Search results

The Beyond Budgeting movement has argued that traditional budgets failed to contribute to the management of tensions associated with the increasing complexity of business models. The literature has reported a range of budgeting practices developed to address these problems, which the authors refer to collectively as “non-traditional (NT) budgets.” The purpose of this paper is to consider how the design and use of a NT budgeting system facilitates the management of multiple organizational tensions.

The study reports the findings of an in-depth case study on three business units (BUs) of the French chemical giant SSB, a company that implemented a NT budget inspired by the Beyond Budgeting Round Table model.

The authors provide detailed empirical insights into the design and use of a NT budgeting system and analyze the manner in which the new system exposes organizational tensions across multiple axes.

It is a limitation of the study that only three of SSB 21 BU’s which implemented the NT budget project were examined in depth. This limitation is mitigated to some extent by the review of audit reports in respect of the implementation of the NT budget in a total of 15 BU’s.

The study contributes a means of analyzing NT budgets in terms of the different types of organizational tensions generated, which should be of use to both researchers and practitioners in researching, designing, and evaluating NT budgets.

This study provides detailed empirical insights into the design and use of a NT budgeting system and evidence of the success of this system in exposing organizational tensions across multiple axes. The study illustrates how productive tensions can be generated through the analysis of discrepancies between alternative views of organizational performance.

Pragmatism is very relevant to workplace management and performance measurement, yet in the accounting literature, it is a term used loosely and in a colloquial manner. By drawing on a framework based on classical pragmatism, this study aims to examine how a pragmatic perspective is discernible in the form and use of management control (MC) practices.

This study collects data using a case study of a firm in the green energy construction sector.

Building on the analytical framework, this study provides evidence that a pragmatic perspective is discernible in both form and use of MC practices, through a clear focus on targets rather than variance analysis, the presence of mutable local MC practices characterised by interaction and problem-solving and the absence of other common MC practices with no clear links to ends-in-view. This study also provides evidence of the potential limitations of a pragmatic perspective including myopia and an exacerbation of the inherent bias in organisations towards exploitation.

This research brings analytical clarity to the study of pragmatism in the accounting literature and insights into how a pragmatic perspective is discernible in the form and use of MC practices. Further, the study shows the potential limitations of a pragmatic perspective for management.

Prior literature provides little insight on how management control systems have responded to the growth of collaborative new product development (NPD). The purpose of this paper is to contrast the use of budgets to manage collaborative and in-house NPD and to consider the implications for enabling flexibility.

The paper reports on the findings of a case study company in the medical devices industry that uses two different business models for its NPD activities. While the company engages in in-house NPD for its own products, it also engages in collaborative NPD services with a range of customers.

The study illuminates how two types of budgets (annual and project) can have very different impacts on flexibility under different business models. The annual financial budgets imposed rigid constraints on in-house NPD and resulted in reduced flexibility, whereas in collaborative NPD, they had little impact on flexibility. Project budgets created hard operational constraints in collaborative NPD which generated a highly pressurised yet highly creative environment, whereas project budgets had little impact on flexibility in in-house NPD.

The study contributes detailed empirical insights into the control systems used to manage collaborative NPD from the supplier perspective, where creativity is largely responsive and contrasts these with the management of in-house NPD where creativity is largely expected. The authors also contribute an analysis of the key control systems and other factors that sustain flexibility in this highly pressurised open innovation environment.

This study aims to examine the question “How can we understand the dynamics that give rise to multiplicities of overlapping controls (MoOCs)?” and explore the role of local politics in the emergence of such multiplicities.

Building on assemblage theory, we use an in-depth case study of local government in France where a Socialist and Green coalition (the “Coalition”) replaced a long-standing Communist administration. The Coalition introduced a comprehensive set of new management control systems (MCSs), layered onto pre-existing systems.

The proliferation of new MCSs, together with the persistence of legacy MCSs, gave rise to a MoOC. Linkages between controls constituted potential points of rupture around which the assemblage changed and shifted the nexus of control. Whereas densely populated areas of the assemblage provided sites for conflict in the battle to influence the allocation of resources, some MCSs became isolated or were reterritorialized by political groups seeking autonomy from the new management.

We highlight the material consequences of political contentions around MoOCs that obfuscate, and at times frustrate, the implementation of a programme for government.

We contribute a set of concepts pertaining to the dynamics of MoOCs. We offer an alternative perspective on the disappointment associated with the adoption of new management tools in the public sector, showing how MCSs can become battlegrounds for political contention rather than tools for management improvement. We contribute to literature utilizing assemblage theory for analysing management accounting change.

Tremendous change has taken place in organisational structures, networks and strategy over the past 25 years. Yet, a strategic management framework developed 25 years ago has increased in popularity among researchers in the past decade. This paper aims to review how Simons’ Levers of Control (LOC) framework has been used in empirical research studies over the past 25 years.

The findings are based on electronic database searches of papers adopting Simons’ framework published in accounting and management journals.

A total of 45 empirical studies adopting the LOC framework are presented chronologically by research method. The review highlights the far greater use of the framework in qualitative compared to quantitative studies. Qualitative studies have extended the application of the framework to broader organisational issues such as sustainability, environmental accounting and inter-organisational controls. The quantitative studies have mainly sought to add to our understanding of the antecedents and outcomes of the use of interactive control systems.

This paper furthers our understanding of Simons’ framework by synthesising and analysing the literature over 25 years. It provides insight into the varying interpretations of the concepts underlying the framework in empirical studies including differences in operationalisation of the concepts in quantitative studies. In addition, it highlights the application of the framework beyond the original domain in which it was developed. Fruitful areas for future research are pointed to in the paper.

Despite extensive adoption of Simons’ Levers of Control (LoC) framework, there is still considerable diversity in its operationalization which impedes the coherent development of the literature and compromises its value to researchers. The purpose of this paper is to draw researchers back to the conceptual core of the framework as a basis for stable, consistent definitions of the domain of observables.

We derive the conceptual core of the framework from Simons’ writings. We highlight instability in existing operational definitions of the LoC, weaknesses in the extent to which these definitions reference this conceptual core, and inconsistencies in the restriction of LoC to formal information-based routines.

We draw on the inconsistencies identified to build the case for commensuration or a “common standard” for the framework’s use on two levels: the constructs within the framework (through reference to the conceptual core of the framework) and the framework itself (through explicit inclusion of informal controls).

We illustrate the benefits of commensuration through the potential to guide the scope of the domain of observables in empirical LoC studies, and to study LoC as complementary or competing with other management control theories.

Our approach to resolving tensions arising from inconsistencies in the empirical definitions of LoC differs from others in that we focus on the strategic variables underlying the framework to define the conceptual core. We believe this approach offers greater potential for commensuration at the level of the constructs within the framework and the framework itself.

The very headline of this presentation hints at least two things. First, what is meant is the history of American sociology, though it is some what awkward to say so outright. Second, the history of American sociology is accomplished, in an impor tant sense, but one should not say that so out‐right, either. In philosophy, as Wittgenstein advised, whereof we can not speak, thereof we must be silent. A different rule reigns in sociology: whereof we can hint at, thereof we must prove. My first task, there fore, is to prove that no matter how embarrassing it may seem one canspeak of a his tory of American sociology after all. My second task is to prove that it has already been on a course of development specifically characteristic of it. And, finally, my last point will be that this specific course is brought to its desired end. Every thing in its own time. Talking about the history of American sociology is extremely risky. But it is the risk that it makes it worth trying. Part of the risk stems from the issue if there is a history of sociology at all, as well as from the issue if there is American sociology in the proper sense of the word. Apart from this, there is the consideration that it may be the American nature proper of that sociology that makes it the least likely to have its own history. First things first.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.