Search results

The purpose of this paper is to further develop a conceptual framework for analysing performance management systems (PMS). The framework aims to be useful for a rich understanding of a specific organisation’s PMS. At the same time, it should preferable be simple so that it could be used even in practice. The framework adds to earlier work by Malmi and Brown (2008), Ferreira and Otley (2009), Broadbent and Laughlin (2009), Bedford and Malmi (2015) and Johanson et al. (2001).

The paper is theoretical but has also been applied to a Swedish municipality. The purpose of the latter was to understand if the framework is feasible so far.

The authors hold that the framework in its present form is useful to use as an analytical tool even if it needs to be subjected to further development.

The paper addresses an issue that is continuously changing. This means that the suggested framework may suffer from theoretical weaknesses in some respects. To balance between a theoretically deep and exhaustive framework and a framework that is simple enough to use is a tricky question that needs further investigation.

The ambition with the framework is that it shall be useful even in practice.

The need for further research in the PMS area has been emphasised by the above researcher but also by, e.g., Van Helden and Reichard (2016). They hold that the authors need rich European cases to improve the understanding of how PMS works. The authors hold that the present framework has the potential to meet the demands from Van Helden and Reichard.

The paper celebrates the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Flamholtz’s seminal paper on the Human Resource Accounting approach to taking people into account, providing a critical review of its progress since that time and offering some thoughts on how the project might now be beneficially shaped.

The paper provides an authoritative review of the progress of the accounting for people project to date.

The continuing exploration of how it might be possible to take people into account is identified to be entering a new and exciting phase.

The authors readily acknowledge that what the paper provides is an account of the evolution of the accounting for people field, which they argue is currently extending into a new and important phase relating to employee health and wellbeing.

The paper’s principal contribution lies in bringing together three authors who have made significant contributions to the topic of accounting for people over the past 50 years.

This paper provides a brief account of the work of the PEI since its inauguration. Furthermore, a number of current issues are discussed such as the way the scope of the subject has been extended to broader issues including intellectual capital and the balanced score card. A final conclusion is drawn that while much has been achieved by the PEI and others, there are still many central measurement issues to be resolved in the future.

Human resource costing and accounting (HRCA) has been the subject of much model construction but there has been little research as to how these models are utilised in practical decision‐making and implementation. This issue is addressed in three studies covering different aspects of HRCA. The first study shows that decisions are influenced in an experimental situation by HRCA information in such a way that the decisions are made in accordance with the content of the information. In the second study, the stimulating and inhibiting factors of force‐field analysis are used to examine a possible implementation of the methods of HRCA. In the third study, developments some years after a number of managers have come into contact with HRCA are examined. The conclusion is that HRCA has been useful as a basis for decisions or actions concerning human resource decision‐making

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the literature debating research policy, research and the role of researchers, in discussing a single researcher's (Jan‐Erik Gröjer's) research during the 1980s and 1990s.

Jan‐Erik Gröjer's publications during the period are compared with different research modes 1 and 2, communalism, universalism, disinterestedness, originality and scepticism and PLACE within this polarized world, i.e. between demands from different research ideologies universities as well as individual researchers perform their research.

This paper can be read as both a contribution to the debate about the researcher's role and as a tribute to a friend who was able to investigate and practise different roles: normative and critical, theoretical and applied and provocative and humble, to name a few.

Further case studies of single researchers could serve as a valuable input to the discussion of different research ideologies.

The paper could be used in, e.g., doctoral student education when discussing the researcher's role but also when discussing the role of university research in general.

The used research modes have not before been analyzed using a single researcher as a case. It could be useful for individual researchers as well as in discussions about management of universities.

Purpose – We examine the fundamental assumptions and features of the Uppsala model of internationalization and argue that we need to look beyond this model for studying internationalization processes in the multinational corporations (MNCs) of today. The purpose of our paper is to identify gaps and neglected issues regarding MNCs' internationalization processes that demand further theoretical and empirical study.

Methodology – Our approach is conceptual: based on the most cited model on internationalization, the Uppsala model, we approach the complex internationalization processes that continuously go on in modern MNCs. We use related bodies of literature, on MNC structure and strategy, headquarters–subsidiary relationships, MNC subsidiary strategy and development, and opportunity seeking and entrepreneurship, to fill in the gaps and develop the emerging research themes.

Findings – We identify the following three issues that need further investigation: the opportunity recognition process preceding internationalization processes in MNCs, the internationalization of multiple products within the confines of the growing MNC, and the internationalization of foreign MNC units.

Research limitations – In this paper, we open up new research fields, but do not offer empirical studies to inform us about these relevant issues. Future research should study these issues empirically, preferably through case study methodologies and/or with longitudinal designs.

Originality – The contribution of our paper is its identification of three research issues in relation to internationalization processes of modern MNCs, which we argue are neglected by contemporary research.

Examines the new challenges that have been posed by the information society and the new demands posed on management. The term “knowledge‐based economy” has become universal, the rules of business are being rewitten and the industrial era enterprise models are no longer adequate to meet the dynamic condition of a changing world market. Companies have become aware of the importance of managing the external communication since this issue is considered important for the company's ability to generate value. Various studies of investors and analysts' request for information indicate a substantial difference between the amount of information found in companies' annual reports and the type of information demanded by the market. The articles in this special edition of Journal of Intellectual Capital represent main current research activities into the area of intellectual capital (IC) in Europe and also Australia. The articles represent the wide scope of research that is being carried out in the expansive field of the measurement, analysis and management of IC.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight how, and why, some small and medium‐sized high‐tech Japanese firms apply and assess the “intellectual asset‐based management” (IAbM) guidelines issued by the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry in October 2005.

This is an interpretive case study linking semi‐structured interview and document data from four Japanese firms that have issued IAbM reports containing ideas about the processes of creating knowledge and routines in their organizations.

The findings indicate that the firms studied essentially follow the guidelines, although pinpointing how this affects their internal management is difficult. The IAbM report is primarily used for external communication, with the capital market and with existing and potential customers.

The practical implications found in this paper relate mainly to the four challenges found already in research by Johanson, i.e. uniqueness versus comparability, confidentiality versus accountability, market communication and management control.

The unique features of this paper are found mainly in the empirical parts, where the guidelines and the sample of small and medium‐sized Japanese firms form an interesting and seldom used empirical point of departure. The findings concerning actual use and interpretation of a guideline could also, of course, be regarded as a distinctive aspect of this paper.

The aim of this paper is to debate various critical issues in the implementation and use of the balanced scorecard (BSC) as a management control tool. Because there is no self‐evident solution to these critical issues, they are termed dilemmas.

The paper contributes to the BSC debate by collecting insights from empirical findings, as well as exploring various theoretical aspects.

After presenting four perceived dilemmas and how they affect the implementation and use of the BSC in various settings, the paper concludes that there is a need for further debate and research on these dilemmas.

The paper is primarily a contribution to the debate concerning the balanced scorecard and its range of application as a management control model.

The paper is motivated by an overall high rate of implementation failure in various practical settings.

Some of the problems described have been debated before, whereas others are new. However, there has been hardly any discussion of the dilemmas in conjunction with one another. The paper is an attempt to generate important new questions about the future implementation and use of the BSC.

This paper argues that intellectual capital and intangible assets are difficult resources for two different reasons. First, intellectual capital and intangibles assets are not (yet) disentangled by the institutions of the capital markets, and therefore they are not (yet) translatable with any degree of confidence into predictions about stock price behaviour. Second, intellectual capital and intangibles are not absent from capital market intelligence; they are just typically translated into financial form, when they are presented to actors in the capital markets, even if in forms that are themselves “invisible”. The capital market may have limited understanding of intellectual capital, but it is also always seeking to understand the complexity of business and (im)possible futures. Its appreciation of intellectual capital is therefore fragile.