111
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
DOI: 10.15240/ ul/001/2017-1-008
In oduc ion
The examina ion o he measu ing co po a e
pe o mance issues is dedica ed o many au ho s
om di e en poin s o iew: he ela ionship
o he s a egy and s a egic o ien a ion o
he business pe o mance (Mo gan & S ong,
2003); he iew o a s a egic measu emen
pe o mance sys em h ough s a egic agenda
and decision-making as a esul o he p ocess
o ( e) o mula ing s a egy (Bisbe & Malagueño,
2012); he e ec o s a egic measu emen
pe o mance sys em on he impo an a ibu es
o he s a egy o mula ing p ocess (Gimbe e
al., 2010); he e ec o s a egic pe o mance
measu emen sys em o human esou ces and
co po a e esul s (Ben o & Whi e, 2014); he
use o he p ocess pe o mance measu emen
(Tuček e al., 2013); he ela ions among
cus ome sa is ac ion, cus ome loyal y and
i nancial pe o mance o a comme cial bank
(Belás & Gabčo á, 2016); he me hodology
o p edic ion and de ec ion o he ways o
sol ing demanding si ua ions in manage ial
wo k, wi h ob ious implica ions in pe o mance
o manage s and in e i ciency o business
pe o mance managemen (Lajčin, F anko ský,
& Š e ko, 2012); he model o acquisi ion
ac i i y in i nancial sec o (Ko auš e al., 2015);
pe o mance managemen and public co po a e
go e nance wi h ega d o ela ionships wi h
bo h ex e nal (s akeholde s) and in e nal
(poli icians and managemen ) ac o s (Romolini
e al., 2015). Many o he empi ical s udies
ealized a ound he wo ld in ecen yea s
ha e also con i med he ela ionship be ween
s a egic planning and business pe o mance
(Rudd e al., 2008).
I we a e alking abou he need and abili y
o he sys em o adap and ope a e in he long
e m pe iod wi h he o ien a ion o economic,
en i onmen al and social pe o mance o
en e p ise, we e e o a co po a e sus ainabili y
pe o mance measu emen sys em (Sea cy,
2012). Acco ding o Male ic e al. (2015) i
seems ha i exis s some suppo o exis ence
o a business case o co po a e sus ainabili y.
Using Tobin´s q was ounded ha co po a e
sus ainabili y is s ongly associa ed wi h ma ke
alue (Lo & Sheu, 2007, p. 355); he g ea e
engagemen in sus ainabili y ac i i ies can lead
o a g ea e inno a ion, which in u n leads
o g ea e i nancial and ma ke pe o mance
(Male ic e al., 2015). On he o he hand, he
analysis o link be ween co po a e social
esponsibili y (in ou iew a na owe concep as
co po a e sus ainabili y) and he pe o mance
indica o s showed ha he link be ween hese
a iables is nega i e. These esul s co e
his e ec only du ing he i s yea s in which
sus ainabili y ac ions a e applied. I will be
necessa y o examine a longe ime pe iod
(López e al., 2007). All o hese au ho s s a e
ha in he esea ch i is s ill necessa y o p o ide
a clea e unde s anding. The aim o his pape
is o iden i y he ela ionship be ween selec ed
managemen ools and concep s o a ious
de elopmen phases o s a egic pe o mance
measu emen sys ems o o e all business
pe o mance measu ed by indica o ROE.
Simila ly he aim is o iden i y he ela ionship
be ween he sus ainabili y index and indica o
ROE as a key aspec in e ms o he cu en
ex emely ad ancing clima e c isis.
INFLUENCE OF BUSINESS PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
AND CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY
CONCEPT TO OVERAL BUSINESS
PERFORMANCE: “SAVE THE PLANET
AND KEEP YOUR PERFORMANCE”
Ras isla Rajnoha, Pe a Lesníko á, Vladimí K ajčík
EM_1_2017.indd 111EM_1_2017.indd 111 13.3.2017 16:58:5713.3.2017 16:58:57
112 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
1. A B ie O e iew o he
Pe o mance Measu emen
Sys ems
As he epo o RSA Tomo ow’s Company
shows (Neely e al., 2000), he achie emen o
sus ainable co po a e success in he demanding
wo ld ma ke depends on he ele an
en e p ises indica o s o he measu emen
o business pe o mance. Cu en ly, s a egic
pe o mance managemen and measu ing
sys em can signi i can ly con ibu e o achie ing
and sol ing his gap. F om ou poin o iew and
a e ex ensi e li e a u e esou ces sea ch, we
s a e ha he issue o business pe o mance
measu emen sys em was passed he ollowing
phases: measu emen sys ems based on
pu ely i nancial indica o s, non- i nancial
pe o mance measu emen indica o s (impac
o echnological inno a ions, en i onmen , e c.),
KPI, BSC, Business In elligence knowledge
in o ma ion suppo and i nally he sus ainabili y
pe o mance measu emen sys em.
1.1 Financial Business Pe o mance
Measu emen Sys em
In he pas , he majo i y o co po a e p ac ice
me hods we e concen a ed o measu e
co po a e pe o mance e e s o mainly
he i nancial pe o mance. Wi hin hese
measu emen sys ems is based on adi ional
accoun ing sys em (Ahmed e al., 1999). The
ea ly pe o mance measu es we e app op ia e
o e alua e di isional and manage ial
pe o mance o he use o s anda d cos ing and
a iance analysis o con ol p oduc ion ac i i ies
(Chenhall & Lang i eld-Smi h, 2007, p. 266). Cos
managemen is one o he mos impo an issue
o company pe o mance and company i nancial
managemen (No ák & Popesko, 2014).
T adi ional business pe o mance measu es
ha e mos ly i nancial cha ac e which
measu es he a e o e u n on in es men ,
cash l ow and p o i ma gins (Gunaseka an
& Kobu, 2007). These measu es ha e been
c i icized due o hei educed abili y o using
o comp ehensi e pe o mance measu emen .
Value based managemen sys em came up
wi h an inno a ion in he o m o indica o EVA
(Sha ma & Kuma , 2010).
F om 80s he adi ional accoun ing
measu es ha e been c i icized in e ms o hea ily
o ien ed na u e owa d in e nal compa isons o
cos s and e enues, also a li le a en ion o he
ex e nal en i onmen ; o misleading signals
o con inuous imp o emen and inno a ion,
wo ked well o indus ial e a (Kaplan & No on,
2005); o his o ical and backwa d cha ac e
(I ne & La cke , 1998); u he mo e hey a e
ocused he ou come ins ead o being p ocess
o ien ed (Yeniy , 2003). Sho comings o
adi ional measu emen sys ems igge ed
a e olu ion in he business pe o mance
measu emen (Kenne ley & Neely, 2002). The
e olu ion is a adical decision and changes om
he p ocessing o i nancial measu es as a basis
o measu ing pe o mance o hei p ocessing
as one o a wide se o measu emen s. The
inadequacy o adi ional measu emen sys ems
poin ed also Resea ch Ins i u e o Managemen
Accoun an s (1996), when only 15% o
esponden s conside ed hei measu emen
sys em as suppo ing he objec i es, while 43%
o esponden s conside ed i o be inadequa e
(Bu gess e al., 2007). This showed ha
en e p ises can eplace exis ing adi ional
measu emen sys ems o hose ha e l ec hei
cu en objec i es and business su oundings
(Kenne ley & Neely, 2002). The esul s
om he da a o manu ac u ing en e p ises
show ha en e p ises wi h mo e ex ensi e
pe o mance measu es mainly objec i e and
subjec i e non i nancial measu es ha e highe
pe o mance (Van de S ede e al., 2006).
1.2 S a egic Business Pe o mance
Measu emen Sys em
Pe o mance measu emen sys em de i ne
Gimbe , Bisbe and Mendoza (2010) as a se o
i nancial and non- i nancial measu es o suppo
en e p ise decision-making by collec ing,
p ocessing and analyzing quan i i ed in o ma ion
ega ding i s pe o mance and p esen ed in
a b ie e iew. A subse is a S a egic Pe o mance
Measu emen Sys em (SPMS), whose ypical
ea u e is he design o hese sys ems o
suppo decision making by manage s h ough
i nancial and also non- i nancial indica o s
co e ing di e en pe spec i es and which in
combina ion enables o ans o m s a egy in o
a comp ehensi e se o pe o mance measu es
(Chenhall, 2005). SPMS con ibu es o he
achie emen o s a egic goals h ough h ee
mechanisms: a be e unde s anding o he
links be ween di e en policy p io i ies, e ec i e
communica ion be ween he objec i es
and ac i i ies and he e i cien alloca ion o
esou ces and asks (Dossi & Pa eli, 2010).
EM_1_2017.indd 112EM_1_2017.indd 112 13.3.2017 16:58:5713.3.2017 16:58:57
113
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
The mos ypical example o such sys ems
is a BSC. BSC me hodology has become
popula since hei in oduc ion by Kaplan
and No on in 1992. The sys em i sel has
unde gone de elopmen in e ms o he change
om a adi ional poin o iew o measu e
pe o mance owa ds a p ocess whe e he
business is able o measu e wha i wan s,
while in ol ing and in angible asse s (Pe kins
e al., 2014). Non- i nancial indica o s a e
conside ed as he d i e s he u u e i nancial
pe o mance o he company (Tangen, 2004).
This is indica ed by he esul s o esea ch
he global consul ing i m Bain & Company in
2015, whe e he ool BSC was one o he six
mos widely used managemen ools among
en e p ises all o e he wo ld (Rigby & Bilodeau,
2015). This ac con i ms he assump ion ha
en e p ises conside his ool o be a necessa y
and e ec i e in s a egy implemen ing and
measu ing business pe o mance. On he o he
hand, i is impo an o misunde s and he BSC
as a mi aculous ool which somehow imp o e
business pe o mance (Pe kins e al., 2014).
In Slo akia o Czech Republic ha e been
also add essed se e al esea ch o his issue
in he ecen pas , he e may be men ioned e.g.
esea ch o he SPSM and BSC me hodology
applica ion in business p ac ice. Ga u o á
p esen s he esul s o he i s exhaus i e
su ey in Slo ak en e p ises implemen ing BSC
(Ga u o á, 2011). O he simila esea ch based
on a ques ionnai e su ey ob ained om he 91
companies om Czech Republic. The s udy
indica es ha he e is a posi i e signi i can
ela ionship be ween managemen ools and
echniques u iliza ion and o ganiza ional
pe o mance (A onina, 2015). The nex su ey
ealized in Czech Republic was ocusing on
he e alua ion he impac o he use o BSC in
o de o achie e g ea e i nancial pe o mance
o businesses, depending on he size and
business sec o on a sample o mic o, small,
medium and la ge en e p ises. This su ey
showed ha ou o a o al sample o 350
en e p ises, only 13% o hem use BSC concep .
Fo companies using he BSC we e conside ed
only hose businesses ha ac i ely use his
ool a leas wo yea s. The e ec o he BSC
use and i s impac on i nancial pe o mance
was es ed using i nancial indica o s ROA and
ROE. The esea ch esul s also did no con i m
ha he BSC use con ibu es o imp o ed
i nancial pe o mance o he company. In he
esea ch was used a sample o 167 en e p ises
(Knápko á e al., 2014). Impo an will be also
i s implemen a ion, as e idenced by he esul s
o such esea ch in Slo akia, implemen a ion
o he BSC sys em only h ough he so wa e
solu ions can lead o a alse unde s anding o
he meaning o BSC by manage s, which is also
a common eason o ailu e o implemen a ion
o his sys em (Šol és & Ga u o á, 2015).
Simila esul s ha e also b ough o he o eign
esea ch, which s a es, ha he BSC a e
associa ed wi h highe measu emen sys em
sa is ac ion, bu exhibi almos no associa ion
wi h economic pe o mance (I ne e al., 2003).
Ano he impo an o eign esea ch, howe e ,
says ha i he BSC is used p ima ily o
s a egic managemen , hen i will also b ing
highe i nancial pe o mance (B aam & Nijssen,
2004).
1.3 Business In elligence as a Key
Knowledge In o ma ion Suppo
o Business Pe o mance
Measu emen Sys em
The business impac o SPMS is a ec ed by
in o ma ion echnology a iables (In e ne
usage, ERPs, in o ma ional echnology ools)
(Ben o e al., 2014). Especially ERP II – BI
(Business In elligence) ep esen s he sys em
ha p o ides he abili y o analyze business
in o ma ion in o de o suppo and imp o e
managemen decision making (Elbashi e al.,
2008). Toge he wi h he acili a ing he decisions
communica ion is in his way suppo ed he
co po a e pe o mance managemen (Melche
e al., 2004). Fo BI success a e necessa y he
echnological capabili ies such as da a quali y,
use access and he igh and whole in eg a ion
o BI wi h o he exis ing sys ems (Işik e al., 2013).
Se e al s udies a e de o ed o he
in l uence o in o ma ion echnology on business
pe o mance. Acco ding o he Ben o e al.
(2014) is e iden ha in o ma ion echnology
a iables con ibu e signi i can ly o he business
impac o SPMS. Excep o abo e men ioned
bene i s, he using o BI imp o es he o e all
en e p ise pe o mance (Ranjan, 2009). I
he pe o mance measu emen sys ems
a e suppo ed by app op ia e IT pla o ms
i will imp o e iden i i ca ion o s eng hs
and weaknesses o en e p ise, con inuous
imp o emen e c. (Nudu upa i & Bi i ci, 2005)
which ul ima ely can lead o he imp o emen
EM_1_2017.indd 113EM_1_2017.indd 113 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58
114 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
o business pe o mance. Pe ini and Pozzebon
(2009) sugges ha BI sys em akes an
impo an ole in imp o ing o implemen a ion
and moni o sus ainable p ac ices. The lack o
in o ma ion suppo dec eases he eliabili y o
in o ma ion and also inhibi s hei in eg a ion
wi h ano he indica o o complex decision
making. Highe -quali y, lowe -cos in o ma ion
is a key o unlocking mo e sou ces o i nance
o SMEs (Belás e al., 2016).
The su ey ca ied ou on he sample o 164
en e p ises ope a ing in Slo akia in es iga ed
he implemen a ion, espec i ely using o
BI in ela ion o company ROE alue. The
esul s show ha only 7% o en e p ises ha e
implemen ed and use a sys em o BI, whe eby
hese companies belong o he g oup wi h he
ROE mo e han 4%. On his basis is displayed
he hypo hesis ha he use o he BI sys em
will a ec he highe business pe o mance.
E en 71% o en e p ises no conside an
implemen ing his sys em in o he p ac ice.
The esea ch esul s showed ha in he case
ha companies do no ha e he BI in o ma ion
sys em as a complex sys em and no ake in o
accoun i s implemen a ion hey end o ha e
a lowe le el o pe o mance. On he o he
hand, businesses ha cu en ly use BI sys em
hey achie e a be e pe o mance wi h a ROE
o mo e han 4%. I ollows ha he BI sys em
has a majo impac on business pe o mance
(Rajnoha e al., 2016).
1.4 Sus ainable Pe o mance
Measu emen Sys em
A comp ehensi e iew o he business is no
possible wi hou neglec ing he social and
en i onmen al aspec s, while highligh ing
only he economic aspec would no e l ec
he di e si y o p ocesses occu ing in he
en e p ise in ela ion o he a ious en i ies ha
a e pe o m in he business (Ma ko á, 2012).
Fo hese easons has disco e ed a new ool
o measu ing pe o mance – T iple Bo om
Line (TBL). The esponsibili y o a business
is no jus abou gene a ing economic p o i
(p o i ), bu also abou ca ing o socie y
as a whole (people) and he en i onmen
(plane ). These h ee elemen s a e he basis
o TBL (Fauzi e al., 2010). This amewo k o
measu ing pe o mance c ea ed by J. Elking on
wen beyond he adi ional measu e o p o i
and e u n on owne alue wi h ega ds o
en i onmen al and social dimensions.
The co po a e sus ainable concep is based
on he globally-o ien ed concep o sus ainable
de elopmen . In gene al, he mos accep able
de i ni ions a e hose ha come om he
epo o he Wo ld Commission o he Uni ed
Na ions En i onmen and De elopmen . The
en i onmen al indica o s being assessed
can be o ganized in o 3 majo g oups o
en i onmen al indica o s: en i onmen al
quali y, en i onmen ally esponsible beha iou ,
and consump ion o en i onmen al se ices
(S eimikiene, 2014). The measu emen
o sus ainabili y is equi ed due o se e al
easons (Ju igo á & Lencséso á, 2015).
Co po a e sus ainabili y s a egy is essen ial
o sus ainable de elopmen , bu also o
he success ul managemen o he company
h ough he ela ed social, legal, poli ical and
economic equi emen s in e ms o ma ke
compe i ion (Schal egge e al., 2012). The
social, legal and poli ical en i onmen , which
a e c ea ed by s a e, play an impo an ole
(Vi gle o á e al., 2016).
In he sus ainabili y issue a e used
he sus ainably o ien ed key pe o mance
indica o s. This indica o s measu e p og ess
owa d sus ainabili y and demons a e he
en i onmen al, social and economic impac s.
Acco ding o Keeble e al. (2003) di i cul ies
in pe o mance measu ing acc ue mainly
om he en e p ise complex o ganiza ional
s uc u e wi h di e en ade l ows, unc ions
and p ojec s. In o de o be able o measu e
co po a e sus ainabili y was de eloped se e al
me hods and models. Global Repo ing Ini ia i e
c ea ed epo ing guidelines which p o ide
a amewo k o he con en o he in o ma ion
included in he co po a e social esponsibili y
epo (Sea cy, 2012). The aim o composi e
index o sus ainable de elopmen c ea ed by
Gla ic and K ajnc is o p o ide a simpli i ed and
quan i i ed iew o he in eg a ed in o ma ion
on sus ainable de elopmen in case o a mo e
comp ehensi e numbe o indica o s. Index can
be used o in o m and suppo decision-making
abou de elopmen ends and e e ing o he
po en ial oppo uni ies o imp o emen in he
sus ainabili y a eas (Gla ic & K ajnc, 2005).
As we ha e al eady men ioned he
ela ionship be ween co po a e sus ainabili y
and business pe o mance has ca ied on many
esea ch deba es. Some esea ches decla e
a posi i e ela ionship be ween co po a e
sus ainabili y/co po a e social esponsibili y
EM_1_2017.indd 114EM_1_2017.indd 114 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58
115
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
Au ho Desc ip ion
Eccless, Pe kins
and Se a eim
„High sus ainabili y“ en e p ises ou pe o med hei coun e pa s in e m o s ock
ma ke pe o mance and accoun ing c i e ia (ROA, ROE). The en i onmen al,
social and go e nance pe o mance can con ibu e o i nancial pe o mance.
Lo and Sheu Using Tobin´s q was ounded ha co po a e sus ainabili y is s ongly associa ed
wi h ma ke alue.
Se aes
and Tamayo
CSR has a posi i e impac on i nancial pe o mance in ela ion o high
ad e ising in ensi y.
Coch an and Wood
Wi hin indus y g oups he i nancial a iable mos s ongly co ela ed wi h CSR
is asse age. A e con olling o asse age, using a la ge sample, and indus y-
speci i c con ol g oups, he e s ill is weak suppo o a link be ween CSR and
i nancial pe o mance.
Pa a and K ausz
En e p ises which ha e been me c i e ia o CSR/sus ainabili y ha e gene ally
been shown o ha e i nancial pe o mance a leas on a pa , i no be e , han
o he en e p ises.
Koh, Qian
and Wang
I exis s he posi i e ela ionship be ween sus ainabili y pe o mance and
i nancial pe o mance. This ela ionship is mode a ed by a i m’s i nancial
dis ess isk.
Waddock and
G a es
Be e co po a e social pe o mance seems o be posi i ely ela ed o be e
i nancial pe o mance. I can be in e p e ed in bo h di ec ions (be e i nancial
pe o mance may lead o imp o ed sus ainabili y pe o mance and ice e sa,
ce e is pa ibus).
Male ic e al. G ea e engagemen in sus ainabili y ac i i ies can lead o a g ea e inno a ion,
which in u n leads o g ea e i nancial and ma ke pe o mance.
Ay azyan and
A anasye
The ole o he s a e and egional go e nmen s in he de elopmen o inno a ion
space o suppo sus ainable inno a i e pe o mance is emphasized.
López e al.
The analysis o link be ween CSR (in ou iew a na owe concep as co po a e
sus ainabili y) and he pe o mance indica o s showed ha he link be ween
hese a iables is nega i e. I will be necessa y o examine a longe ime pe iod.
Ga cia Cas o e al.
The posi i e ela ionship be ween social pe o mance and i nancial pe o mance
which was ound in mos o he p e ious esea ch becomes a non-signi i can o
e en a nega i e while he endogenei y is aken in o accoun .
Hawn and Ioannou
Symbolic ac ions o en i onmen al, social and go e nance ha e a highe impac
on ma ke alue in he p esence o highe in angible asse s, and ha a la ge
gap be ween symbolic and subs an i e ac ions has a highe posi i e e ec on
i m pe o mance. Subs an i e ac ions ha e a lowe o no signi i can impac on
ma ke alue (e en hough hey ha e a signi i can posi i e e ec on ROA in he
p esence o highe in angibles).
Ba on, Ha jo o
and Jo
Fo he ull da ase CFP and CSP a e ound o be la gely un ela ed, which is
consis en wi h he heo ies in which CSP p o ides p oduc di e en ia ion o
he social ma ke line is ho izon al. This, howe e , is an equilib ium ela ionship
and does no imply he absence o a causal ela ion be ween CSP and CFP
o indi idual i ms. The absence o an empi ical ela ion be ween i nancial
pe o mance and social pe o mance o he p esence o a posi i e ela ion o
consume indus ies and a nega i e ela ion o indus ial indus ies does no
mean ha he e is no causal ela ion o an indi idual i m.
Sou ce: Eccless e al. (2012); Se aes and Tamayo (2013); Coch an and Wood (1984); Pa a and K ausz (1996); Koh
e al. (2014); Waddock and G a es (1997); Lo and Sheu (2007); Male ic e al. (2015); Ay azyan and A anasye (2016);
López e al. (2007); Ga cia Cas o e al. (2010); Hawn and Ioannou (2012); Ba on, Ha jo o and Jo (2012)
Tab. 1: O e iew o ela ionship be ween co po a e sus ainabili y and business
pe o mance
EM_1_2017.indd 115EM_1_2017.indd 115 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58

116 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
(CSR), some a gue ha he e is no co ela ion.
In Table 1 we p esen ed some i ndings in i eld
o business pe o mance.
Based on esul s o ou esea ch we
inclined o au ho s, who s a e ha i exis
a posi i e co ela ion be ween co po a e
sus ainabili y and i nancial pe o mance.
S a egic managemen ool BSC can also e e
o he co po a e sus ainabili y concep . In his
sense he ‘sus ainable BSC’ ex ends he
adi ional pe spec i es wi h pe spec i e on
he en i onmen and socie y. Ea lie s udies
iden i i ed he exis ence o he ela ionship
be ween he cha ac e is ics o en ep eneu s
and business pe o mance, bu he esul s we e
s ill inconclusi e (Kozubíko á e al., 2015).
This may co e he cen al equi emen o he
co po a e sus ainabili y concep in con inuous
imp o emen o business pe o mance in
economic, en i onmen al and social e ms
(Figge e al., 2002). Based on his, i is e iden
link be ween pe o mance measu emen
sys ems in eac ion business sec o o he
p esen ends and oppo uni ies.
Due o he aim o pape and om ou
analy ical iew de i ned phases o pe o mance
measu emen sys ems, we ocused on
iden i ying he impac o he selec ed ools used
in he indi idual phases o o e all business
pe o mance measu ed by indica o ROE. This
aim we ha e ans o med in o he esea ch
hypo heses.
2. Objec i es, Da a Collec ion
and Me hodology
2.1 Objec i es and Resea ch
Hypo hesis
The aim o his pape is o iden i y he
ela ionship be ween selec ed managemen
ools and concep s o a ious de elopmen
phases o s a egic pe o mance measu emen
sys ems o o e all business pe o mance
measu ed by indica o ROE. Simila ly he
aim is o iden i y he ela ionship be ween he
sus ainabili y index and indica o ROE as a key
aspec in e ms o he cu en clima e c isis.
To iden i y he ela ionship be ween selec ed
managemen ools and o e all co po a e
pe o mance, we o ma ed he ollowing
esea ch hypo hesis:
H1: We assume ha businesses applying
he BSC me hodology will achie e signi i can ly
highe pe o mance.
H2: We assume ha i businesses use
a sys em o key pe o mance indica o s (KPI)
will achie e highe le el o pe o mance.
H3: We assume ha businesses applying
in addi ion o i nancial indica o s and also
non- i nancial indica o in he o m o mo e
o ien a ion on he en i onmen will achie e
be e pe o mance.
H4: We assume ha a s onge emphasis
on non- i nancial, s a egic indica o s and
en i onmen has no signi i can ly nega i e
impac on he i nancial pe o mance o he
company, and hey c ea e a Sus ainable
Pe o mance Measu emen Sys em.
2.2 Da a Collec ion
The i s s age o p ima y esea ch p esen ed
que ying selec ed sample o Slo ak en e p ises
in he o m o an online ques ionnai e ocused on
he use o selec ed pa ame e s o pe o mance
measu emen sys em. The emphasis was on
he in es iga ion o impac hese pa ame e s
on he o e all business pe o mance measu ed
by ROE. In he second phase o esea ch,
we ocused on explo ing issues o measu ing
co po a e sus ainabili y h ough a sus ainable
de elopmen composi e index in a pa icula
manu ac u ing en e p ise and i s impac
on pe o mance. The conclusion con ained
assessmen o achie emen s and iden i i ca ion
o mu ual ela ionship and s a egic pe o mance
measu emen sys em and measu ing co po a e
sus ainabili y. Da a abou he p ima y da abase
o 1,457 en e p ises om selec ed indus ies
o he Slo ak Republic ( he g ea es ex en
was en e p ises ep esen ed by enginee ing,
wood and au omo i e indus ies) we ecei ed
om in o ma ion o a ious indus ial
associa ions and hose we ha e subsequen ly
supplemen ed by o he companies on he basis
o ex ensi e online su ey. The ques ionnai e
was dis ibu ed in wo consecu i e ounds.
Fi s ia e-mail ( ime o comple ion was wo
mon hs, low la ency – he e we e comple ed
only 45 esea ch ques ionnai es), subsequen ly
we a e he e o e used in he second ound he
o m o elephone and he mos common o m
o ace- o- ace in e iew ( ime o comple ion
was nex wo mon hs, he e we e i lled o he
119 esea ch ques ionnai es). A e hese wo
consecu i e ounds he ques ionnai es we e
co ec ly comple ed by 164 en e p ises in he
end. We conside he size o he esea ch
sample as being su i cien ly ep esen a i e
EM_1_2017.indd 116EM_1_2017.indd 116 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58
117
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
and his is 11.26% sha e o he o al numbe
o companies su eyed. Fo his, we could
iden i y and analyze pa ame e s o measu ing
and managing co po a e pe o mance, a key
i nding was he size o ROE. Based on his,
we ha e inco po a ed he companies o he
pe o mance ca ego ies (6 in e als o scale),
which a e in l uenced by he lowe equency
educed o 3 espec i ely 2 pe o mance
en e p ise ca ego ies. We ealized ha mo e
app op ia e indica o would be he indica o
EVA, bu o i s de e mina ion i is necessa y
o know he cos s o he own capi al, which is
in ou condi ions a he un ealis ic. The e o e,
we ha e used mo e accessible indica o ROE.
In iew o he sensi i i y o he da a we ha e
scale a alue o 0% o o e 10%. Mo eo e we
conside ed 6% o ROE as he mode a e alue
eached in su eyed en e p ises. Speci i ca ion
o en e p ises is shown in Fig. 1.
2.3 Me hodology
In he quan i a i e pa o he esea ch, we did
no ocus only on adi ional i nancial ools;
g ea e emphasis was he e o e pu o he BSC
and KPI. In he a ea o non- i nancial indica o s,
we ocused on companies and hei o ien a ion
o he en i onmen . The esul s ob ained by
ques ionnai e su ey we e p ocessed by
s a is ical me hods, whe eby we excep o
selec ed a iables o desc ip i e s a is ics o one
a iable ( equency, ela i e p opo ions) used
mainly Chi-squa e es o independence. I is
used o es he ca ego ical a iable wea he he e
is a ela ionship be ween hese a iables o no .
In he analyzing his ela ionship we s a ed om
Pi o Tables and Pi o coe i cien s. The analysis
o he di e ence be ween obse ed (empi ical)
and expec ed ( heo e ical) equency we used
Pea son chi-squa e es . Besides his, we ha e
also used a simila M-V chi-squa e es , which is
based on he heo y o maximum likelihood and
is used in case he e is a eal be ween a iables
dependen . The hypo hesis was e i i ed a he
5% signi i cance le el (α = 0.05).
In he quali a i e pa o he esea ch we
ha e c ea ed in he condi ion o pa icula
en e p ise a composi e index o sus ainabili y
which we cons uc ed based on he wo k o
K ajnc and Gla ič (2005). Fo he analysis
o indus ial en e p ise in he au omo i e
indus y, we aimed o ex ac he necessa y
da a om ele an a eas and o comple e
hem by sub-indices in o a single composi e
index. In he analysis, we can poin ou ha
he company is p ima ily ocused on achie ing
economic pe o mance, and belongs o he
middle o he pollu an , which means ha
he en i onmen al ocus lies p ima ily on he
issue o was e. In e ms o social a eas i is
an en e p ise ha p o ides o i s employees
many ad an ages. The da a we ha e ob ained
o a gi en en e p ise, we compa ed he ime
pe iod o six yea s (2009-2014). The ollowing
Table 2 con ains indica o s o he a ea in he
speci i ed uni s o he pe iod, and i s dis ibu ion
co esponds classi i ed based on he GRI
guidelines.
In he economic i eld we included he
adi ional indica o s (x1i) used in accoun ing
as well as in angible asse s. Di ec impac on
he pe o mance o he en e p ise is mainly
he quali y o p oduc ion, which is exp essed
h ough e o a e (PPM – Pa s pe million) and
he cos o he claims. Indica o s o socio-social
Fig. 1: The segmen a ion o en e p ises su eyed in o he pe o mance g oups
Sou ce: own
EM_1_2017.indd 117EM_1_2017.indd 117 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58
118 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
a ea (x2i) e l ec he a i ude o en e p ises
o in e nal g oups (employees) and ex e nal
g oups (public). En i onmen al indica o s (x3i)
in ol e mainly he a eas o consequences
on he en i onmen wi hin he indi idual
ypes o ma e ials in he p oduc ion. These
include a balanced iew o he en i onmen al
consequences o he inpu s and ou pu s o he
company. Subsequen ly, we assigned o hese
indica o s a cha ac e ; he posi i e impac on
he sus ainable de elopmen o en e p ise (x+
ji)
and he nega i e impac (x–
ji) . Because o he
indica o s we e exp essed in di e en uni s o
measu emen , he no maliza ion o hei alue
was needed. One me hod ha can be used
is he calcula ion o s anda d indica o s using
he ela ionships (1) and (2). No maliza ion
o indica o s o posi i e impac is ca ied ou
acco ding o equa ion (1) and no maliza ion
o indica o s o nega i e e ec s is ca ied ou
acco ding o equa ion (2):
(1)
(2)
Fo he pu poses o assessmen he
impo ance o indi idual indica o s in he g oups
in ela ion o he sus ainable de elopmen o
en e p ise, i is necessa y es ablish he weigh s
o ele an indica o s (wji). In ou wo k, we apply
AHP (Analy ical Hie a chy P ocess) me hod
o de e mine weigh s. De ailed desc ip ion o
his me hodology is s a ed by Saa y (2008).
A e hese p ocedu es we p oceed o he
cons uc ion he sub-indices o sus ainabili y
(IS, j) o each g oup o indica o s. These sub-
indices a e calcula ed as a weigh ed a e age
o he indi idual s anda dized indica o s a he
ime o he ele an se o indica o s as ollows:
(3)
Finally, he indi idual sub-indices o
sus ainabili y a e agg ega ed in o a single
composi e index o sus ainable de elopmen
a he ime as he weigh ed a e age o he
indi idual sub-indices o sus ainabili y as
ollows:
(4)
Composi e index has helped us o
de elop an o e all pic u e o he a eas o
co po a e sus ainabili y wi h he un eiling o
isible ese es and po en ial oppo uni ies
Economic indica o s Social indica o s En i onmen al indica o s
Sales (€) Dona ions (€) Elec ici y consump ion (MWh)
P o i (€) T aining cos s (€) Na u al gas consump ion (m3)
Capi al expendi u e (€) 13 h and 14 h sala y (% om g oss
wage)
Consump ion o LPG, p opane
bu ane ( )
R&D cos s (€) Ze o absence (%) Fuel consump ion ( )
O he i nes and penal ies (€) No. o wo ke s acciden s
(numbe ) Wa e consump ion (m3)
A e age alue o PPM
(numbe )
The numbe o days due o wo k
acciden s Was e ( )
The cos o claims (€) Gende inequali y (%) In es men s in he en i onmen (€)
Fines and penal ies (€)
Sou ce: own
Tab. 2: Indica o s om di e en a eas o co po a e sus ainabili y
EM_1_2017.indd 118EM_1_2017.indd 118 13.3.2017 16:58:5813.3.2017 16:58:58
119
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
o imp o emen . Finally, we in es iga ed he
impac a e o index on pe o mance indica o
ROE h ough Spea men´s coe i cien .
3. Resea ch Resul s
3.1 Non-T adi ional Measu es and hei
Impac on Business Pe o mance
Wi hin he ame o using ools, espec i ely
concep s conduci e o imp o ing he
pe o mance, we ocused on he less equen ly
used ools in he o m o BSC me hodology.
We we e in e es ed in a sub-analysis, whe he
his concep has a majo impac on he o e all
pe o mance o en e p ises. The ollowing
Tables 3 and 4 indica ed achie emen s h ough
selec ed s a is ical es s.
F om he Tables 3, 4 we can see ha he
BSC me hodology has a demons able impac
on he business pe o mance and he alue
in e ms o esidues, i is clea ha he use
o he me hodology can be achie ed abo e-
a e age pe o mance (ROE alue o 7%). I he
en e p ises do no use he BSC me hodology,
hey will achie e an a e age o e en below-
a e age pe o mance (ROE o 7% o less), which
also e l ec s he hypo hesis H1.
F om p e ious da a – Tables 5, 6, we
can conclude ha he KPI sys em a ec s he
pe o mance o en e p ises, while om he
esidue da a is e iden ha businesses using
KPI hey achie e a be e pe o mance wi h
ROE o 4%. I ollows ha he hypo hesis H2 is
also con i med.
In e ms o non- i nancial indica o s we
paid a en ion o especially o ien a ions on he
en i onmen and analysis esul s (Tabs. 7, 8)
e ealed s a is ically signi i can dependence
o business pe o mance and he o ien a ion
o he en i onmen , and simila ly as in he
p e ious case, en e p ises ypically achie e
be e business pe o mance wi h ROE o 4%.
The sample analysis o all ele an
sec o s (164 en e p ises) showed ha on he
o e all pe o mance ha e impac s excep o
adi ional indica o s such as ou pu o i nancial
accoun ing also o he ac o s. While he use
o BSC me hodology and KPI was o eseen
S a is ics Chi-squa e d p
Pea son´s chi-squa e 12.78406 d = 2 p = .00167
M-V chi-squa e 10.11521 d = 2 p = .00636
Con ingency coe i cien .2689137
C ame ´s V .2791981
Sou ce: own
The obse ed equency Expec ed equency Obse ed minus he expec ed
equencies ( esidue)
BSC is
no used BSC is used To al BSC is
no used
BSC
is used To al BSC is no
used
BSC
is used To al
G oup 1 68 4 72 65.41463 6.58537 72.0000 2.58537 -2.58537 0.0000
G oup 2 58 3 61 55.42073 5.57927 61.0000 2.57927 -2.57927 0.0000
G oup 3 23 8 31 28.16463 2.83537 31.0000 -5.16463 5.16463 0.0000
Row o al 149 15 164 149.0000 15.0000 164.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sou ce: own
No e: G oup 1 (ROE ˂ 0, 0-2%); G oup 2 (ROE 2-4%, 4-7%); G oup 3 (ROE 7-10%, o e 10%).
Tab. 3: Pi o : BSC me hodology x Pe o mance – s a is ics
Tab. 4: Pi o : BSC me hodology x Pe o mance – equency
EM_1_2017.indd 119EM_1_2017.indd 119 13.3.2017 16:58:5913.3.2017 16:58:59
126 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
Business & Economics, 14(3C), 333-355.
K ajnc, D., & Gla ič, P. (2005). A model
o in eg a ed assessmen o sus ainable
de elopmen . Resou ces, Conse a ion &
Recycling, 43(2), 189-208. doi:10.1016/j.
escon ec.2004.06.002.
Lajčin, D., F anko ský, M., & Š e ko, R.
(2012). Possibili ies o P edic ing he Beha io
o Manage s When Coping wi h Demanding
Si ua ions in Manage ial Wo k. Ekonomický
časopis, 60(8), 835-853.
Lo, S. F., & Sheu, H. J. (2007). Is Co po a e
Sus ainabili y a Value-Inc easing S a egy
o Business? Co po a e Go e nance:
An In e na ional Re iew, 15(2), 345-358.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00565.x.
López, M. V., Ga cia, A., & Rod iquez,
L. (2007). Sus ainable De elopmen and
Co po a e Pe o mance: A S udy Based on
he Dow Jones Sus ainabili y Index. Jou nal o
Business E hics, 75(3), 285-300. doi:10.1007/
s10551-006-9253-8.
Male ic, M., Male ic, D., Dahlgaa d, J.,
Dahlgaa d, S. M., & Gomiscek, B. (2015).
Do co po a e sus ainabili y p ac ices enhance
o ganiza ional economic pe o mance?
In e na ional Jou nal o Quali y and Se ice
Sciences, 7(2/3), 184-200. doi:10.1108/
IJQSS-02-2015-0025.
Ma ko á, V. (2012). Podnikanie z aspek u
koncep u spoločenskej zodpo ednos i podniku.
In Managemen o O ganiza ions in Real
and Vi ual En i onmen : Oppo uni ies and
Challenges IV. P oceedings o scien i i c pape s.
Banská Bys ica: Ekonomická akul a Uni e zi y
Ma eja Bela Banskej Bys ici.
Melche , F., Win e , R., & Klesse, M. (2004).
Aligning P ocess Au oma ion and Business
In elligence o Suppo Co po a e Pe o mance
Managemen . In AMCIS 2004 P oceedings.
Re ie ed May 15, 2016, om h p://aisel.
aisne .o g/amcis2004/507.
Mo gan, R. E., & S ong, C. A. (2003).
Business pe o mance and dimensions o
s a egic o ien a ion. Jou nal o Business
Resea ch, 56(3), 163-176. doi:10.1016/S0148-
2963(01)00218-1.
Neely, A., Mills, J., Pla s, K., Richa ds,
H., G ego y, M., Bou ne, M., & Kenne ley, M.
(2000). Pe o mance measu emen sys em
design: de eloping and es ing a p ocess-based
app oach. In e na ional Jou nal o Ope a ions &
P oduc ion Managemen , 20(10), 1119-1145.
doi:10.1108/01443570010343708.
No ák, P., & Popesko, B. (2014). Cos
Va iabili y and Cos Beha iou in Manu ac u ing
En e p ises. Economics and Sociology, 7(4),
89-103. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2014/7-4/6.
Nudu upa i, S. S., & Bi i ci, U. S. (2005).
Implemen a ion and impac o IT-suppo ed
pe o mance measu emen sys ems. P oduc ion
Planning & Con ol: The Managemen o
Ope a ions, 16(2), 152-162. doi:10.1080/0953
7280512331333057.
Pa a, M. L., & K ausz, J. (1996). The
Associa ion be ween Co po a e Social-
Responsibili y and Financial Pe o mance:
The Pa adox o Social Cos . Jou nal o
Business E hics, 15(3), 321-357. doi:10.1007/
BF00382958.
Pe ini, M., & Pozzebon, M. (2009).
Managing sus ainabili y wi h he suppo
o business in elligence: In eg a ing socio-
en i onmen al indica o s and o ganiza ional
con ex . Jou nal o S a egic In o ma ion
Sys ems, 18(4), 178-191. doi:10.1016/j.
jsis.2009.06.001.
Pe kins, M., G ey, A., & Remme s, H.
(2014). Wha do we eally mean by „Balanced
Sco eca d“? In e na ional Jou nal o P oduc i i y
and Pe o mance Managemen , 63(2), 148-
169. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-11-2012-0127.
Ranjan, J. (2009). Business In elligence:
Concep s, Componen s, Techniques and
Bene i s. Jou nal o Theo e ical and Applied
In o ma ion Technology, 9(1), 60-70.
Rajnoha, R., Š e ko, R., Me ko á, M., &
Dob o ič, J. (2016). Business In elligence
as a Key In o ma ion and Knowledge Tool
o S a egic Business Pe o mance. E&M
Ekonomie a Managemen , 19(1), 183-203.
doi:10.15240/ ul/001/2016-1-013.
Rigby, D., & Bilodeau, B. (2015).
Managemen Tools and T ends 2015. Bos on:
Bain & Company. Re ie ed Ap il 4, 2016,
om h p://www.bain.com/publica ions/a icles/
managemen - ools-and- ends-2015.aspx.
Romolini, A., Go i, E., & Fissi, S. (2015).
Public Co po a e Go e nance and Pe o mance
In o ma ion in Local U ili ies: The Di e en
Pe cep ions o Poli icians and Manage s.
Adminis a ion and Public Managemen
Jou nal, (25), 55-77.
Rudd, J., G eenley, G., Bea son, A., & Lings,
I. (2008). S a egic planning and pe o mance:
Ex ending he deba e. Jou nal o Business
Resea ch, 61(2), 99-108. doi:10.1016/j.
jbus es.2007.06.014.
EM_1_2017.indd 126EM_1_2017.indd 126 13.3.2017 16:59:0013.3.2017 16:59:00

127
1, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
Saa y, T. L. (2008). Analy ical Hie a chy
P ocess: Planning, P io i y Se ing, Resou ce
Alloca ion. In e na ional Jou nal o Se ices
Sciences, 1(1), 83-98. doi:10.1504/
IJSSCI.2008.017590.
Sea cy, C. (2012). Co po a e Sus ainabili y
Pe o mance Measu emen Sys ems: A Re iew
and Resea ch Agenda. Jou nal o Business
E hics, 107(3), 239-253. doi:10.1007/s10551-
011-1038-z.
Se aes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2013). The
Impac o Co po a e Social Responsibili y on
Fi m Value: The ole o Cus ome Awa eness.
Managemen Science, 59(5), 1045-1061.
doi:10.1287/mnsc.1120.1630.
Sha ma, A. K., & Kuma , S. (2010).
Economic Value Added (EVA) – Li e a u e
Re iew and Rele an Issues. In e na ional
Jou nal o Economics and Finance, 2(2), 200-
220. doi:10.5539/ije . 2n2p200.
Schal egge , S., Lüdeke-F eund, F., &
Hansen, E. G. (2012). Business cases o
sus ainabili y: he ole o business model
inno a ion o co po a e sus ainabili y.
In e na ional Jou nal o Inno a ion and
Sus ainable De elopmen , 6(2), 95-119.
doi:10.1504/IJISD.2012.046944.
S eimikiene, D. (2014). Compa a i e
Assessmen o En i onmen al Indica o s o
Quali y o Li e in Romania and Li huania.
Economics & Sociology, 7(1), 11-21.
doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2014/7-1/2.
Šol és, V., & Ga u o á, B. (2015).
Modi i ca ion o pe o mance measu emen
sys em in he in en ions o globaliza ion ends.
Polish Jou nal o Managemen S udies, 11(2),
160-170.
Tangen, S. (2004). Pe o mance
measu emen : om philosophy o p ac ice.
In e na ional Jou nal o P oduc i i y and
Pe o mance Managemen , 53(8), 726-737.
doi:10.1108/17410400410569134.
Tuček, D., Hájko á, M., & Tučko á,
Z. (2013). U iliza ion le el o Business
managemen in Czech en e p ises – objec i es
and ac o s. E&M Ekonomie a Managemen ,
16(2), 81-98.
Van de S ede, W. A., Chow, Ch. W., & Lin,
T. W. (2006). S a egy, Choice o Pe o mance
Measu es, and Pe o mance. Beha io al
Resea ch in Accoun ing, 18(1), 185-205.
doi:10.2308/b ia.2006.18.1.185.
Vi gle o á, Z., Dobeš, K., & Voj o ič, S.
(2016). The Pe cep ion o he S a e’s In l uence
on i s Business En i onmen in he SMEs om
Czech Republic. Adminis a ion and Public
Managemen Jou nal, (26), 78-96.
Waddock, S. A., & G a es, S. B. (1997).
The Co po a e Social Pe o mance-Financial
Pe o mance Link. S a egic Managemen
Jou nal, 18(4), 303-319. doi:10.1002/
(SICI)1097-0266(199704)18:4<303::AID-
SMJ869>3.0.CO;2-G.
Yeniy , S. (2003). A li e a u e e iew
and in eg a i e pe o mance measu emen
amewo k o mul ina ional companies.
Ma ke ing In elligence & Planning, 23(3), 134-
142. doi:10.1108/02634500310474957.
doc. Ing. Ras isla Rajnoha, PhD.
Tomas Ba a Uni e si y in Zlín
Facul y o Managemen and Economics
Depa men o Indus ial Enginee ing
and In o ma ion Sys ems
[email p o ec ed]
Ing. Pe a Lesníko á, PhD.
Technical Uni e si y in Z olen
Facul y o Wood Sciences and Technology
Depa men o Business Economics
[email p o ec ed]
doc. RND . Vladimí K ajčík, Ph.D.
Рan-Eu opean Uni e si y
Facul y o In o ma ics
ladimi [email p o ec ed]
EM_1_2017.indd 127EM_1_2017.indd 127 13.3.2017 16:59:0113.3.2017 16:59:01
128 2017, XX, 1
Ekonomika a managemen
Abs ac
INFLUENCE OF BUSINESS PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
AND CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPT TO OVERAL BUSINESS
PERFORMANCE: “SAVE THE PLANET AND KEEP YOUR PERFORMANCE”
Ras isla Rajnoha, Pe a Lesníko á, Vladimí K ajčík
Nowadays he dissa is ac ion wi h only i nancial indica o s has led o a ocus on non- adi ional
a eas o pe o mance measu emen as Balanced Sco eca d, en i onmen indica o s and o he s.
Mo eo e many ecen s udies has ocused on he co po a e sus ainabili y concep and pe o mance
measu emen in e connec ion. The aim o his pape is o iden i y he ela ionship be ween
selec ed managemen ools and concep s o a ious de elopmen phases o s a egic pe o mance
measu emen sys ems o o e all business pe o mance measu ed by indica o ROE. Simila ly he
aim is o iden i y he ela ionship be ween he sus ainabili y index and indica o ROE as a key
aspec in e ms o he cu en clima e c isis. Ou mos impo an i ndings b ing new in o ma ion and
knowledge o he s a egic ans o ma ion om adi ional business pe o mance measu emen
sys em o s a egic and sus ainable pe o mance measu emen sys em. Speci i cally we ound ou
ha he BSC me hodology has a demons able impac on he business pe o mance. Also KPI
sys em and o ien a ion on he en i onmen a ec he pe o mance o en e p ises. In he case ha
companies do no ha e he knowledge in o ma ion sys em as a complex sys em and do no ake
in o accoun i s implemen a ion hey ended o ha e a lowe le el o pe o mance. This means ha
he BI knowledge in o ma ion sys em has a majo impac on business pe o mance. Rega ding o
he co po a e sus ainabili y concep we can con i m ha he di ec mode a e co ela ion is appa en
be ween economic sub-index and also composi e index o sus ainable de elopmen and indica o
o ROE. The connec ion o en i onmen al and social sub-index sepa a ely o ROE had no been
shown su i cien ly. Based on esul s we can conclude ha he index o sus ainable de elopmen
is a challenge o en e p ises e l ec ing a g owing need o change pu ely sho - e m o ien ed,
consume is pa e ns o p oduc ion and consump ion.
Key Wo ds: Business pe o mance, i nancial measu es, non- i nancial measu es, s a egic
pe o mance measu emen sys em, knowledge in o ma ion sys em, sus ainabili y measu emen
sys em.
JEL Classi i ca ion: M21, M14.
DOI: 10.15240/ ul/001/2017-1-008
EM_1_2017.indd 128EM_1_2017.indd 128 13.3.2017 16:59:0113.3.2017 16:59:01