Abstract

Prior research establishes a judgemental bias towards common measures when managers evaluate performance using the balanced scorecard. In an experimental study, I examine the role of a strategy map when evaluating performance in a boundary condition setting for this bias with performance measures strategically linked and both narrative strategy information and a strategy map provided. I manipulate the presence of a strategy map and find that managers who receive a strategy map develop greater strategic causal relationship knowledge when evaluating performance than managers who receive narrative strategy information only. Additional analyses indicate the bias is absent from managers' judgements in both conditions.