We examine the relationship between quality‐based manufacturing strategy and the use of different types of performance measures, as well as their separate and joint effects on performance. A key part of our investigation is the distinction between financial and both objective and subjective nonfinancial measures. Our results support the view that performance measurement diversity benefits performance as we find that, regardless of strategy, firms with more extensive performance measurement systems—especially those that include objective and subjective nonfinancial measures—have higher performance. But our findings also partly support the view that the strategy‐measurement “fit” affects performance. We find that firms that emphasize quality in manufacturing use more of both objective and subjective nonfinancial measures. However, there is only a positive effect on performance from pairing a qualitybased manufacturing strategy with extensive use of subjective measures, but not with objective nonfinancial measures.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 February 2006
Research Article|
January 01 2006
Strategy, Choice of Performance Measures, and Performance
Wim A. Van der Stede;
Wim A. Van der Stede
University of Southern California.
Search for other works by this author on:
Thomas W. Lin
Thomas W. Lin
University of Southern California.
Search for other works by this author on:
Online ISSN: 1558-8009
Print ISSN: 1050-4753
American Accounting Association
2006
Behavioral Research in Accounting (2006) 18 (1): 185–205.
Citation
Wim A. Van der Stede, Chee W. Chow, Thomas W. Lin; Strategy, Choice of Performance Measures, and Performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting 1 February 2006; 18 (1): 185–205. https://doi.org/10.2308/bria.2006.18.1.185
Download citation file:
Pay-Per-View Access
$25.00