外文翻譯---創(chuàng)建并推廣一個(gè)管理會(huì)計(jì)理念平衡記分卡-會(huì)計(jì)審計(jì)(文件)
【正文】 我們擺脫了偉大男性和女性的傳統(tǒng)經(jīng)歷，并且發(fā)展為一種分析方法，它展示了新方法如何僅是一個(gè)固定對(duì)象，而它的多樣性是許多人行為的結(jié)果，這通常與革新本身的利益無(wú)關(guān)。我們假定平衡記分卡之前不存在專家影響力，但分析了如何通過(guò)經(jīng)驗(yàn)和理論知識(shí)之間的相互作用來(lái)構(gòu)建平衡記分卡。我們也說(shuō)明了專門服務(wù)公司的成立，平衡記分卡的合作（ BSCol），其與眾多技術(shù)公司的聯(lián)盟，如何為在管 理咨詢，軟件和商業(yè)技術(shù)中的專家發(fā)展提供機(jī)會(huì)，從而去幫助組織應(yīng)用平衡記分卡。同樣，在組織內(nèi)，冠軍平衡記分卡經(jīng)常被看作是技術(shù)專家。 專家的構(gòu)建存在兩個(gè)方面：組織的內(nèi)部和外部。 我們研究 這兩個(gè)目標(biāo)方法的結(jié)構(gòu)，平衡記分卡和執(zhí)行者如何像平衡記分卡專家一樣進(jìn)行構(gòu)建。我們也描述了該過(guò)程（例如，策略執(zhí)行）和人們是如何構(gòu)建的，即使面臨懷疑者，圍繞這一概念的專家，使它能夠被認(rèn)為可操作甚至在各種時(shí)點(diǎn)是需要的。平衡記分卡有一個(gè)被他的推廣者完善記錄的相對(duì)較長(zhǎng)的歷史（卡普蘭和諾頓， 1992，1996；卡普蘭， 1998）。盡管如此，一項(xiàng)研究管理學(xué)概念變?yōu)閷?shí)際的顯著的嘗試（瓊斯和達(dá)格代爾， 2020），這一研究追溯了作業(yè)成本法的出現(xiàn)，同時(shí)說(shuō)明了它是如何滲透到世界的商業(yè)活動(dòng)中去。也有人質(zhì)疑其普遍的吸引力（波基諾等， 2020； 庫(kù)珀和艾薩 梅爾， 2020），并且告誡說(shuō)，平衡記分卡要適應(yīng)于在通訊、獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)機(jī)制、策略和信息特征的變化多樣性（魯非特和斯?fàn)柕?， 2020； 奧特里 ， 1999）。根據(jù)一項(xiàng)克蘭菲爾德大學(xué)的研究報(bào)告指出， 75%的公司有一個(gè)關(guān)于業(yè)績(jī)衡量的正規(guī)進(jìn)程（被調(diào)查的所有公司的 46%），運(yùn)用平衡記分卡作為他們的主要方法（ 引自平衡記分卡協(xié)作“如何做”培訓(xùn)材料， 2020）。我們可以期待有更多的書籍去更深入的研究戰(zhàn)略中心組織的每一個(gè)要素。 2020 年，卡普蘭和諾頓出版了他們的第二本書，《戰(zhàn)略中心組織》，描述了作為企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略管理體系的平衡記分卡是一個(gè)不可分割的“戰(zhàn)略中心組織”。 1992 年，卡普蘭和諾頓在哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論中公布了這一初步研究結(jié)果，提出平衡記分卡作為“驅(qū)動(dòng)績(jī)效的指標(biāo)”。平衡記分卡的概念在卡普蘭和諾頓發(fā)表之后（ 1992）發(fā)展的很快。它強(qiáng)調(diào)了業(yè)績(jī)的四個(gè)維度：財(cái)務(wù)，顧客，內(nèi)部業(yè)務(wù)流程和學(xué)習(xí)與成長(zhǎng)。 90 年代以來(lái)，引進(jìn)了各種各樣的管理會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)方法，包括平衡記分卡，經(jīng)濟(jì)附加值和目標(biāo)成本等等。然而，我們并不關(guān)注一個(gè)或多個(gè)機(jī)構(gòu)采用并適應(yīng)了平衡記分卡以研究平衡記分卡的采用者和使用者（威尼斯 ， 2020； 托米拉 ， 2020）。一個(gè)由于缺乏可操作性，模糊或模棱兩可而被輕易忽略的概念是如何變?yōu)榭山邮艿母镄鹿ぞ?，甚至成為?yōu)秀管理理 所當(dāng)然的組成部分？ 我們集中注意于平衡記分卡，將其作為一個(gè)例子進(jìn)行深入的理解，管理會(huì)計(jì)理念進(jìn)入世界具體組織操作和方法的過(guò)程。 Kaplan, 1998). Kaplan (1998, 1994) largely repeats this history as an account of a knowledge creation cycle, but, rather improbably, depicts the process as smooth and without conflict. The present study illustrates some of the previously undocumented translations, disruptions, maneuvers and tensions involved in the process of disembedding and reembedding the idea, drawing on Giddens? notion of global and local interconnectedness (cf., Jones and Dugdale, 2020). Specifically, we examine how the idea of the BSC emerged from local practice during the late 1980s, and how it was subsequently generalized, thus enabling it to travel as a thinkable, manageable concept. We also illustrate how the construction of processes (of, for example, strategy implementation) and of people, notably the expertise around the idea, enabled it to be seen as operable and even necessary at various times and places, even in the face of skepticism. Translation processes are crucial in converting an abstract idea into a practical technology. Power (2020) focuses on the rise and discursive acceptance of specific ideas and their role in constituting the practices of risk management, and suggests, “all management practices necessarily embody and are constituted by ideas of what they should be”. These ideas which constitute programmatic elements in practice are often linked to larger value systems (Rose and Miller, 1992). In the case of the BSC, the larger value system includes the importance of quantification and the value of strategic management. We examine both the construction of the object of technology, the BSC, and how some actors are constructed as BSC experts. Sturdy et al. (2020) argue that the translation process has emphasized “the activity of inanimate objects such as technological hardware”, but “the transformation of human actors is underplayed”. The making of experts is an important element in the making and unmaking of the ideas themselves (Gendron et al, 2020). There are two aspects in the construction of experts: within and outside the organization. The construction of experts within the organizations is realized in part through the assignment of managerial responsibilities and designation of new roles. Power (2020) illustrates how new roles and positions, such as the Chief Risk Officer, are envisaged and made up in the conceptions of enterprisewide risk management. We illustrate how the conceptualization of the BSC enpasses the creatio
畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號(hào)-1