SUSTAINABLE
MANAGEMENT, BALANCED SCORECARD AND SMALL BUSINESS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND
STATE OF THE ART
Marileide
Barbosa
Pontifícia
Universidade Católica de Campinas, Brazil
E-mail: barbosa.marileide@gmail.com
Juan Arturo
Castañeda-Ayarza
Pontifícia
Universidade Católica de Campinas, Brazil
E-mail: juan.arturo@puc-campinas.edu.br
Denise Helena
Lombardo Ferreira
Pontifícia
Universidade Católica de Campinas, Brazil
E-mail: lombardo@puc-campinas.edu.br
Submission: 2/1/2019
Revision: 2/15/2019
Accept: 5/17/2019
ABSTRACT
The Balanced Scorecard - BSC is a widely used tool in business management that allows implementing and controlling strategies. Today, in a context that demands efforts from all organizations for sustainable development, the BSC has become an excellent alternative to include sustainability in business management. However, when it comes to small business organizations, management tools like BSC and business sustainability face the greatest difficulties, barriers and limitations. Therefore, the objective is to map the frontier of knowledge that brings together sustainable management and BSC to small companies, allowing visualization of the paths covered and the ones to be taken through science. A systematic bibliographical research was developed identifying and analyzing the main scientific publications that intersect the themes mentioned above. The results show the need to increase research towards understanding and monitoring the transformation of small business management in terms of sustainable development. The importance of the use of management tools to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the whole process has been confirmed, as well as that the BSC can play a relevant role. Thus, with this, researchers are expected to be more interested in the subject and more studies applied in small companies will come to be.
Keywords: sustainability; small business; Balanced Scorecard; SBSC; sustainable management
1.
INTRODUCTION
The need for human society to
rethink its development model based on the principles of sustainability reached
the operational and administrative processes of organizations, requiring
changes in the management model.
Sustainable management is understood
as the adoption of actions that seek to meet the needs of the organization and
all of its stakeholders. These actions seek to making a company, at the same
time profitable, socially responsible and also concerned with the preservation
of the natural physical environment with which it interacts (FIGGE et al.,
2002; FALLE et al., 2016).
Tools used in specific areas of sustainable
management can bring benefits to the entire company. For example, in
environmental sustainability, tools like carbon foot print analysis, when
applied through integrated practices, can improve the productive process, the
performance of the entire company and also to improve the individual awareness
and skills of employees, in addition to the positive impacts on the
organization and environment relationship (AKHTAR et al., 2018; GIAMA;
PAPADOPOULOS, 2018).
Thus, it can be understood that
there is no single method for guiding he management of an organization into
sustainability, since the process can be influenced by the type and size of the
organization, the organizational environments, the goals and perspectives of
the company. The greatest challenge lies in making ever-balanced decisions
between economic, social and environmental issues (NAWAZ; KOÇ, 2018).
It is understood from Kaplan
and Norton (2004) and Chalmeta
and Palomero (2011)
that in a globalized and highly competitive scenario, sustainability in
organizations can be seen as an alternative for business growth, efficiency and
effectiveness of sustainable actions, from the financial and non-financial
perspectives.
Several researchers, such as Figge
et al. (2002), Chalmeta and Palomero (2011), Hansen and Schaltegger (2012), Cantele
and Zardini (2018) have contributed to studies for the management of
sustainability in companies. In this sense, it is understood that the Balanced
Scorecard (BSC), an implementation and strategic control tool, can be a
promising alternative, especially for small companies, which have a major
participation in the economic activity.
For example, in Brazil, small
companies accounted for 72% of the jobs created in the country, registering a
positive balance for four consecutive years, from 2014 to 2017. In 2017, 83.5
thousand jobs were generated by small business, compared to 31.4 thousand jobs
generated by medium and large companies (SEBRAE, 2018).
Despite the importance of small
companies, among all organizations they are the ones that present the most
difficulty to develop professional management and, even more, to operationalize
sustainable strategies, either because of a lack of technical knowledge, skills
or resources (DEPKEN; ZEMAN, 2017).
Given this scenario, we identified
the opportunity to map the frontier of scientific knowledge developed at the
intersection of issues related to sustainable management, small business and
the Balanced Scorecard management tool.
This paper follows the following
structure: Section 2 is devoted to the theoretical framework on sustainability
in small companies, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and the Sustainable Balanced
Scorecard (SBSC). Section 3 deals with the outlining of the bibliographic
research, with a description of the methods the bibliography collection and
analysis. Section 4 presents and discusses the results, while section 5 is
devoted to the final considerations.
2.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1.
Sustainability in companies
Sustainability, as an alternative to
development, has been gaining prominence in the business and academic world in
recent years. Thus, the challenge arises for the companies to incorporate in
their management a base that allows to elaborate and to implement socially and
environmentally responsible actions, along with the actions guided by the
economic objectives.
In the academy, studies that seek to
understand the challenge of sustainable management and also contribute to the
insertion of sustainability in the company's actions are mainly directed to
cases of large companies (BIEDER et al.,
2002; SCHALTEGGER; LÜDEKE-FREUND, 2011).
According to Dias (2017), the term
sustainability is based on satisfying human needs without compromising future
generations and the environment in which one lives.
For Epstein and Roy (2001), organizational
sustainability is characterized as a strategic issue, which proposes to balance
the social, environmental and economic aspects of the organization and society.
Thus, as shown by Lee and Saen (2012), business sustainability is directly related
to the Triple Bottom Line (TBL).
The TBL, according to Milne
and Gray (2013), is an
understanding that guides sustainability reports with the company's commitment
to sustainable development. The incorporation of indicators into management and
business reporting has become synonymous with the practice of organizational
sustainability. In addition, companies are using strategies based on
sustainability as an opportunity to remain competitive (CHANG; CHENG, 2019).
According to Bonacchi
and Rinaldi (2007),
sustainability requires the translation of the strategy into managerial
actions, defined in steps that must be followed to reach the strategic
objectives. However, this effort ends up being a great challenge because, as Epstein
and Wisner (2001)
argue, managers often do not know how to implement sustainability strategies,
since these strategies need to be planned and aligned with the company's
objectives.
Based on the joint strategy and
objectives, companies need management tools that can contribute to the
implementation of organizational objectives and their respective strategies
based on sustainability (KAPLAN; NORTON, 2004). In this perspective, the
traditional Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and the Sustainable Balanced Scorecard
(SBSC) are potentially useful to insert sustainability in management and also
to contribute to the generation of competitive advantage in companies.
2.2.
Balanced Scorecard
Kaplan
and Norton (2004)
developed the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) with the intention of overcoming the corporate
challenges of a management that aims to relate the financial sector to the
non-financial sectors of the organization. Tsalis et al. (2013) emphasize the BSC as
a control system that makes it possible to improve the management of the
strategic objectives of the organization, besides allowing proposing corrective
actions and improvements.
Bora et al. (2017) understand that the
BSC is a tool that is not limited to the control at the corporate strategic
level but which can be used in each business unit of the corporation and in
each division or department of the business unit. Emphasizing the care needed
to maintain strategic alignment among all levels present at the organization’s
structure.
In the context of administration,
the control function has the mission of daily diagnosing the entire
administrative process, evaluating each objective through performance
indicators. In this context, the BSC assists the implementation and control
process by mapping the strategies, in an aligned, segmented and specific
manner, valuing financial and non-financial control (HANSEN;
SCHALTEGGER, 2012;
GEORGIEV, 2017).
The implementation of BSC, according
to Kaplan and Norton (2004), is divided into three steps:
· First step: clear definition of
business objectives and strategies by defining the strategic posture of the
company (statement of values, mission, vision and strategic objectives) and the
alignment of the specific objectives and guidelines to the defined strategic
posture.
· Second stage: review of existing
processes, evaluating their adequacy to the company's new strategic posture.
· Third stage: creation of the
strategic map, which should highlight the cause and effect relationships
between the strategic objectives and the specific objectives and strategies
proposed at all levels of the organization.
Belli et al. (2013) describe that for a
good implementation of BSC it is imperative that the "What, How, When, How
Much, Where and Who" questions are clearly defined and thus help in
proposing performance indicators that meet the perspectives of the company's strategic
posture.
The BSC is used by many companies in
the design and implementation of the corporate strategy, but can also be used
in the process of insertion of sustainability throughout the whole company's
management (EPSTEIN; WISNER, 2001; OLIVEIRA et al., 2012).
For Belli et al. (2013) the BSC strategic map
can be easily adapted in several business models, as it allows for, in the
development of the strategic plan, addressing each of the BSC's four
perspectives: financial, customer, internal processes and learning/growth.
Falle et al. (2016) add that the BSC
translates a company's strategic position into strategic objectives and actions
aligned with specific long, medium and short-term objectives, facilitating
management by results.
Also, Figge et al. (2002) complement the
importance of BSC in the perspective of sustainable management, given that the
division and the specificity of the objectives and strategies allow directing
sustainable actions proposals in all organizational and administrative processes,
starting from the elaboration of the strategic posture.
2.3.
Sustainable Balanced Scorecard -
SBSC
The first publications related to
BSC and sustainability were presented by Azzone et al. (1996), Elkington
(1998), Epstein and Wisner (2001) consider the BSC as a suitable tool to
facilitate the integration of sustainability in the management of an
organization.
Hansen
and Schaltegger (2012)
and Silva and Callado (2013) corroborate while affirming that BSC can also be
transformed into a specific tool for guiding a company management in
sustainability.
Figge et al. (2002) points out that the
BSC is modified when sustainability is integrated into its perspectives,
shifting to being recognized as SBSC, allowing management and measurement in a
specific way within the framework of control of objectives and strategies
related to sustainability, in other words, in addition to the financial
perspectives, customers, internal processes and learning/growth, the
sustainability perspective is included (HANSEN; SCHALTEGGER, 2012).
On the other hand, Schaltegger (2011), Rohm and Montgomery (2011),
Sands et al. (2016), point out that SBSC can be considered the basis for a
systematic and controlled management of a sustainability-based business
involving daily checklists, in addition to allow the alignment between the
strategies and principles of the Triple Bottom Line.
Researchers such as Epstein and
Wisner (2001), Deegan (2002), Figgie et al. (2001), Butler et al. (2011),
suggest three implementations for the SBSC:
a) The integration of environmental and
social issues with the four perspectives in the traditional BSC. Sustainability
measures should be integrated into all company operations, starting with the
main strategy and defining metrics to follow the whole process.
b) Add a fifth perspective, called
environmental and social perspective, where the objectives and strategic
actions will be particularly directed to.
c) Develop a specific BSC for
environmental and social issues, without the involvement of other departments
of the company.
Hsu et al. (2011) propose a SBSC
structure based on the four BSC perspectives. In which, the financial and
customer perspectives have been shifted to the stakeholder perspective and the
sustainability perspective.
Hansen
and Schaltegger (2012) add
that two aspects in structuring the chosen model will be important to
characterize the integration of sustainability into the strategy: 1) the way
social and environmental objectives are considered in the perspectives adopted,
and 2) how the hierarchy of perspectives is drawn (hierarchical process).
Figge et al. (2002) further emphasize
that the inclusion of sustainability in the BSC should defend the subordination
of all perspectives to the economic perspective, to show that the model is not
only a public relations tool but a management tool for business units. That is,
as manifested by Chung et al. (2016), the efforts to make business sustainable should aim at
creating competitive advantage for companies.
Thus, it is understood that
organizational sustainability is a strategic option aligned with the company's
main objectives and the search for the balance between social, environmental
and economic aspects, as proposed by the Triple Bottom Line (TBL). In this
sense, the SBSC will allow to relate to the profitability, customer
satisfaction and loyalty, and employee productivity (CHALMETA; PALOMERO, 2011;
EPSTEIN; ROY, 2001; LEE; SAEN, 2012; BONACCHI; RINALDI, 2007; HANSEN;
SCHALTEGGER, 2012).
3.
METHOD
The bibliographic research had four
stages (Figure 1). In the first stage, the search keywords were defined:
"sustainability management", "balanced scorecard" and
"small business".
The second stage allowed to define
the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the research collection process: a)
the keywords can be present in any part of the publication (title, abstract,
keywords, text body, references); b) Science Direct and Scielo databases (both
databases consulted on 2/08/2018 and 3/01/2019) were chosen, as well as Google
Scholar (consulted between Jan 31st, 2018 and Feb 5th, 2018); c) it was
considered as publication period from 2000 to March 2019.
Figure 1: Stages of the research
Source: Prepared by the authors
In the third stage, the articles
were distributed according to the type of work and subjects discussed and, in
the fourth stage, the state of the art of research on sustainable management,
which uses BSC applied to small companies, was analyzed.
4.
RESULTS
In the Google Scholar, 164
publications were collected, including articles, books, book chapter, reports,
course papers, dissertations and doctoral theses, 194 papers were collected at
Science Direct. In the Scielo database only four articles were found, all in
the Spanish language.
Then, from the articles found, a new
collection process was carried out through the references cited by these
articles. Papers that addressed the issues related to the search keywords used
in the first collection phase were selected. Thus, we selected another 246
articles, collected between February and May 2018 (Table 1).
|
Table 1: Total documents collected by base |
|
|
Scielo |
4 |
|
Science Direct |
194 |
|
Google acadêmico |
164 |
|
Bibliographic references |
246 |
|
Grand total |
608 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
Regarding the types of papers,
approximately 75,5% of the 608 publications collected are articles from
international scientific journals, while 24% are papers published through
congresses, journals at university level, master's dissertations and doctoral
theses (Table 2).
|
Table 2: Type of documents |
|
|
Bachelor Thesis |
14 |
|
Congress Published reports |
40 2 |
|
Doctor Dissertation |
10 |
|
Scientific Journal |
460 |
|
Master Dissertation |
22 |
|
University magazine |
27 |
|
Book |
30 |
|
Grand total |
608 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
As this research aims to show and
discuss the state of the art of the researches that relate the keywords used in
the bibliographic collection, for the fourth stage, the works with greater
relevance and impact in the development of knowledge were selected. Thus,
publications such as books, university journals, congresses, course work,
master's dissertations and doctoral theses were excluded. The publications in
international scientific journals were selected.
It is understood that the types of
Works excluded, although they play an important role in the development and
discussion of knowledge, have lower impact than the articles published in
scientific journals, due both to their lesser diffusion strength and to the
lower rigor of evaluation in the publication process.
Recalling that for the fourth stage
(analysis of the state of the art) only articles that address the topics
sustainable management and BSC; sustainable management and small business; and
sustainable management, BSC and small companies will be selected from 463
papers published in scientific journals.
Approximately 92% of the articles
independently addressed each of the keywords considered in the collection of
the papers or were related to subjects other than the object of study of this
research. Thus, through analysis of the abstracts, 36 publications were
selected, distributed as follows: 15 articles (Appendix A) that deal with
issues of sustainable management and small business; 17 articles (Appendix B)
that address the issues of sustainable management and BSC; and finally 4
articles intersecting sustainable management, BSC and small business (Figure
2).
Figure 2: Distribution scheme of collected articles
Source: Prepared by the authors
Among the 36 articles selected, 43%
were published by researchers from Germany; 8% by Greece; 8% from Australia, 8%
from the United States. Regarding the relevance of the selected papers, 8% were
published in journals that had between 0 and 2 of impact factor (according to
the JCR of 2017), 8% between 2 and 3, 32% with more than 3 impact factor.
The article with the largest number
of citations (1,161 citations) was The Sustainability Balanced
Scorecard-Linking Sustainability Management to Business Strategy”, from Frank
Figge; Tobias Hahn; Stefan Schaltegger; Marcus Wagner from the University of
Lüneburg, Germany, Center for Sustainability Management, in 2002 in Business
Strategy and the Environment, whose impact factor is 5,355.
The publications that intersect the
subjects delimited for this research (Fig. 2) are reduced, compared to the
total of publications collected (Table 2). Thus, the periodicity of the
publications is approximately two publications per year (between 2000 and
2019).
It should be noted that the main
country of origin of most publications is Germany, whose researchers belong to
the “Centre for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg”.
However, when the subject is about
research intersecting sustainable management, BSC and small business issues,
literature is much more limited, highlighting the signaling gap for future
research. In this sense, the last stage of this bibliographic research consists
of a qualitative analysis, which aims to characterize the knowledge frontier
developed through the 36 selected papers.
4.1.
Analysis of the state of the art
The analysis was elaborated in three
stages, grouping the articles related to each intersection.
4.1.1. Sustainable management and BSC
From the 17 articles analyzed, it is
understood that BSC is an appropriate tool to implement sustainability in
business management. The BSC is also called SBSC and is presented as a
functional tool, which links the company's activities to its objectives, taking
into account socio-environmental responsibility.
In two articles reservations
regarding the implementation of the SBSC were found. For Epstein
and Wisner (2001) there
are two significant obstacles to implementing sustainability: 1) Lack of
managerial knowledge to implement strategies based on sustainability; 2) In the
view of managers, actions focused on environmental responsibility often reduce
the attractiveness of the business.
In this sense, Epstein
and Wisner (2001)
conducted a study applied in two large companies that allowed them to develop a
cause and effect map to identify the financial effect that can lead to the
adoption of a non-financial strategy. (Example: strategies related to employee
health and safety). The result showed that developing and implementing the SBSC
is beneficial to the company because it allows them to develop strategies
aligned with their vision and objectives. It will also enable monitoring the
strategies through quantifiable indicators, as well as integrating financial
and non-financial measures, which are important for measuring performance in a
comprehensive manner.
For Bieker and Waxenberger (2002),
the BSC is appropriate to integrate environmental and social aspects into the
Company’s strategic management. However, in practice, they identified that in
the traditional use of BSC the financial perspective of companies prevailed,
preventing a balanced integration of social and environmental issues.
To solve this problem, Bieker and
Waxenberger (2002) proposed the integrity scorecard or ISC, a management system
that would meet the demands of all stakeholders in the company's actions. It is
an integrative ethical approach that seeks to ensure pluralistic management
based on the value demanded by stakeholders. Thus, being able to ensure the
operational efficiency of the BSC. In the same line as the authors analyzed,
Hansen and Schaltegger (2016) also proposes a conceptual framework of SBSC
based on the interests of stakeholders.
Authors such as Figge et al. (2002),
Epstein and Wisner (2001), Butler et al. (2011), Bieker and Waxenberger (2002)
emphasize the use of SBSC as an appropriate management tool to implement
sustainability strategies. However, Bieker and Waxenberger (2002) point out that, because it is an
operational tool that aims to link the company's activity to its main
objectives, it is possible that the company's performance regarding corporate
social responsibility become less evident.
Figge et al. (2002) describe that
sustainability management implemented with the SBSC tool helps overcome
barriers in other implementation approaches by integrating the sustainability
pillars into a single, enterprise-wide management. The authors report that the
development stages of a SBSC comply with requirements related to the
integration of environmental and social management to the strategic management
of the company.
Butler et al. (2011) argue that the use of
SBSC will make it possible to clearly see the relationship between sustainable
practices, corporate strategies and profitability. That is, as proposed by Rohm
and Montgomery (2011),
the use of the SBSC will allow aligning the strategies to the principles of
TBL.
On the side of the empirical
research, Chalmeta and Palomero (2011) elaborated a case study with the
objective of improving the SBSC tool, validating the concepts of sustainability
and showing its implementation in the company strategies. Schaltegger (2011) and Hsu et al. (2011) also developed a case
study research, aiming to propose the SBSC as the tool that will allow
measuring the company's sustainable performance.
Schaltegger
and Lüdeke-Freund
(2011) have contributed with a survey that suggests that the structure of the
SBSC should be aligned with the company's strategic map from a cause-and-effect
perspective.
Sands et al. (2016) presents an empirical
study of large companies in Australia on the feasibility of integrating the
social and environmental dimensions into the traditional four dimensions of
BSC.
Finally, Hansen and
Schaltegger (2016)
conducted a systematic review of the literature covering a two-decade period
focusing on the measurement and management of sustainability performance. The
modifications to the traditional BSC, including the SBSC, have been mapped and
characterized as architectures that describe the hierarchy between performance
perspectives and strategic objectives, as well as the influence of
organizational values.
In general, it can be commented that
the analyzed articles enriched the theoretical and applied knowledge about the
sustainable management and the use of the tool BSC. The applied researches show
the search for the validation of the BSC as a facilitator of the insertion and
measurement of sustainability in the companies’ management.
4.1.2. Sustainable management and small
business
Sustainable management in small
enterprises is seen as a process of innovation, given the importance of
sustainable development in society (BOS-BROUWERS, 2010; HANSEN; KLEWITZ, 2012;
SEBRAE, 2015).
Hansen and Klewitz (2012) conducted
a survey analyzing the heterogeneous view between 1987 and 2010 of the studies
focused on innovation practices in the area of sustainability, including
strategic behaviors and sustainable management in small enterprises. This study
reflects the lack of further research focused on sustainability.
On the other hand, Tsai and Chou (2009),
Bergeron et al. (2010), Johnson and Schaltegger (2016), Verboven and Vanherck
(2015), Ethos-Sebrae (2016), address the use of tools for the sustainability
process.
Tsai and Chou (2009) and Bergeron et
al. (2010) present a study on ISO 9001, ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and SA 8000
systems, contributing to the understanding of the diverse opportunities that
small companies have for dealing with resource constraints and to increase
their capabilities, given the challenge of sustainable management. ISO 9001
designates technical standards that establish a model of quality management for
organizations, regardless of their type and size.
ISO 14001 specifies the requirements
of an environmental management system, allowing an organization to develop a
framework for environmental protection. The OHSAS 18001 consists of a series of
British standards, developed by the BSI Group, to guide the formation of a
Management and Certification System for Safety and Occupational Health. SA 8000
is an international standard for the assessment of social responsibility for
suppliers and vendors based on conventions from the International Labor
Organization.
In the same line of systems
evaluated by Tsai and Chou (2009), Bergeron et al. (2010), Johnson and
Schaltegger (2016) argue that most of these systems are still poorly
implemented in small enterprises. They point to the main barriers to
implementation: lack of awareness, lack of perception over the benefits, lack
of managerial knowledge and experience, lack of human and financial resources,
as well as the difficulties arising from informal structures in small
enterprises.
On the other hand, Verboven and
Vanherck (2015) and the Ethos-Sebrae (2016) report show that any system or tool
aimed at sustainable management will be effective when it brings benefits to
the competitiveness of the business and, at the same time, for all
stakeholders.
The research on sustainable
management and small business also addressed the limitations related to the
knowledge and skills that small entrepreneurs have to implement and manage
sustainability (JOHNSON, 2017; NAICKER et al., 2017). For these authors,
knowledge management is an important tool to strengthen sustainability in
practice, since it will make actions more efficient and effective.
Another approach found in the
articles collected refers to sustainability as a business strategy (HÖRISCH et
al., 2015; SHIELDS; SHELLEMAN, 2015; SUKKAR, 2017).
Hörisch et al. (2015) emphasize that
the strategic choice of sustainability will require manager knowledge and the
use of tools. In this case, it is possible that company size influences the
process, although the empirical research of the authors has shown that the size
of the company apparently did not influence the use of sustainable management
tools.
Shields and Shelleman (2015) present
a tool for the development of sustainable strategies; it is a sustainable SWOT,
which aims to facilitate the elaboration of strategies through the analysis of
organizational environments, in order to facilitate the alignment between
objectives and strategies.
Sukkar (2017) presents a research on
the benefits to companies, including small business, when they implement
sustainability since the development of the strategic plan. It considers
management tools and indicators for assessing sustainability performance.
Chang and Cheng (2019) developed an
integrated multi-attribute decision analysis model to identify key
sustainability indicators that play a vital role in boosting the sustainable
performance of manufacturing in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
Therefore, through the researchers
analyzed, it can be understood that there is a growing academic discussion
about the integration of sustainability in small companies. These surveys
present knowledge as an important differential for sustainable management in
addition to highlighting that there are few tools used by companies. However,
it is understood that there is a need to increase the number of empirical
research to expand this discussion.
4.1.3. Sustainability, BSC and Small
Business
Four articles were found and
analyzed. We sought to understand the motivations, objectives and contributions
of the research.
Sukkar (2017) was motivated by: the
increasing deflation of environmental resources; the importance of
socio-environmental responsibility for all business, including small
enterprises; as well as the need for sustainable actions to contribute to the
competitiveness of small business.
While for Falle et al. (2016) and Medel et al.
(2011) the motivations are based on the importance of small companies to the
economy, as well as the need to strategically manage sustainability, relying on
the SBSC tool. Yet, Tsalis et al. (2013) justifies the research to the
lack of empirical evidences that show the use of the SBSC in the development
and implementation of sustainable strategies.
As for the objectives proposed by
the researches, it is worth mentioning the operationalization of BSC as a tool
for sustainable management in small companies. In order to align sustainable
actions with company objectives (SUKKAR, 2017), integrates sustainable actions
into the management process and BSC (MEDEL et al., 2011), as well as overcome
the challenges of implementing sustainable BSC (TSALIS et al., 2013). And, Falle et al. (2016) sought to empirically
evaluate the SBSC in the context of small enterprises.
The contributions, from Medel et al.
(2011), show the complexity of sustainability in the business environment,
especially in small companies. Therefore, the development of strategies based
on sustainability and aligned with corporate objectives, paying attention to
the implementation and control process, should come along with the communication
process, through the use of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) report.
Tsalis et al. (2013) show the importance
of the environmental analysis, making use of the SWOT tool, for the decision
process of the small business managers when adopting the SBSC tool. The article
also contributes to the literature review that evaluates the insertion of
sustainability in BSC, which resulted in the so-called SBSC.
Falle et al. (2016) through a case study,
show the importance of SBSC in the strategic management of sustainability in
small companies. There are additional benefits in the use of the tool, such as
improving the integration of sustainability in all business activities and
establishing priorities, as well as the possibility of identifying new areas of
activity.
Sukkar (2017) shows the possibility
of a paradigm shift in small companies, facilitating, consequently, the
insertion and integration of sustainability in the management and in all the
activities of the company. Sustainability in line with the company's reality
will improve the control and performance of strategies.
5.
SUSTAINABILITY, BSC AND SMALL
BUSINESS FROM BIG DATA PERSPECTIVES
Aspects
of sustainability are becoming more important to supply chain management,
making it a challenge as sustainability adds less quantifiable aspects to
supply chain management than the classic aspects of the process. On the other
hand, measuring sustainability is crucial to the implementation of modern
supply chain management (LIEBETRUTH, 2017).
López-Robles
et al. (2019) present six thematic areas related to intelligent solutions:
Business Intelligence; Innovation and Organizational Performance Management;
Data and Decisional Process; Competitive Intelligence and National
Intelligence. Among them, the data area and the decision-making process stand
out as the most representative in terms of the number of citations in their
research. For the authors, this thematic area covers topics related to data,
query processing, database management systems, decision trees, visualization of
information, transactional data, extraction of information, and analysis of
data in real time.
Another
area of research using Big Data is innovation management and organizational
performance. It is possible to emphasize the growth of the interest in this
area of research, due to the rapid growth of the h-index of works such as that
of López-Robles et al. (2019). This work shows the opportunity to use the
technology to change internal processes, which are time consuming to organize
and update the data and the performance indicators, thus making it difficult
for a dynamic response from organizations for increasingly complex
environments.
López-Robles
et al. (2019) highlight a model of intelligence maturity and its application
that will attract the interest of the scientific community in the future. They
also affirm that small business are being seen in many places as a vital motor
for growth, needing to develop and incorporate resources associated with
Intelligence; bringing complete improvements to the organization with
capabilities to quantify and facilitate its incorporation within organizations.
The
need to translate and understand codified information is shown by Pröllochs and
Feuerriegel (2018). Associated with the use of the SWOT analysis tool where it
is possible to analyze the risks and opportunities of organizational
environments, the authors present methods based on advanced analyzes, which can
perform all the calculations in a computerized way and, consequently,
subsidizing the managers in the update, in the establishment of goals,
performance measurement, and assessments with arbitrary frequency.
On
the other hand, Marín-Ortega et al. (2014) address Big Data in order to:
increase revenue; reduce costs and increase productivity. In this sense, the
authors present a business intelligence application model based on Zachman
Framework, which considers four lines of the structure: (1) strategy model, (2)
business model, (3) system model, and (4) model of technology. Thus, the model
proposed by them is composed of components of business architecture,
interconnecting the components of business intelligence and relations between
them. The model follows seven steps: step 1 - business architecture; step 2 -
extract and load processes; step 3 - instrumentalize the management control;
step 4 - transformation process; step 5 - virtual data; step 6 - develop the
business intelligence system and step 7 - analysis.
Zhou
et al. (2018) comment on the use of diffuse technology applied to deal with vague,
uncertain and qualitative information, as in the case of sustainable management
and the supply chain, or as in the evaluation of recycling partners. A
weighting technique is used combining the fuzzy method and the
DEMATEL-AEWFVIKOR evaluation.
Thus,
it can be said that currently there is no research that relates directly the
Big Data and the improvement of strategic management via BSC. However, there
are studies that report on intelligent models, using technological solutions
based on Big Data that could come to meet BSC, subsidizing the establishment of
targets, measurement, analysis and management decision making through risk and
organization environment analysis. Consequently, it can be said that the
intersection between BSC, strategic management and sustainability could benefit
from the Big Data research.
6.
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
The
present need of companies to contribute to the sustainable development of
society requires more than isolated or departmentalized actions within the
organizational structure. The importance
of developing an efficient and effective sustainable management is understood,
which allows maintaining and, if possible, improving the company's
competitiveness, taking into account the needs of stakeholders.
In
the case of small companies, sustainable management presents itself as an
opportunity, and in the near future even as a requirement, of competitiveness.
On the other hand, sustainable management becomes the major administrative
challenge, due to the characteristics of small enterprises, where management
and administrative functions (planning, organization, direction and control)
generally do not follow a formal and professional process.
In this sense, the use of management
tools, such as the BSC and the SBSC, is essential to allow the
operationalization and control of the strategies, as well as align them with
the objectives, at all levels of the organizational structure.
The
BSC tool is widely used by medium and large companies, proving useful to
improve the process of implementation and strategic control, as well as the
efficiency of the management of the company as a whole. Also, the BSC received
special attention from the researchers, who adapted it to the specific needs of
sustainable management, renaming it as SBSC.
However,
despite the importance of small business to society and the economy,
sustainable management and BSC have not yet received wide attention from the
academy, specially when it comes to applied research, which would improve
practical knowledge about the use of BSC and the effort to develop sustainable
management.
7.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This
study was financed in part by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher
Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001.
REFERENCES
AKHTAR, P.;
KHAN, Z.; FRYNAS, J. G.; TSE, Y. K.; RAO‐NICHOLSON, R. (2018) Essential
Micro‐foundations for Contemporary Business Operations: Top Management
Tangible Competencies, Relationship‐based Business Networks and
Environmental Sustainability. British
Journal Management, v. 29, n. 1, p. 43-62. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12233.
AZZONE, G.;
NOCI, G.; MANZINI, R.; WELFORD, R.; YOUNG, C. W. (1996) Defining environmental
performance indicators: an integrated framework. Business strategy and the environment, v. 5, n. 2, p. 69-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199606).
BELLI, A. P.; ANDRUCHECHEN, J. R.; ALBERTON,
L.; PETRI, S. M. (2013) Proposta de implementação do planejamento estratégico e balanced scorecard: um
estudo em uma microempresa de manufatura. Revista de estudos contábeis, v. 4, n. 7,
p. 57-76.
BERGERON, H.; BOULERNE, S.; ROY, C.; WOLF, D. (2010) Identification des Enjeux Prioritaires des PME dans le but D’établir un Tableau de Bord pour leur Gestion du Développement Durable. Crises et Nouvelles Problématiques de la Valeur, Nice, France. Cd-Rom; 2010.
BIEDER, T.; FRIESE, A.; HAHN,
T.; Axel Springer Verlag (2002) Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement am Druckstandort. In:
SCHALTEGGER, S.; DYLLICK, T. (Hrsg.): Nachhaltig
managen mit der Balanced Scorecard – Konzept und Fallstudien. Wiesbaden:
Gabler, p. 167-198.
BIEKER, T.; WAXENBERGER, B. (2002)
Sustainability balanced scorecard and business ethics: Developing a Balanced
Scorecard for Integrity Management. In: 10th
International Conference of the Greening of Industry Network,
Göteborg/Sweden.
BONACCHI, M.;
RINALDI, L. (2007) DartBoards and Clovers as new tools in sustainability
planning and control. Business Strategy
and the Environment, v. 16, n. 7, p. 461-473. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.596.
BORA, B.;
BORAH, S.; CHUNGYALPA, W. (2017) Crafting Strategic Objectives: Examining the
Role of Business Vision and Mission Statements. Journal of Entrepreneurship & Organization Management, v. 6, n.
1, p. 1-6. https://doi:
10.4172/2169-026X.1000205.
BOS‐BROUWERS, H. E. J. (2010) Corporate
sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of Themes and Activities in
Practice. Business Strategy and the
Environment, v. 19, p. 417-435. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.652.
BUTLER, J. B.,
HENDERSON, S. C.; RAIBORN, C. (2011) Sustainability and the balanced scorecard:
Integrating green measures into business reporting. Management Accounting Quarterly, v. 12, n. 2, p. 1–10.
CANTELE, S.;
ZARDINI, A. (2018) Is sustainability a competitive advantage for small
businesses? An empirical analysis of possible mediators in the
sustainability–financial performance relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 182, n. 1, p. 166-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.016.
CHALMETA, R.;
PALOMERO, S. (2011) Methodological proposal for business sustainability
management by means of the Balanced Scorecard. Journal of the Operational Research Society, v. 62, n. 7, p.
1344–1356. https://doi.10.1057/jors.2010.69
CHANG, A; CHENG, Y. (2019) Analysis model of
the sustainability development of manufacturing small and medium- sized
enterprises in Taiwan. Journal of
Cleaner Production, v. 207, p. 458-473. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.025.
CHUNG, C. C.;
CHAO, L. C.; CHEN, C. H.; LOU, S. J. (2016) A Balanced Scorecard of Sustainable
Management in the Taiwanese Bicycle Industry: Development of Performance
Indicators and Importance Analysis. Sustainability,
v. 8, n. 6, p. 1-21. https://doi:10.3390/su8060518.
DEEGAN, C.
(2002) Introduction: the legitimising effect of social and environmental
disclosures – a theoretical foundation. Journal
Accounting, Auditing e Accountability, v. 15, n. 3, p. 282-311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852.
DEPKEN, D.;
ZEMAN, C. (2017) Small business
challenges and the triple bottom line. TBL: Needs assessment in a Midwest
State, USA. Technological Forecasting Social Change.
DIAS, R. (2017) Gestão
ambiental: responsabilidade
social e sustentabilidade. 3 ed. São Paulo: Atlas.
ELKINGTON, J.
(1998) Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of
21st-century business. Environmental
Quality Management, p. 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106.
EPSTEIN, M. J.;
ROY, M. J. (2001) Sustainability in action: Identifying and measuring the key
performance drivers. Long range planning,
v. 34, n. 5, p. 585-604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(01)00084-X.
EPSTEIN, M. J.;
WISNER, P. S. (2001) Using a balanced scorecard to implement sustainability. Environmental quality management, v.
11, n. 2, p. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.1300.
ETHOS-SEBRAE
(2016). Indicadores Ethos-Sebrae para
micro e pequenas empresas. Instituto Ethos.
FALLE, S.;
ORCID, R. R.; ENGERT, S.; BAUMGARTNER, R. J. (2016) Sustainability management
with the sustainability balanced scorecard - austrian case study. Sustainability, v. 8, n. 545, p. 1-16.
https://doi:10.3390/su8060545.
FIGGIE, F.;
HAHN, T.; SCHALTEGGER, S.; WAGNER, M. (2001) The Sustainability Balanced
Scorecard – a tool for value oriented sustainability management in
strategy-focused organizations. Conference
Proceedings of the 2001 ecomanagement and auditing conference. ERP environment,
p. 83-90.
FIGGE, F.;
HAHN, T.; SCHALTEGGER, S.; WAGNER, M. (2002) The Sustainability Balanced
Scorecard – linking sustainability management to business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, v.
11, n. 5, p. 269-284. https://doi: 10.1002/bse.339.
GEORGIEV, M.
(2017) The Role of the Balanced Scorecard as a Tool of Strategic Management and
Control. Journal of Innovations and
Sustainability, v. 3, n. 2, p. 31-63.
GIAMA, E.;
PAPADOPOULOS, A. M. (2018) Carbon footprint analysis as a tool for energy and
environmental management in small and medium-sized enterprises. International Journal of Sustainable
Energy, v. 37, n. 1, p. 21-29,
doi: 10.1080/14786451.2016.1263198.
HANSEN, E. G.; KLEWITZ, J. (2012) Publicly Mediated Inter‐Organizational
Networks: A solution for Sustainability Oriented Innovation in SMEs?
Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Sustainability, Wagner, M (Ed.), Greenleaf.
HANSEN, E. G.;
SCHALTEGGER, S. (2012) Pursuing sustainability with the balanced scorecard:
Between shareholder value and multiple goal optimisation. Centre for Sustainability Management, Working Paper Series, p.
1-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2169335.
HANSEN, E. G.; SCHALTEGGER, S.
(2016) The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of
Architectures. Journal of Business Ethics, v. 133, p. 193–221.
HÖRISCH, J.; JOHNSON, M. P.; SCHALTEGGER, S.
(2015) Implementation of Sustainability Management and Company Size: A
Knowledge-Based View. Business Strategy
and the Environment, v. 24, p. 765-779. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1844.
HUBBARD, G. (2009) Measuring organizational
performance: beyond the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, v. 18, p. 177-191. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.564.
HSU, C. W.; HU,
A. H.; CHIOU, C. Y.; CHEN, T. C. (2011) Using the FDM and ANP to construct a
sustainability balanced scorecard for the semiconductor industry. Expert Systems with Applications, v.
38, n. 10, p. 12891-12899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.082.
JOHNSON, M. P.; SCHALTEGGER, S. (2016) Two
Decades of Sustainability Management Tools for SMEs: How Far Have We Come? Journal of Small Business Management,
v. 54, n. 2, p. 481-505. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12154.
JOHNSON, M. P. (2017) Knowledge acquisition and
development in sustainability oriented small and medium sized enterprises:
Exploring the practices, capabilities and cooperation. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 142, n. 4, p. 3769-3781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.087.
KAPLAN, R. S.; NORTON, D. P. (2004) Mapas estratégicos: convertendo ativos intangíveis em resultados tangíveis. São
Paulo: Campus.
LEE, K. H.;
SAEN, R. F. (2012) Measuring corporate sustainability management: A data
envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 140, n. 1, p. 219-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.08.024.
LIEBETRUTH,
T. (2017) Sustainability in Performance Measurement and Management Systems for
Supply Chains. Procedia Engineering,
v. 192, p. 539-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.06.093.
LÓPEZ-ROBLES,
J. R.; OTEGI-OLASO, J. R.; PORTO GÓMEZ I.; COBO, M. J. (2019) 30 years of
intelligence models in management and business: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Information
Management, v. 48, p. 22-38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.013.
MARÍN-ORTEGA,
P. M.; DMITRIYEV, V.; ABILOV, M.; MARX GÓMEZ, J. (2014) ELTA: New Approach in
Designing Business Intelligence Solutions in Era of Big Data. Procedia Technology, v. 16, p. 667-674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.015.
MEDEL, F.; GARCÍA, L.; ENRIQUEZ, S.; ANIDO, M.
(2011) Reporting models
for corporate sustainability in SMEs. In: Golinska, P. M; Fertsch; Marx-Gómez,
J. (Eds.), Information technologies in
environmental engineering, Heidelberg: Springer, p. 407-418. http://doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-19536-5_32.
MILNE, M. J.,
GRAY, R. (2013) W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting
initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of business ethics, v. 118, n. 1, p. 13-29.
NAICKER, V.; LE ROUX, S.; BRUWER, J.; BRUWER,
J. P. (2017) Knowledge Sharing as a Value-Adding Initiative for South African
SMME Sustainability: A Literature Review. Expert
Journal of Business and Management, v. 5, n. 2, p. 51-60.
NAWAZ, W.; KOÇ,
M. (2018) Development of a systematic framework for sustainability management
of organizations. Journal of Cleaner
Production, v. 171, n. 10, p.1255-1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.011.
OLIVEIRA, L. R.; MEDEIROS, R. M.; TERRA, P. B.; QUELHAS; O. L. G.
(2012) Sustentabilidade: da evolução dos conceitos à implementação como
estratégia nas organizações. Production, v.
22, n. 1, p. 70-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132011005000062.
PRÖLLOCHS, N.; FEUERRIEGEL, S.
(2018) Business analytics for strategic management: Identifying and assessing
corporate challenges via topic modeling.
Information & Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.05.003
ROHM, H.;
MONTGOMERY, D. (2011) Sustainability to
Corporate Strategy Using the Balanced Scorecard. The Balanced Scorecard
Institute: Cary, NC, USA.
SANDS, J. S.;
RAE, K. N.; GADENNE, D. (2016) An empirical investigation on the links within a
sustainability balanced scorecard (SBSC) framework and their impact on
financial performance. Accounting
Research Journal, v. 29, n. 2, p. 154-178. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-04-2015-0065.
SCHALTEGGER, S.
(2011) Sustainability as a driver for corporate economic success: consequences
for the development of sustainability management control. Society and Economy, v. 33, n. 1, p. 15-28.
SCHALTEGGER,
S.; LÜDEKE-FREUND, F. (2011) The
Sustainability Balanced Scorecard. Concept and the Case of Hamburg Airport;
Leuphana Universität Lüneburg: Lüneburg,
Germany.
SEBRAE - Centro Sebrae de Sustentabilidade (2015) Sustentabilidade nos Pequenos Negócios, 2 ed.; Cuiabá-Sebrae.
SEBRAE - Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro e Pequenas Empresas
(2018) Análise do CAGED. Brasília-DF.
SHIELDS, J.; SHELLEMAN, J. M. (2015)
Integrating sustainability into SME strategy. Journal of Small Business
Strategy, v. 25, n. 2, p.
59-75.
SILVA, M. D. O. P.; CALLADO A. A. C. (2013) Análise de Modelos de Balanced Scorecard elaborados a
partir da ótica da Sustentabilidade através do uso da Matriz SWOT. Administração, Contabilidade e
Sustentabilidade, v. 3, n. 4, p. 87-103. https://doi.org/10.18696/reunir.v3i4.175.
SUKKAR, A. E.
(2017) Sustainability: Its Factors and its Performance Evaluation. Journal of Commerce and Educational
Thoughts, v. 1, p. 14-30. http://doi.org/10.26476/jcet.2017.01.14-30.
TSAI, W. H.; CHOU, W. C. (2009) Selecting
management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model
based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert
Systems with Applications, v. 36, n. 2, p. 1444-1458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.11.058.
TSALIS, T. A.;
NIKOLAOU, I. E.; GRIGOROUDIS, E.; TSAGARAKIS, K. P. (2013) A framework
development to evaluate the needs of SMEs in order to adopt a
sustainability-balanced scorecard. Journal
of Integrative Environmental Sciences, v. 10, n. 3–4, p. 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2013.858751.
VERBOVEN, H.; VANHERCK, L. (2015)
Sustainability as a management process for SMEs: Analysis of existing tools in
Flanders and best-of-breed proposal. Schwerpunktthema,
v. 23, n. 4, p. 241-249.
ZHOU, F.; WANG, X.; LIM, M. K.; HE, Y.; LI, L.
(2018) Sustainable recycling partner selection using fuzzy DEMATEL-AEW-FVIKOR:
A case study in small-and-medium enterprises (SMEs). Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 196, p. 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.247.
Appendix A
Publications selection: intersection
Sustainable Management and BSC
|
Source |
Title |
Author |
Publication Year |
Affiliation |
Country |
|
Environmental
Quality Management |
MJ Epstein; PS
Wisner |
2001 |
Jones Graduate School of Management, Rice University, Houston, Texas |
USA |
|
|
10th International Conference of the Greening of Industry
Network, Göteborg/Sweden. |
T Bieker; B
Waxenberger |
2002 |
University of St. Gallen. Switzerland |
Switzerland |
|
|
Business Strategy and the Environment |
The
sustainability balanced scorecard—Linking sustainability management to
business strategy. |
Frank Figge; Tobias Hahn; Stefan Schaltegger; Marcus Wagner |
2002 |
Centre for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Business Strategy and the Environment |
I
Dias‐Sardinha; L Reijnders |
2005 |
Guest Professor, University of Lisbon, ISEG, SOCIUS |
Portugal |
|
|
Journal of
Industrial Ecology |
The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for
eco-efficiency analysis. |
Andreas
Möller;Stefan Schaltegger |
2005 |
Faculty of Environmental Sciences University of Lueneburg 21332 Lueneburg,
Germany |
Germany |
|
Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change |
Integrative
management of sustainability performance, measurement and reporting. |
Stefan Schaltegger;
Marcus Wagner |
2006 |
Centre for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Business Strategy and the Environment |
Measuring
organizational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line. |
Graham Hubbard |
2009 |
Adelaide Graduate School of Business, The University of Adelaide,
Australia |
Australia |
|
Management
Accounting Quarterly |
Sustainability
and the balanced scorecard: Integrating green measures into business
reporting. |
JB Butler; SC Henderson; C Raiborn |
2011 |
Professor of Accounting, Texas State University |
USA |
|
Journal of the Operational Research Society |
Methodological
proposal for business sustainability management by means of the Balanced
Scorecard. |
R. Chalmeta; S.
Palomero |
2011 |
Grupo Integración y
Re-Ingenierı´a de Sistemas (IRIS), UniversitatJaume I, 12071 Castellón,
Spain |
Spain |
|
Expert Systems with
Applications |
CW Hsu; AH Hu; CY Chiou; TC Chen |
2011 |
Department of Environmental Management, Tungnan University, 152, Sec.
3, Beishen Rd., Shenkeng Dist., New Taipei City 22202, Taiwan, ROC |
Taiwan |
|
|
Balanced Scorecard Institute |
Dan Montgomery;
Howard Rohm |
2011 |
Balanced Scorecard Institute (North Carolina) USA |
USA |
|
|
Society and Economy |
Stefan Schaltegger |
2011 |
Centre for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
|
Centre for
Sustainability Management |
The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: Concept and the Case of Hamburg
Airport. |
Florian Lüdeke-Freund; Stefan Schaltegger |
2011 |
Centre for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Wseas transactions on environment and development |
Dynamic Balanced Scorecard: Model for Sustainable Regional. |
Kozena Marcela;
StriteskaMichaela; SvobodaOndrej |
2011 |
Faculty of Economics and Administration University of Pardubice Studentska
84, 532 10, Pardubice CZECH REPUBLIC |
RepublicCzech |
|
Ecological
Indicators |
LoannisE.Nikolaou; Thomas A.Tsalis |
2013 |
Department of Environmental Engineering, Democritus University of
Thrace, Vas Sofias 12, Xanthi 67100, Greece |
Greece |
|
|
The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of
Architectures. |
Erik G. Hansen; Stefan Schaltegger |
2016 |
Innovation Incubator and Centre for Sustainability Management
(CSM)Leuphana University of LüneburgLüneburgGermany |
Germany |
|
|
Accounting Research
Journal |
An empirical investigation on the links within a sustainability
balanced scorecard (SBSC) framework and their impact on financial
performance. |
John Stephen Sands |
2016 |
Leuphana University Lüneburg, Centre for Sustainability Management, Scharnhorststraße
1, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
Appendix B
Publications selection: intersection
Sustainable Management and Small Business
|
Source |
Title |
Author |
Publication Year |
Affiliation |
Country |
|
Business Strategy and the Environment |
Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of themes
and activities in practice. |
Hilke Elke Jacke Bos‐Brouwers |
2010 |
VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration
and Econometrics – VU‐CfE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands |
Germany |
|
Expert Systems with
Applications |
Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A
novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. |
Wen-Hsien Tsai; Wen Chin Chou |
2009 |
Department of Business Administration, National Central University,
Jhongli, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan, ROC |
Taiwan |
|
Journal Crises et
nouvelles problématiques de la Valeur |
Identification des Enjeux Prioritaires des PME dans le but D'établir
un Tableau de Bord pour leur Gestion du Développement durable Crises et
Nouvelles Problématiques de la Valeur. |
Hélène Bergeron; Sandrine Boulerne; Chantal Roy; Dominique Wolff |
2010 |
Universidade de
Québec . UQTR - Universitédu Québec à Trois-Rivières. Canada |
Canada |
|
Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Sustainability |
Publicly mediated inter‐organizational networks a solution for
sustainability oriented innovation in SMEs. |
Erik G. Hansen; Johanna Klewitz |
2012 |
Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, D-21335 Lüneburg,
Germany |
Germany |
|
Seminário
internacional sobre pequenos negócios |
Inovação e
sustentabilidade, bases para o futuro dos pequenos negócios. |
Realização: Sebrae |
2012 |
Sebrae |
Brazil |
|
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management |
Sustainability Management and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises:
Managers' Awareness and Implementation of Innovative Tools. |
Matthew P. Johnson |
2013 |
LeuphanaUniversitätLüneburg, Centre for Sustainability Management
(CSM), Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Journal of Cleaner
Production |
Sustainability-oriented innovation of SMEs: A systematic review. |
Johanna Klewitz; Erik G. Hansen |
2014 |
Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, D-21335 Lüneburg,
Germany |
Germany |
|
Business Strategy and the Environment |
Implementation of Sustainability Management and Company Size: A
Knowledge-Based View. |
Jacob Hörisch; Matthew P.
Johnson; Stefan Schaltegger |
2015 |
LeuphanaUniversitätLüneburg, Centre for Sustainability Management
(CSM), Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Journal of Small Business Management |
Two Decades of Sustainability Management Tools for SMEs: How Far Have
We Come? |
Matthew P. Johnson; Stefan
Schaltegger |
2016 |
LeuphanaUniversitätLüneburg, Centre for Sustainability Management
(CSM), Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Journal of Small Business Strategy |
Integrating sustainability into sme strategy. |
Jeff Shields; Joyce M. Shelleman |
2015 |
University of North Carolina, Ashville. USA |
USA |
|
Schwerpunktthema |
Sustainability as a management process for SMEs: Analysis of existing tools
in Flanders and best-of-breed proposal. |
Hans Verboven; Lise Vanherck |
2015 |
Universiteit
Antwerpen AntwerpenBelgium. |
Belgium |
|
Journal of Cleaner
Production |
Knowledge acquisition and development in sustainability oriented small
and medium sized enterprises: Exploring the practices, capabilities and
cooperation. |
Matthew P. Johnson |
2017 |
Leuphana University Lüneburg, Centre for Sustainability Management,
Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany |
Germany |
|
Instituto Ethos |
Indicadores
Ethos-Sebrae para micro e pequenas empresas |
Realização:
Instituto Ethos de empresas e responsabilidade social |
2016 |
Instituto Ethos-Sebraae |
Brazil |
|
Journal of business and management |
Knowledge Sharing as a Value-Adding Initiative for South African SMME
Sustainability: A Literature Review. |
Visvanathan Naicker; Suzaan Le Roux; Juan Bruwer; Juan-Pierré Bruwer |
2017 |
Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa |
South Africa |
|
Journal
of Cleaner Production |
Analysis model of the sustainability development of
manufacturing small and medium- sized enterprises in Taiwan. |
Chang, A; Cheng, Y. |
2019 |
National
Formosa University, Taiwan |
Taiwan |