## 1 Introduction  
Increasingly, organizations are inserted in disruptive environments, so they must have the ability to respond in time to the demands posed by these environments, so that they can continue to meet their commitments just in time and leverage their competitive advantage in a sustainable way. However, organizations have no control over their external environment, so their sustained growth varies according to how they adapt to it. [PERSON] et al. (2004) and [PERSON] (2012) have argued that a company's ability to define and readjust its internal requirements to take advantage of the opportunities offered by its external environment and its ability to control its threats are determinants of its success. However, this constant adaptation by organizations to the external and internal environment is largely downstream of their global and corporate strategy, in which [1] considered that the \"(o)organisations must therefore implement sustainable strategies as an integral part of their growth and competitiveness strategy, to maximize their resources and have a positive impact on their performance\". Additionally, the same authors have developed a conceptual framework for the topic under analysis, one which reflects the diagnosis of the internal and external environment, and the importance of the strategy formulation and inherent implementation, control, and evaluation. This means that the management control system produces effects on the organisation's strategy; [PERSON]. [2; 3] emphasised that strategy is influenced by the management control system, given its dynamic approach and emphasis on interaction and dialogue, meaning that its effective use transforms it into a communication tool [4; 5; 6]. This line of thought is in line with the fact that the use of financial and non-financial indicators provides a comprehensive and holistic view of the organisations, since these indicators should be interconnected and integrated into a single management tool that has the advantage of, in addition to combining the indicators from the different perspectives, characterising the strategy and conveying strategic information [7; 8; 9; 10; 11]. In this context, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a well-known measurement tool or system that allows organisations to compare current performance against the outlined performance [7; 8; 9; 10; 11]. The BSC, besides being considered as a performance measurement tool, is also recognised as a communication system capable of providing effective communication to the whole organisation [12; 13; 14; 10], and is therefore fundamental to the organization's management [15; 16; 17; 18]. Its recognised added value lies, in particular, in the ability provided to managers to focus on the critical side of processes, through information [19], communication, commitment and responsibility to achieve not only short but also long term objectives [20]. Based on the monitoring of objectives, managers can know their positioning and redirect it if necessary [20; 21; 22], thus allowing it to be constantly adapted to the needs of the organization [23]. In view of these added values, the BSC is widely recognised and used [24], largely because it is accepted that organisational knowledge of resources and competencies is a valuable key factor [25; 26; 27; 28]. However, although several organisations have successfully implemented the BSC, others have failed to do so [29; 30; 31; 32]. Some authors consider that one of the ways to overcome this failure is through the reinforcement of learning, which plays a critical role in the implementation of the BSC [17; 32]. Many authors recognise that these themes still need empirical research [33; 34; 35], namely, in what is considered to be a gap in the literature. Furthermore, there is still a need to guide managers towards its implementation [4; 36; 37; 38; 39].