Comparative Study on Sustainability Balanced Score Card (Susbsc) and Firm Value

of the company. It also emphasizes the cause-and-effect relationship between sustainability and corporate strategies (Butler, Henderson &Raiborn, 2011).

Though, Figge, Hahn, Schaltegger and Wagner (2002), insist that it is important to formulate a Sustainability Balance Scorecard (SUSBSC) for a specific business unit and then to identify environmental and social aspects that are strategically relevant to that business unit. SUSBSC can be described as a traditional BSC that integrates economic, environmental and social issues that aim to transform the so-called soft factors into long-term strategic goals and contribute to sustainability in an integrated way. (Chai, 2009; Figge et al., 2002) The five perspectives of the SBSC allow a balance between short-term and long-term objectives, between desired outcomes and the performance drivers of those outcomes, and between the objective measures and more subjective measures.

There are several channels through which inadequate service inputs could affect firm value. This study therefore will address how other variables (SUSBSC) relate to manufacturing sector growth in Nigeria and South Africa. Exploring the explanatory power of these variables will fill the knowledge vacuum that currently exists in the study of manufacturing sector growth in the two countries. It is based on the above background that this study intends to examine sustainable balanced scorecard and firm value: a cross country analysis.

Statement of the Problem

The traditional BSC is found to have a broad scope of financial and non-financial information, but nevertheless it has to evolve further in order to provide an integrated management system that addresses the unavoidable contribution to sustainable development (Hansen &Schaltegger, 2012; Schaltegger&Lüdeke-Freund, 2011). Hansen and Schaltegger (2012) in their study recognized that the incorporation of certain sustainability issues in BSC has been neglected, and therefore, needs to be adapted to the changing business environment.

Moreso, prior studies reviewed, concentrated in studying one country only, examples, the study of Maduekwe and Kamala (2016) carried out in Cape Metropolis South Africa, Al-Msccen and Mohammad (2015) carried out in Jordanian Companies, Okoye, Odum and Odum (2017) did a study on Manufacturing firms in Nigeria and Mohammed (2015) did his work on Nigerian Banks, etc hence basing their studies coverage on one country. In this study therefore, we extended our scope to cover two large countries in Africa which are regarded as giants of Africa; Nigeria and South Africa, comparing the effect of SUSBSCon their firm values on Country specific.

Objectives of the Study

The main objective of the study is to carry out a comparative study on the effect of Sustainability Balanced Scorecard on Firm Value among Manufacturing Firms listed on stock exchanges of Nigeria and South Africa. Specific objectives include to:

1. Evaluate theeffect of Social Sustainability Balanced Scorecard on the value of firms listed on the Nigeria and South Africa Stock Exchanges

2. Ascertain the effect of Environmental Sustainability Balanced Scorecard on the value of firms listed firms on the Nigeria and South Africa Stock Exchanges

Research Hypothesis

To guide this study, the following hypothesis has been formulated: Ho: Social and Environmental Sustainability Balance Scorecard has no significant effect on the value of firms listed on Stock Exchanges of Nigeria and South Africa

II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Balanced Scorecard (BSC)

Correia, Langfield-Smith, Thorne & Hilton (2008) see BSC as a tool that provides an improvement in both internal and external communication and monitoring of organizational performance against strategic goals. Hence, BSC can be defined as a strategy for planning, used by the management to structure business actions according to the vision, mission and strategy of the company.

Sustainability Balance Scorecard (SUSBSC)

Sustainability reporting acts as a key driver of good corporate social responsibility performance and plays a vital role in improving not just communication, but also credibility and trust between organizations and their stakeholders. Sustainability reporting also provides a clear framework to allow shareholders and investors to compare companies on