Mối quan hệ giữa hệ thống kế toán quản trị rộng rãi, kiểm soát quản lý, hiệu suất và thông tin liên quan đến công việc

RohitSharma1, StewartJones2, JanekRatnatunga3
1Australian Accounting Research Foundation, New South Wales, Australia
2Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
3Monash University, Australia

Tóm tắt

Mục đíchMục đích của bài báo này là chỉ ra rằng vai trò hỗ trợ quyết định và vai trò ảnh hưởng đến quyết định đối với thông tin quản lý là đồng thời trong các tổ chức, do đó phải được phân tích đồng thời.Thiết kế/phương pháp/nghiên cứuMột quy trình hồi quy hai giai đoạn để kiểm tra mối quan hệ điều chỉnh và can thiệp giữa các biến quan tâm đã được áp dụng. Đầu tiên, tương tác của các yếu tố kiểm soát ở cấp độ cá nhân (hành chính và chuyên nghiệp) đối với hệ thống kế toán quản trị rộng rãi (MAS) đã được kiểm tra, sau đó mối quan hệ can thiệp giữa MAS rộng rãi, thông tin liên quan đến công việc (JRI) và hiệu suất đã được phân tích.Kết quảCác bài kiểm tra về mối quan hệ điều chỉnh giữa môi trường kiểm soát, MAS rộng rãi, JRI và hiệu suất đã tiết lộ một hạng mục tương tác có ý nghĩa cho JRI, nhưng không cho hiệu suất.Giới hạn/nghiên cứuCác lỗi đo lường và thực hiện thông thường liên quan đến phương pháp khảo sát gắn liền với nghiên cứu này. Hơn nữa, mẫu không được chọn ngẫu nhiên, điều này làm suy yếu tính hợp lệ bên ngoài của các phát hiện. Tính hợp lệ bên ngoài sẽ ngày càng bị ảnh hưởng xấu bởi kích thước mẫu nhỏ tương đối. Do đó, cần thận trọng khi khái quát hóa các kết quả cho một quần thể rộng hơn.Ý nghĩa thực tiễnNghiên cứu cung cấp bằng chứng về mối quan hệ giữa MAS rộng rãi, cơ chế kiểm soát cấp độ cá nhân và biến kết quả của JRI.Tính độc đáo/giá trịBài báo này nhằm mục đích sử dụng môi trường có kiểm soát, các biện pháp đã thiết lập và phương pháp phân tích để gợi ý rằng khi lý thuyết hiện có giải thích mối quan hệ thực nghiệm giữa các biến quan tâm theo nhiều cách khác nhau, có thể cần thiết phải xem xét toàn diện các mối quan hệ lý thuyết và thực nghiệm ở nhiều cấp độ hơn một lần để cho phép giải thích tốt hơn về sự liên kết giữa lý thuyết và các bài kiểm tra thực nghiệm.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Abernethy, M.A. and Brownell, P. (1997), “Management control systems in research and development organizations: the role of accounting, behavior and personnel controls”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 233‐48.

Abernethy, M.A. and Stoelwinder, J.U. (1994), “The role of professional control in the management of complex organizations”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1‐17.

Aldrich, H. and Mueller, S. (1982), “The evolution of organizational forms: technology, co‐ordination and control”, Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 33‐7.

Allison, P.D. (1977), “Testing for interaction in multiple regression”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, pp. 144‐53.

Arnold, H.J. (1982), “Moderator variables: a classification of conceptual, analytic, and psychometric issues”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol 29, pp. 41‐59.

Arya, A., Glover, J. and Sivaramakrishnan, K. (1997), “The interaction between decision and control problems”, The Accounting Review, October, pp. 570‐3.

Baiman, S. (1982), “Agency research in managerial accounting: a survey”, Journal of Accounting Literature, Vol. 1, pp. 154‐213.

Baiman, S. and Demski, J.S. (1980), “Economically optimal performance evaluation and control systems”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 21, Supplement, pp. 184‐228.

Birnberg, J.G. and Snodgrass, C. (1988), “Culture and control: a field study”, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 13, pp. 447‐64.

Brewster, C.J. (1986), “Typology of management controls”, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference on Organizational Control of the Labour Process, Aston, UK.

Brownell, P. (1981), “Participation in budgeting, locus of control and organizational effectiveness”, Accounting Review, October, pp. 844‐60.

Brownell, P. (1982), “The role of accounting data in performance evaluation, budgetary participation, and organizational effectiveness”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 20, Spring, pp. 12‐27.

Brownell, P. and Dunk, A.S. (1991), “Task uncertainty and its interaction with budgetary participation and budget emphasis: some methodological issues and empirical investigation”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 16, pp. 693‐703.

Caroll, S.J. and Gillen, D.J. (1987), “Are the classical management functions useful in describing managerial work?”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 1, pp. 38‐51.

Chenhall, R.H. and Morris, D. (1986), “The impact of structure, environment, and interdependence on the perceived usefulness of management accounting systems”, The Accounting Review, January, pp. 16‐33.

Cronbach, L.J. (1951), “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests”, Psychometrika, September, pp. 297‐334.

Demski, J.S. and Feltham, G.A. (1976), Cost Determination: A Conceptual Approach, Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.

Edwards, R. (1979), Contested Terrain, the transformation of the workplace in the Twentieth Century, Basic Books, New York, NY.

Emmanuel, C., Otley, D. and Merchant, K. (1990), Accounting for Management Control, 2nd ed., Chapman and Hill, London.

Fisher, J. (1995), “Contingency‐based research on management control systems: categorisation by level of complexity”, Journal of Accounting Literature, Vol. 14, pp. 24‐53.

Fisher, J. (1998), “Contingency theory, management control systems and firm outcomes: past results and future directions”, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol. 10, Supplement, pp. 47‐64.

Fry, L.W. and Smith, D.A. (1987), “Congruence, contingency, and theory building”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, pp. 117‐32.

Galbraith, J.R. (1973), Designing Complex Organizations, Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA.

Ginzberg, M.J. (1980). “An organizational contingencies of accounting and information systems implementation”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 369‐82.

Gordon, L.A. and Narayanan, V.K. (1984), “Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and organization structure: an empirical investigation”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 9, pp. 33‐47.

Gorry, G. and Scott Morton, M. (1971), “A framework for management information systems”, Sloan Management Review, Fall, pp. 55‐70.

Govindarajan, V. and Fisher, J. (1990), “Strategy, control systems, and resource sharing: effects on business‐unit performance”, Academy of Management Journal, June, pp. 259‐378.

Govindrajan, V. and Gupta, A.K. (1985), “Linking control systems to business unit strategy: impact on performance”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 9, pp. 125‐35.

Guadagnoli, E. and Velicer, W. (1988), “Relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 2, pp. 265‐75

Gul, F.A. (1991), “The effects of management accounting systems and environmental uncertainty on small business managers’ performance”, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 22 No. 85, pp. 57‐61.

Gul, F.A. and Chia, Y.M. (1994), “The effects of management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and decentralisation on managerial performance: a test of three‐way interaction”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 19, pp. 413‐26.

Hage, J. and Aiken, M. (1967), “Relationship of centralisation to other structural properties”, Administrative Science Quarterly, June, pp. 72‐92.

Hartmann, F.G.H. and Moers, F. (1999), “Testing contingency hypotheses in budgetary research: an evaluation of the use of moderated regression analysis”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 24, pp. 219‐315.

Hayes, D.C. (1977), “The contingency theory of managerial accounting”, The Accounting Review, January, pp. 22‐39.

Hopwood, A.G. (1972), “An empirical study of the role of accounting data in performance evaluation”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 10, pp. 156‐82.

Hopwood, A.G. (1976), Accounting and Human Behaviour, Prentice‐Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Johnson, P.O. and Neyman, J. (1936), “Tests of certain linear hypotheses and their applications to some educational problems”, Statistical Research Memoirs, Vol. 1, pp. 57‐93.

Kaiser, H.F. and Rice, J. (1974), “Little jiffy, mark iv”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Spring, pp. 111‐7.

Kerlinger, F.N. and Pedhazur, E.J. (1973), Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research, Holf, Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY.

Knights, D. and Wilmott, H.C. (1987), “Organizational culture as management strategy: a critique and illustration from the financial services industry”, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 40‐63.

Kren, L. (1992), “Budgetary participation and managerial performance: the impact of information and environmental volatility”, The Accounting Review, July, pp. 511‐26.

Larcker, D.F. (1981), “The perceived importance of selected information characteristics for strategic capital budgeting decisions”, The Accounting Review, July, pp. 519‐38.

McDonough, E. and Leifer, R. (1986), “Effective control of new product projects: the interaction of organization culture and project leadership”, Journal of Product Innovation and Management, Vol. 3, pp. 149‐57.

Mahoney, T.A., Jerdee, T.H. and Carroll, S.J. (1963), Development of Managerial Performance: A Research Approach, South‐Western Publishing Co., Cincinnati, OH.

Mahoney, T.A., Jerdee, T.H. and Carroll, S.J. (1965), “The jobs of management”, Industrial Relations, February, pp. 97‐110.

Merchant, K.A. (1981), “The design of the corporate budgeting system: influences on managerial behavior and performance”, Accounting Review, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 813‐29.

Merchant, K.A. (1985), Control in Business Organizations, Pitman, Boston, MA.

Mia, L. and Chenhall, R.H. (1994), “The usefulness of management accounting systems, functional differentiation and managerial effectiveness”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 19 No. 1, 1‐13.

Mintzberg, H. (1979), The Structuring of Organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Orlikowski, W.J. (1991), “Integrated information environment or matrix of control? The contradictory implications of information technology”, Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 9‐42.

Otley, D. and Fakiolas, A. (2000), “Reliance on accounting performance measures: dead end or new beginning?”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 25 No. 4/5, pp. 497‐510.

Otley, D. and Pollanen, R.M. (2000), “Budgetary criteria in performance evaluation: a critical appraisal using new evidence”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 25, pp. 483‐96.

Ouchi, W.G. (1979), “A conceptual framework for the design or organizational control mechanisms”, Management Science, September, pp. 833‐48.

Perrow, C. (1986), Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay, Random House, New York, NY.

Ramanathan, R. (1992), Introductory Econometrics, With Applications, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Orlando, FL.

Southwood, K.E. (1978), “Substantive theory and statistical interactions: five models”, American Journal of Sociology, March, pp. 1154‐203.

Storey, J. (1985), “The means of management control”, Sociology, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 193‐221.

Tiessen, P. and Waterhouse, J.H. (1983), “Towards a descriptive theory of management accounting”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 8 No. 2/3, pp. 251‐67.

Vagneur, K. and Peiperl, M. (2000), “Reconsidering performance evaluative style”, Accounting Orgainsations and Society, Vol. 25, pp. 511‐25.

Venkatraman, N. and Ramanujam, V. (1987), “Measurement of business economic performance: an examination of method convergence”, Journal of Management, Spring, pp. 109‐22.

Govindarajan, V. (1988), “A contingency approach to strategy implementation at the business‐unit level: integrating administrative mechanisms with strategy”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 828‐53.

Hartmann, F.G.H. (2000), “The appropriateness of RAPM: toward the further development of theory”, Accounting Organsiations and Society, Vol. 25, pp. 451‐82.

Ouchi, W.G. and Jaeger, A.M. (1978), “Type Z organizations: stability in the midst of mobility”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 3, pp. 305‐14.