平衡计分卡的核心是:理解健康和社会保健中的因果关系。

IF 0.7 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Gaia Bassani, Luca Piubello Orsini, Chiara Leardini
{"title":"平衡计分卡的核心是:理解健康和社会保健中的因果关系。","authors":"Gaia Bassani, Luca Piubello Orsini, Chiara Leardini","doi":"10.1177/09514848251374955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare organizations increasingly use performance management systems to ensure flexibility, service quality, and cost efficiency. In this context, the balanced scorecard (BSC) represents one of the most popular performance management tools for achieving these objectives. A crucial element that makes it widely employed is that it allows measures and perspectives to be linked through clearly defined cause-and-effect relationships. Nevertheless, despite its centrality in implementing BSC, a discussion regarding the effective interpretation of cause-and-effect relationships has sparked. In particular, the previous literature emphasizes the dichotomy between non-statistical causality, i.e., based on logical or finality relationships, and causality tested statistically. This study aims to investigate the nature of causal relationships between indicators and perspectives of BSC through a systematic literature review of studies conducted in the health and social care contexts. Findings reveal that both perspectives of causality can be identified; however, numerous directions for future research are possible for both. Overall, there is a need for more attention to theoretical perspectives supporting causal analysis. Furthermore, although the development of quantitative methodologies to support empirical analyses is remarkable, there is room for further improvement. Finally, the research focuses mainly on the organizational level, overlooking the role of BSC causality at other levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":45801,"journal":{"name":"Health Services Management Research","volume":" ","pages":"9514848251374955"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"At the core of the balanced scorecard: Understanding cause-and-effect relationships in health and social care.\",\"authors\":\"Gaia Bassani, Luca Piubello Orsini, Chiara Leardini\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09514848251374955\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Healthcare organizations increasingly use performance management systems to ensure flexibility, service quality, and cost efficiency. In this context, the balanced scorecard (BSC) represents one of the most popular performance management tools for achieving these objectives. A crucial element that makes it widely employed is that it allows measures and perspectives to be linked through clearly defined cause-and-effect relationships. Nevertheless, despite its centrality in implementing BSC, a discussion regarding the effective interpretation of cause-and-effect relationships has sparked. In particular, the previous literature emphasizes the dichotomy between non-statistical causality, i.e., based on logical or finality relationships, and causality tested statistically. This study aims to investigate the nature of causal relationships between indicators and perspectives of BSC through a systematic literature review of studies conducted in the health and social care contexts. Findings reveal that both perspectives of causality can be identified; however, numerous directions for future research are possible for both. Overall, there is a need for more attention to theoretical perspectives supporting causal analysis. Furthermore, although the development of quantitative methodologies to support empirical analyses is remarkable, there is room for further improvement. Finally, the research focuses mainly on the organizational level, overlooking the role of BSC causality at other levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services Management Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"9514848251374955\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services Management Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09514848251374955\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services Management Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09514848251374955","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医疗保健组织越来越多地使用绩效管理系统来确保灵活性、服务质量和成本效率。在这种情况下,平衡计分卡(BSC)是实现这些目标的最流行的绩效管理工具之一。使它得到广泛应用的一个关键因素是,它允许通过明确定义的因果关系将度量和观点联系起来。然而,尽管平衡计分卡在实施中处于中心地位,但关于有效解释因果关系的讨论已经引发。特别是,先前的文献强调了非统计因果关系(即基于逻辑或最终关系)和统计检验的因果关系之间的二分法。本研究旨在通过对健康和社会保健背景下的研究进行系统的文献回顾,探讨平衡记分卡的指标和观点之间的因果关系的本质。研究结果表明,因果关系的两种观点都可以确定;然而,未来研究的许多方向都是可能的。总的来说,需要更多地关注支持因果分析的理论观点。此外,虽然支持实证分析的定量方法的发展是显著的,但仍有进一步改进的余地。最后,研究主要集中在组织层面,忽略了平衡计分卡因果关系在其他层面的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
At the core of the balanced scorecard: Understanding cause-and-effect relationships in health and social care.

Healthcare organizations increasingly use performance management systems to ensure flexibility, service quality, and cost efficiency. In this context, the balanced scorecard (BSC) represents one of the most popular performance management tools for achieving these objectives. A crucial element that makes it widely employed is that it allows measures and perspectives to be linked through clearly defined cause-and-effect relationships. Nevertheless, despite its centrality in implementing BSC, a discussion regarding the effective interpretation of cause-and-effect relationships has sparked. In particular, the previous literature emphasizes the dichotomy between non-statistical causality, i.e., based on logical or finality relationships, and causality tested statistically. This study aims to investigate the nature of causal relationships between indicators and perspectives of BSC through a systematic literature review of studies conducted in the health and social care contexts. Findings reveal that both perspectives of causality can be identified; however, numerous directions for future research are possible for both. Overall, there is a need for more attention to theoretical perspectives supporting causal analysis. Furthermore, although the development of quantitative methodologies to support empirical analyses is remarkable, there is room for further improvement. Finally, the research focuses mainly on the organizational level, overlooking the role of BSC causality at other levels.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Services Management Research
Health Services Management Research HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Health Services Management Research (HSMR) is an authoritative international peer-reviewed journal which publishes theoretically and empirically rigorous research on questions of enduring interest to health-care organizations and systems throughout the world. Examining the real issues confronting health services management, it provides an independent view and cutting edge evidence-based research to guide policy-making and management decision-making. HSMR aims to be a forum serving an international community of academics and researchers on the one hand and healthcare managers, executives, policymakers and clinicians and all health professionals on the other. HSMR wants to make a substantial contribution to both research and managerial practice, with particular emphasis placed on publishing studies which offer actionable findings and on promoting knowledge mobilisation toward theoretical advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信