February.
    14. Fuzhong Chen & Haifeng Li & Huini Wei & Wani Nelson, 2022. "The Ownership, Innovation, and Sustainable Development of Micro and Small Enterprises: Evidence of China," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, November.
    15. Camisón, César & Monfort-Mir, Vicente M., 2012. "Measuring innovation in tourism from the Schumpeterian and the dynamic-capabilities perspectives," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 776-789.
    16. Giedrė Dzemydaitė, 2021. "The Impact of Economic Specialization on Regional Economic Development in the European Union: Insights for Formation of Smart Specialization Strategy," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-15, May.
    17. Behrens, Vanessa & Berger, Marius & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Iferd, Younes & Peters, Bettina & Rammer, Christian & Schubert, Torben, 2017. "Innovation activities of firms in Germany - Results of the German CIS 2012 and 2014: Background report on the surveys of the Mannheim Innovation Panel Conducted in the Years 2013 to 2016," ZEW Dokumentationen 17-04, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Measuring process innovation output in firms: Cost reduction versus quality improvement," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    19. Mario Corona & Youngjung Geum & Sungjoo Lee, 2017. "Patterns of Protecting Both Technological and Nontechnological Innovation for Service Offerings: Case of the Video-Game Industry," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 192-204, September.
    20. Walker, Richard M. & Chen, Jiyao & Aravind, Deepa, 2015. "Management innovation and firm performance: An integration of research findings," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 407-422.
    21. Frank Crowley & Jane Bourke, 2018. "The Influence Of The Manager On Firm Innovation In Emerging Economies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-21, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3221-:d:346277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.