Search results

The purposes of this paper are to provide first a detailed description of the use of interfirm cooperation by a large sample of Dutch firms of different sizes and from different industries, and second, to examine the governance role of financial managers in the management of cooperative arrangements.

Research questions are developed based on a review of previous literature and data were collected using a questionnaire administered to a large sample of Dutch firms.

The paper finds that the sample firms are generally well engaged in various types of interfirm cooperation, in particular in outsourcing arrangements and joint ventures. In addition, larger firms are on average involved in more types of cooperation than smaller firms are, and different cooperative activities and forms are frequently used in combination. On average, financial managers report to be actively involved in the management of interfirm cooperation, which ranges from monitoring yearly results, providing advice, supervising performance, to managing daily operations of the cooperation. In this management role, they mostly use frequent detailed financial and non‐financial performance information, which often not only relates to their own firm, but also to the partner firm.

This research provides evidence of the extensive use of interfirm cooperation in practice and identifies an important governance role of financial managers in the management of interfirm cooperation. An analysis of differences in this role across different types of cooperation and functional levels of financial managers is provided.

The findings provide new insights into firms' use of a broad range of interfirm cooperative activities and into the governance role financial managers in these activities. Consistent with prior studies that document an increasing propensity of firms to engage in cooperative arrangements, the results support that interfirm cooperation constitutes an important area for research in accounting. This paper provides several suggestions for future research aimed at improving researchers' and practitioners' understanding of the management of interfirm cooperation.

This paper sets out to introduce the special issue on management controls and new organisational forms. It summarises and reflects on themes and findings raised in the papers in the issue.

The findings reported in the paper are based on desk research and review of the papers contained in the issue.

The paper finds that management control systems can perform various coordinating and governance roles in managing new organisational forms. However, management control systems designers must be aware of the complexities of these new organisational arrangements.

The paper is a summary of studies exploring the roles of management controls in new organisational forms. The issues addressed in these studies are important in furthering our understanding of the changing roles of management control systems.

Purpose – To show the properties of performance measurement and management systems (PMMS) used dialogically and the association between the dialogic use of PMMS and the characteristics of the organizational relationships between parent companies and foreign subsidiaries.

Design/Methodology/Approach – Data were collected through a questionnaire e-mailed to large foreign subsidiaries of multinational firms operating in various industries. Hypotheses regarding factors associated with the extent to which PMMS are used dialogically between parent companies and foreign subsidiaries were tested based on responses to 136 usable questionnaires (45% response rate).

Findings – PMMS are used more dialogically within relationships between parent companies and subsidiaries characterized by subsidiary strategic role and organizational interdependence. Measurement diversity and perceived comprehensiveness of PMMS are higher if PMMS are used more dialogically. Finally, the dialogic use of PMMS is positively associated with subsidiary size and the emphasis on collaboration in the parent company’s national culture.

Originality/Value – In contrast to prior management accounting research that is focused on the outcomes of different styles of use of PMMS, this study shows organizational characteristics and PMMS properties associated with the dialogic use of PMMS. Moreover, this study advances the traditional view of the international business literature that conceives PMMS as bureaucratic systems employed by parent companies to coercively control foreign subsidiaries.

Notwithstanding the relevance of managerial control systems (MCS) in any organization, as well the distinctive role they can play in family business, due to its specific features, the literature rarely dealt with the role and characteristics of MCS in family business. Taking into account previous contributions from different disciplines (organization, management accounting, and family business), the current work aims to better understand the state of the art about research in the field of MCS in family business in order to identify main research gaps and propose future research directions.

Forty-five articles have been analyzed, which were issued in 29 sources. Research findings show that the literature on MCS in family business is limited and not very conclusive. Some authors focused on the type of controls, other authors outlined the role of MCS in managerialization and the relation with professionalization. A few studies focused on some specific mechanisms, especially strategic planning and compensation. Some contributes dealt with MCS’ determinants and impacts. Differences between family and non-family firms were proposed. However, a clear and organized picture of the features of MCS in family firms, their determinants, and impacts has not yet been developed. Particularly, the impact of the distinctive features of family business on MCS represents an underdeveloped research field along with how MCS can be differently developed and used in different kinds of family firms. In the light of findings of the literature review, we propose a reference research framework on MCS in family business.

This article deals with how to test for and evaluate interdependence among control practices in a management control system using structural equation modeling. Empirical research on the levers of control (LOC) framework is used as an example. In LOC research, a path model approach to interdependence has been developed. The appropriateness of this approach is evaluated, developed, and compared with the correlation of residuals approach (seemingly unrelated regression) implemented in the wider complementarity literature. Empirical examples of the different models are shown and compared by using a data set on LOC of 120 SBUs in Sweden. The empirical results show that modeling interdependence among control practices in a management control system as non-recursive (bi-directional) paths or as residual correlations evidently affects the conclusions drawn about interdependence in terms of both presence and magnitude. The two models imply different views on how to conceptualize interdependence and are not statistically and empirically comparable. If using non-recursive path models, several model specification issues appear. To be able to identify such models, this needs to be carefully considered in the theory and research design prior to data collection.

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.

There has been much debate in the literature regarding whether political pressures are beneficial or detrimental to public agencies’ performance and outcomes. This chapter explores under what conditions, if any, do political pressures have any positive effects.

A survey methodology and multivariate regression models are applied to assess the relationship between political pressures and public agencies’ performance and outcomes, using data from South-America and Europe. The theoretical scope is developed drawing from the public sector, management control, and goal-setting literatures.

The effects of political pressures on public agencies’ performance and public officers’ job satisfaction are moderated by technical certainty. At low levels of technical certainty political pressures have negative effects while at high levels they have positive effects.

All limitations of survey research apply.

Governments, public officers, and politicians should take into account the dynamics described in this study so as to limit the negative effects of political pressures and take advantage of the positive ones.

This is the first study to suggest that the effects of political pressures on public agencies vary depending on the nature of the task public agencies perform. The results reported here bring a new perspective to the literature, helping to clarify prior conflicting results. In addition, the fact that results are consistent for South American and European public agencies suggests that these findings might be generalizable across cultural boundaries.

Recent accounting research has connected the coercive and enabling types of formalisation (C/E) (Adler and Borys, 1996) with the distinction between diagnostic and interactive controls (D/I) proposed by Simons (1995, 2000) to tackle research questions on complex control situations involving both the degree of employee autonomy and patterns of management attention. The diverse conceptual approaches used for connecting C/E and D/I have led to fragmentation in the literature and raise concerns about their conceptual clarity. In this paper, we assess the conceptual clarity of various forms of connection between C/E and D/I. Firstly, we conduct an in-depth content analysis of 59 recent papers, and inductively identify three points of conceptual ambiguity and divergence in the literature (namely, the perspective from which a phenomenon is studied; whether categories capture choices driven by design or by style-of-use; and the properties of control systems). We also observe that the literature proposes various forms of connection (i.e. coexistence, inclusion, and combination approaches). Secondly, we use the three detected points of ambiguity and divergence as assessment criteria, and evaluate the extent to which conceptual clarity is at risk under each form of connection. Based on this assessment, we provide guidelines to enhance the conceptual clarity of the connections between C/E and D/I, propose several research models, and indicate opportunities for future research in this area.

Many businesses recognise project management as a core competence and seek to deliver benefits to the business through effective management of projects. But how can an organisation know whether its project management processes are adequate? Can a business compare itself with best practice or its competitors? Is there an accepted benchmark for organisational project management capability? The Project Management Maturity Model (ProMMM) has been developed to meet these needs. It describes four levels of increasing project management capability (Naive, Novice, Normalised and Natural), with each ProMMM level further defined in terms of four attributes, namely culture, process, experience and application. It presents a generic benchmarking framework applicable to project‐based organisations in any type of industry, including those responsible for facilities management projects, and does not presume any prior level of project management capability. ProMMM allows organisations to assess their project management capability against agreed criteria, set realistic targets for improvement, and measure progress towards enhanced capability. This paper outlines the structure of the ProMMM framework, and presents a case study where ProMMM has been used to support development of effective project management.

Performance measurement systems (PMSs) have long been used for monitoring and improving administrative performance. In parallel, organizational ambidexterity refers to firms that manage different organizational functions and various demands to generate performance. The purpose of this paper is to propose that three dimensions of PMS increase organizational ambidexterity and consequently they influence organizational performance. In this framework, organizational ambidexterity mediates the relationships between three dimensions of PMS and organizational performance.

The data were collected through a structured questionnaire sent to Brazilian software companies. Owners, directors, project managers and responsible for company strategy answered the questionnaire. The final sample was 227 Brazilian software firms that answered according to their PMSs and organizational ambidexterity.

The results provide four main findings. First, the three dimensions of PMS, namely—attention focus, legitimization and strategic decision-making—influenced organizational ambidexterity. Second, organizational ambidexterity had a major effect on organizational performance. Third, organizational ambidexterity mediated the indirect effects of attention focus, legitimization and strategic decision-making on organizational performance. Fourth, exploration and exploitation—two dimensions of organizational ambidexterity—mediated the indirect effect of the abovementioned PMS dimensions on organizational performance.

Although there are different dimensions of organizational ambidexterity, this paper is limited to two of the most used ones: exploitation and exploration. In addition, the results were limited to subjective—in contrast to objective—performance measures.

Software companies can use PMS for attention focus, legitimization of firm’s choices and strategic decision-making to increase their exploration and exploitation capabilities. Moreover, software companies can use strategic decision-making to control existing strategies and establish new strategies for legitimizing ambidextrous choices and thereby support their decision-making process.

The data showed that not only organizational ambidexterity mediates the effects of the three dimensions of PMS use on performance, but also exploration and exploitation.