## 2 Literature Review  
### Synopsis on The BSC  
Knowing that traditional performance indicators are based only on accounting systems, [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2008) [40] highlighted the added value of Dashboards, which in the first instance communicate strategic objectives and subsequently monitor and analyse possible deviations between the real and the desired. In order that processes be evaluated and critical factors be flagged, it is essential for a given organisation to be able to find the indicators capable of measuring performance. In this sense, all of the organisation's employees may be involved in an integrated way, which may favour a more efficient evaluation of processes and resources [41; 42; 43]. However, the BSC was not the only tool proposed because, given the need to broaden the field of action by involving financial and non-financial, medium- and long-term indicators, other management tools emerged, such as, for example, the Tableau de Bord, and the Budget [44]. Recently, [PERSON] et al. (2021) [45] defined the following management control tools: steering instruments; behavioural instruments; dialogue instruments; Tableaux de Bord (TDB) and Balanced Scorecard (BSC). The TBD consists of a set of tables and graphs that provide comparisons between indicators, in order to assist managers in strategic decision making [46; 47; 48]. Although both tools, Tableau de Bord and BSC, use financial and non-financial indicators, the BSC is distinguished by the fact that it incorporates cause-effect relationships between indicators grouped into four perspectives. It is noted that traditional tools focus their attention on retrospective (financial) indicators, as they provide information about the past, and the traditional tools pay very little attention to trend indicators [45; 49]. In other words, the BSC systematically includes the intangible, non-financial and qualitative factors linked to innovation capability and competitive situation when compared to the TDB [50]. The same authors argued that the BSC is a positive evolution of the TDB. The BSC, in turn, proves to be more dynamic, given that it resorts to the use of trend indicators, which enable future projections to be made, which may provide information relevant for the strategy reorientation [21; 46; 47; 48; 51; 52]. Additionally, it is also very important that the management tools have the capacity to provide a correct alignment of the organisational strategy with the performance assessment, so that the planning should be in line with the performance assessment, which should be able to reflect the expectations of the shareholders [34; 48; 53; 54; 55]. The implementation of the BSC means the implementation of a flexible management control tool and also allows the link with the budget process; however, it focuses on actions and promotes organisational synergy [56]. Regarding the advantages of the BSC compared to Tableau de Bord, [PERSON] & Martins (2004) [57] enumerated that: (1) Tableau de Bord is more directed to an operational management, while the BSC is closely linked to the strategy; and (2) Tableau de Bord originated from the need to manage critical factors of technical-productive scope, that is, more operational. The BSC, in turn, was developed by Harvard University Management professors, who had very strong ties with Strategic Management and its dissemination. Through this focus integrated with the strategy and its dissemination [57], organisations will have the ability to distribute the different resources according to the decisions taken and the areas most in need. The BSC analysis is very simple to interpret since it summarises the strategic objectives as well as the organisational strategy. Tracking and following up the defined strategy are considered relevant advantages compared to other management tools that do not allow \"opening the fan\" and the respective face-to-face follow-up in the various organisational processes.