DOI: 10.7910/dvn/iw5kxq
title: Balanced Scorecard - Crossref Bibliographic Metadata

description: &lt;p&gt;This dataset provides detailed bibliographic metadata records for scholarly publications related to the &lt;b&gt;'Balanced Scorecard' (BSC)&lt;/b&gt;, as retrieved from Crossref.org. This metadata corpus facilitates in-depth exploration of the academic discourse surrounding this strategic performance management framework.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Contextual Overview of Balanced Scorecard:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. Definition and Context:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
The Balanced Scorecard is a strategic performance management framework developed by Kaplan and Norton in the early 1990s. It aims to provide a more comprehensive view of organizational performance by complementing traditional financial measures with metrics from three additional perspectives: customer, internal business processes, and learning and growth. Its purpose is to translate strategy into a coherent set of performance measures that drive behavior and track progress.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Strengths and Weaknesses:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Strengths include providing a holistic view of performance, aligning operational activities with strategy, improving communication of strategic objectives, and facilitating organizational learning. Challenges can arise from difficulties in selecting appropriate measures, ensuring causal links between measures and strategic objectives ("strategy maps"), potential for information overload, and the resources required for implementation and maintenance. Its success depends on robust data systems and active leadership engagement.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. Relevance and Research Potential:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
The BSC remains a widely adopted framework for strategy execution and performance management globally. It has influenced the development of performance dashboards and strategic management systems. Research opportunities include its adaptation to non-profit and public sectors, its integration with risk management and sustainability reporting, the impact of BSC use on organizational performance and agility, and the behavioral implications of its implementation (e.g., gaming of metrics, anagerial attention).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;hr/&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dataset Structure and Content:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The dataset consists of one or more archives. Each archive contains a series of approximately 850 monthly folders (e.g., spanning from January 1950 to January 2025), reflecting a granular month-by-month process of metadata retrieval and curation for Balanced Scorecard.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Within each monthly folder, users will find several JSON files documenting the search and filtering process for that specific month:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
 &lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;term_results/&lt;/code&gt;: A subfolder containing JSON files for results of initial broad keyword searches related to Balanced Scorecard.&lt;/li&gt;
 &lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;merged_results.json&lt;/code&gt;: Aggregated results from these individual term searches before advanced filtering.&lt;/li&gt;
 &lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;filtered_results.json&lt;/code&gt;: Results after applying a more specific, complex Boolean query (e.g., &lt;code&gt;"balanced scorecard" AND ("performance" OR "strategy" ...)&lt;/code&gt;) and exact phrase matching to refine relevance. The exact query used is detailed within this file.&lt;/li&gt;
 &lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;final_results.json&lt;/code&gt;: &lt;strong&gt;This is the primary file of interest for most users.&lt;/strong&gt; It contains the curated, deduplicated (by DOI) list of unique publication metadata records deemed most relevant to 'Balanced Scorecard' for that specific month. Includes fields like Title, Authors, DOI, Publication Date, Source Title, Abstract (if available from Crossref).&lt;/li&gt;
 &lt;li&gt;&lt;code&gt;statistics_results.json&lt;/code&gt;: Summary statistics of the search and filtering process for the month.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This granular monthly structure allows researchers to trace the evolution of academic discourse on Balanced Scorecard and identify relevant publications with high temporal precision. For an overview of the general retrieval methodology, refer to the parent Dataverse description (&lt;a href="https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/mgmt_crossref_metadata" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;Management Tool Bibliographic Metadata (Crossref)&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Users interested in aggregated publication counts or trend analysis for Balanced Scorecard should consult the corresponding datasets in the &lt;a href="https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/mgmt_raw_data" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;Raw Extracts Dataverse&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href="https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/mgmt_normalized_indices" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;Comparative Indices Dataverse&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
description: <strong>Note on the Dataset: Management Tools Lifecycle Analysis</strong>
<strong>Overview and Context</strong><br>This dataset provides raw empirical data for the Management Tools Lifecycle Analysis project, an interdisciplinary study examining the longitudinal evolution of 23 management tool groups through bibliometric and statistical analysis of heterogeneous data sources: Google Trends, Google Books Ngram Viewer, Crossref.org, and Bain & Company’s usability and satisfaction surveys. Hosted at https://github.com/Wise-Connex/Management-Tools-Analysis/tree/main/Informes, the dataset underpins a series of 138 technical reports spanning over 20,000 pages of quantitative analysis, systematically characterizing patterns of adoption, diffusion, and decline of these tools within organizational contexts.
The project is framed within Diomar Anez’s doctoral research, titled "Ontological Dichotomy in 'Management Fads': A Perspective from the Paradoxes of the Transorganizational Ecosystem". This inquiry investigates the emergence, diffusion, and persistence/obsolescence of technological-administrative innovations—conceptualized as tools, techniques, philosophies, or management approaches exhibiting potentially cyclical trajectories. Moving beyond phenomenological descriptions of these cycles, the research probes their causal underpinnings, exploring onto-anthropological, microeconomic, and organizational dimensions. It posits that a management tool’s longevity depends not solely on its intrinsic efficacy but on its capacity to mediate inherent organizational paradoxes, such as stability versus innovation or continuity versus disruption.
<strong>Purpose and Contributions</strong><br>The dataset and associated technical reports aim to detect and characterize systematic patterns in the adoption and use of management tools, assessing whether their behavior aligns with the construct of “management fads” (marked by boom-and-bust cycles) or conforms to alternative models of diffusion and persistence. This exploratory and descriptive phase, grounded in quantitative methods, delivers an unprecedented empirical foundation in its scope and granularity, contributing to management sciences with a longitudinal data repository and advanced statistical analyses. These encompass time-series modeling (ARIMA), comparative trend analysis, trend means, cycle analysis, Fourier transform, correlation maps, linear regression, principal component analysis (PCA), and visualization of PC1 vs. PC2 loading plots, alongside trend visualizations that elucidate complex patterns.
Complementing this, the doctoral dissertation employs a qualitative approach to investigate underlying causal mechanisms and social processes, examining how contextual factors, power structures, social networks, and legitimation processes shape perceptions of a tool’s value and utility. The integration of quantitative (reports/data) and qualitative (dissertation) methodologies offers a holistic and dialectical understanding of management innovation dynamics, positioning the project as a novel contribution to the study of organizational paradoxes and innovation diffusion.
<strong>Transparency and Reproducibility</strong><br>The raw dataset is made publicly available to ensure transparency, enable reproducibility of the analyses presented in the technical reports, and foster further quantitative research by scholars, students, consultants, and practitioners interested in management tool trends, innovation diffusion, and strategic management. The technical reports provide descriptive and exploratory analyses, while the doctoral dissertation delves into qualitative factors driving tool adoption or abandonment, collectively laying a robust foundation for future research.
<strong>Authorship and Interdisciplinary Contributions</strong><br>The project is led by:

<strong>Diomar Anez (Principal Investigator):</strong> Doctoral candidate in Management Sciences, with training in Philosophy, Communication, Business Valuation, Financial Planning, and Economics, and over 25 years of experience in organizational consulting. Anez designed the conceptual framework, selected the management tools, developed the theoretical foundation, and provided interpretive insights within the context of organizational dynamics and management theory.
<strong>Dimar Anez (Data Analysis and Programming):</strong> With studies in Computer and Electronic Engineering, and expertise in data science, machine learning, and big data. Dimar led automated data extraction, preprocessing, cleaning, statistical modeling (including time-series analysis, linear regression, PCA, and forecasting techniques), and visualization, ensuring analytical rigor and scalability using Python and advanced software tools.