Horizontal accounting
within organizations
Robert Chenhall
Monash University
5th Conference on New Directions in Management Accounting:
Innovations in Practice & Research
Approach
• Meaning of horizontal accounting (HA):
– What does HA look like: practices
– How does HA work: processes
• Theoretical perspectives that provide research
opportunities:
–
–
–
–
–
A value chain perspective (ABC)
A strategic perspective (SCM)
An organizational structural perspective
An operations management perspective
A human resource management perspective
(Not consider relevant areas related to economics,
marketing, IT, psychology and sociology)
• Conclusions
What is horizontal accounting within
organizations?
• Accounting that assists in managing the efficiency and
effectiveness of the value chain that exists within the
organization.
Management Accounting (horizontal & vertical)
Horizontal accounting (entire value chain)
Horizontal accounting within the organization
Top
management
Suppliers
Productive
processes
Customers
• What does horizontal accounting look like?
– Practices: any management accounting
practice that assists in managing the lateral
dimension of the value chain
• Strategic control: business modelling that shows
how facets of the value chain interconnect to
provide opportunities for strategic advantage.
– integrated MCS: e.g. balanced scorecards, target costing,
financial planning, ABCM.
• Operational control: practices that direct operations
and provide timely feedback for immediate
correction and information for improvements.
–
–
–
–
horizontal budgeting
lean accounting
integrated cost management
non-financial measures (e.g. quality, reliability, throughput time,
manufacturing measures, productivity measures (input/output)
– summary costs
– factory displays & charts
• Personnel control: practices to evaluate the
performance of individuals at levels of divisions,
teams, individual employees and which may form
part of reward & compensation
– Divisions:
» financials and balanced scorecard type systems
– Teams:
» team maturity indexes, organizational climate
surveys, team output measures
– Shop floor individuals
» non-financials
» qualitative & subjective measures
» 360 degree evaluations
– Processes (use): the way in which practices
are used to assist in managing the lateral
dimension of the value chain
• Diagnostic use: used mainly for operational control
– Operational controls (action plans nested within strategy)
– Signalling and communicating strategy down to the value chain
– Providing boundary spanning information & help develop networks
across the value chain
– Provide rhetoric and language for value chain management
• Interactive use: used mainly for operational improvements & strategic control
– Identify problems & opportunities within the value chain
– Identify emerging issues that can address uncertainties and generate
innovation related to the value chain
– Acquire information for personnel control
• Use management accounting practices in conjunction with other
controls (combinations or packages of controls)
– Combine formal practices with informal control, personal, clan,
self control, professional control
» diagnostic and interactive
» formal controls and organic processes
» coercive and enabling
Theoretical perspectives that
provide research opportunities
• A value chain perspective
– The internal value chain has long been
recognized as:
• processes that involve the means to convert inputs
into outputs
– virtual organizations may manage the process without
physical involvement in the transformation processes.
• provides the basis to develop competitive
advantage
– Activity-based costing was a response to
managing the ‘value chain’
• ABC, ABCM research opportunities
– Surveys keep track of adoption and use
• limited (& declining) interest in ABCM in the
academic literature (both practice studies and
theory-based research)
• need an interesting angle if studying ABCM
– use as an example of:
» how MCS are diffused
» how do MCS assist/hinder change
» how MCS influence managers’ judgement
» how MCS relate to broader management
initiatives related to strategy, work place
improvements, innovation
– The ABC implementation literature
• Large number of studies that have looked at
technical and organizational/behavioral factors that
influence effective implementation.
– Interesting broad findings
– Need for more insightful studies of processes and how
they work through time.
– Useful research findings to transfer to studying
implementation of other MCS
» e.g. performance measurement, budgetary systems
– Need to study effects of ABC together with other changes
taking place within the organization
» how to disentangle effects of ABC from other change
initiatives?
• A Strategy Perspective
– Strategic Cost Management (SCM) developed to
move management accounting to a strategic
approach
• Consider the whole business strategically & how internal processes
relate to strategy
– ABCM or SCM?
• ABCM is part of SCM
– Other parts: e.g. value chain analysis, competitor costing,
target costing, total cost of ownership, cost of quality, life cycle
costing
– Research orientation used to study SCM
• Many practice-based studies and prescriptions
• Few theory-based empirical studies to identify what SCM is
and how it works
– Mainly consider parts of SCM (e.g. ABCM, competitor costing,
life cycles)
• Is SCM still an interesting area?
– NO: see John Shank’s chapter in Bhimani (2006).
• Why has SCM lost its impact? Did it ever have an impact?
– Early enthusiasm in the 1980-1990s
• Simmonds (1981): early links to strategy which was emerging
as a way to link management disciplines
• Kaplan & Johnson (1987) & Johnson (1992): showed the
difficulties of MA & the need for a business related approach
• Shank (1989): saw SCM as the way of the future
• Cooper & Kaplan (1988); Shank & Govindarjan (1993)
popularized ABCM as part of SCM
• Bromwich and Bhimani (1994): was management accounting
really irrelevant?
– Authors sympathetic to SCM, SCM did not take off like ABC.
• Clarifying ideas in the mid-1990
– Did the construct & theorizing of SCM ever
get developed ?
• Atttempts to consolidate and define SCM
– Considerable variation on its meaning, benefits and
outcomes (Lord, 1996; Tomkins & Carr, 1996; Roslender & Hart,
2001, Anderson, 2006)
– Little carefully constructed research to refine construct of
SCM and examine why it might have worked, and if not,
why not?
• SCM is a practice-defined construct
– The SCM construct is elusive and has evolved through
time
» It is a generic approach with a marketing, strategy focus
» SCM can be applied to managing various functions (e.g.
suppliers, customers, cost management, risk
management) (see Anderson, 2006)
– Is SCM still relevant? Research
opportunities
• The essence of SCM is done by others
– Other disciplines are defining themselves ‘strategically’
» operations management, IT, HRM, strategists
. we need to understand these approaches
• A strategic approach is more sophisticated than
that used in most SCM research
– Does the rational approach to strategy as considered under
SCM lack relevance?
» strategic problems cannot be objectively defined, they are open to
interpretation from many different angles
» strategic problems are wicked problems
(interconnected, complicated, uncertain, ambiguous, conflicting)
– Strategy involves intended rationality but may involve high
levels of subjectivity and complex behavioural responses
» take an approach that examine both the content of rational
approaches and processes of behavioural responses
– Strategy as process as well as the
prescriptive content (see Chenhall’s chapter in Chapman
[2005]).
• A process view starts to look at the dynamics of
how SCM works (rational & behavioral) &
implications for the value chain
– link MCS to the dynamics of these processes
» what are the dynamic relationships between strategic
position, resources, value chain and outcomes?
» how is, and how should, strategy be formulated &
implemented?
» who is involved in the strategy process and how do
individual differences have effects?
• Some ways of studying aspects of strategy
that have implications for the internal value
chain & horizontal accounting
– The content of strategy
• Conceptualizing strategy
– Conceptualize more specifically than archetypes (e.g.
defenders-prospectors, build-harvest, cost-differentiation)
– Specific strategic priorities (e.g. quality, service, reliability,
etc)
» shows clearer links to value chain
• Hard and soft aspects of strategy as content
– Hard = relatively concrete, comprehensible, tangible
– Soft = relatively indefinite, elusive, intangible
– Hard aspects of strategic content
– Resource based view (competencies,
capabilities, innovation capabilities) (Barney, 1991)
– Digitization: internet-enabled commerce
relationship, digitalising business relationships
(Bhimani, 2003; Sanchez et al 2006)
– Governance & enterprise risk management:
examining governance and risk within the
internal value chain (Collier et al, 2007)
– Globalization: convergence or diversity
(Drori et al, 2006)
– Soft aspects of strategic content
– Tangibles and intangibles (good progress in MCS research)
– Intellectual capital, knowledge-based
organizations (good progress in MCS research)
– Exploration (pursuit of new knowledge) &
exploitation (past knowledge).
» Consider together or do they follow each other ?
(Gupta, Smith.& Shalley, 2006)
– Innovation/creativity and their linkages
» Some MCS research on innovation
» Not much on creativity
» How does creativity link to innovation?
(getting from creativity to innovation [von Oetinger, 2004])
• The process of strategy
• Dynamics of strategic fit
– Modelling the dynamics of changes in strategic fit (Zajac,
Kraatz & Bresser, 2000)
• Organizational dynamics:
– Organizational inheritance (group think, strategic drift:
constraints on new strategies) or managerial initiative
(proactive role of managers on strategy)
– Chaos or control (predictable, unpredictability)
• Organizational learning & unlearning (Huber,
1991)
• Dynamic capabilities (Teece et al, 1997; Winter 2003)
– resource development and renewal ( c.f. resource- based
view that is a static approach)
– evolution of the knowledge base
• Change processes
– continuous or discontinuous
– revolutionary or evolutionary
– rational or unpredictable
– incremental or comprehensive
» role of MCS as move between different
modes
• Strategic decision speed
– speed of decision making (Baum, & Wally, 2003)
– presumptive adaptation (fast or gradual) (Gabriel
& Jensen, 2006)
– the dynamic resource-based view, or capability
lifecycles (Helfat & Peteraf 2003)
– Networks
• Networks & accounting (good MCS research):
e.g. Mouritsen & Hanson, 2006; Mouritsen and Thrane, 2006 & following citations:
Mouritsen et al. 2001; Tomkins, 2001; Seal and Vincent-Jones, 1997; LangfieldSmith and Smith, 2003.
• Wide diversity of network theories (Oliver & Ebers 1998;
Grandori, & Soda,1995 )
– See integrating theory: a balancing strategy between three
pairs of competing forces
» cooperation Vs competition
» rigidity Vs flexibility,
» long-term Vs short-term orientations. (Das & Teng, 2000).
• Idea of ‘strategic communities’ & their integration
– strategies to emerge from collaborative action to raise
knowledge, create innovation & markets
» virtual teams between various organizations (Kodoma Mitsuru,
2005, 2006)
• Combining external networks with internal
resource-based view (Choonwoo, Kyungmook & Pennings , 2001)
• Researching how MCS relates to broad
strategic context is still important &
presents research challenges
– If SCM is not delivering on its promise, why?
• Is it technically problematic?
– do management accountants lack knowledge on a strategic
perspective (background, training)?
• Are accountants poorly positioned in terms of
authority and power?
– do senior strategists resist the message of SCM that
operational managers are involved in strategy?
– do management accountants not have the ear of senior
management?
– Is the essence of SCM captured outside the
accounting function, why?
• Is SCM alive but done by the strategy
(development) team with or without management
accountants (Lord, 1996; Anderson & Young, 2001 ) ?
• Are different aspects of SCM done by other
specialists (are other specialists more ‘strategic’?)
– Operations Management: value chain analysis, ABC
– Organizational Behaviour: horizontal accounting
– Human Resource Management: performance management
– Strategists:
» the dynamics of strategy
» overview other specialists
– The question for the future is whether MCS
will be focused on control & short term
business results, not broader strategic
management
• focus on supplier management, governance,
accounting to support structure & remuneration
(themes of this conference)
OR
• does MA have a strategic partner role (see HR
literature)?
• An organizational structural
perspective
• Structures to manage interdependencies
– Processes can generate interdependences within the
organization that create a need to manage the
interface between discrete parts of the process
• pooled
• sequential
• reciprocal
– Occupied the attention of many early organizational
theorists (seen as essence of managing the value
chain)
• Thompson (1967), Perrow (1970) Galbraith (1973, 1994)
– Recent approach by Galbraith(2005)
• Customer centric approach and how the
organization can supply customers with solutions
– Customer-based profit centers
– Customer relationship management (Lateral networking
capabilities to link all processes to customers)
» Customer business unit
» Coordinators for key customers
» Customer business team
» informal processes
» e-coordination
– Performance evaluation:
» Share of customers business that is won
– Structural tension between hierarchy and
managing interdependent processes across
structural units
• Differentiated, divisional structures that involve
high levels of interdependencies between divisions
create control issues derived from a need for
integration:
– high differentiation and the need for integration between
divisions.
• How do MCS work to achieve integration (e.g.
budgets, non financial performance measures) yet
be consistent with decision rights that exist within
high levels of differentiation (e.g. Profit, ROI)?
• Organizational structures have evolved to move
away from tall hierarchical structures to manage
horizontally
– Business unit reconfiguration (Karim 2006)
• What organizations do rather than what they have
– linked to dynamic capabilities and resources
– The dynamics of restructuring:
• Understand changing structural relationships: structural
forms and processes of changing these structures
– patching
» remapping structure (add, combine, split) to match
resources with turbulent conditions
– organizational modularity
» links to modular product systems, altering responsibilities
& reusing resources
– divisional charter changes
» realigning divisions around the addition, deletion or
movement of resources within the firm to add value
– Development of teams
• What are the dynamics of teams?
– Social network theory has been applied to small group
research studying the emergence & change of informal
structures & patterns of relations (Burt, R. 1978)
– Combining teams and hierarchy (Romme, 1996 )
• Virtual teams
– Teams, but people work independently across
geographic boundaries using IT (e.g.media richness
theory) (DeRosa, Hantula, Kock & D'Arcy, 2004).
• Clusters:
– The establishment of high trust relations among
companies within a cluster
» the exploitation of joint purchasing services as well
as of shared dedicated facilities (Van de Ven, A. 1991)
• Relationship governance to manage
lateral relationships within the organization
(Meer-kooistra & Scapens, 2004; cited in Scapens, 2006):
– Governance needs to be:
• firm but flexible
• trust encouraged when structure mitigates risks of
cooperation between individuals with different
interests.
– Guiding considerations:
•
•
•
•
information sharing and knowledge exchange
cooperation and competition
flexibility and standardization
sharing and shifting leadership roles.
• Research opportunities?
– MCS for differentiation and integration
• are non financial measures inconsistent with delegation of
decision rights?
– Dynamics of teams & role of MCS
– Dynamics of business unit reconfiguration &
implications for MCS (Karim 2006)
• patching, organizational modularity, divisional charter
changes
– Horizontal management: (Ostroff, 1999)
• structure based on processes that deliver desired outcomes
• units do not have hierarchical controls over each other
– challenges for accountability and performance measurement
– How does governance & risk management provide
direction & correction for value chain management?
• An operations management
perspective
– Developments in manufacturing strategy have
identified the value chain as providing the basis to
develop strategy
– Operations management provided the basis for a
value chain approach as it stressed the primary
concern of management is to manage lateral
(horizontal) facets of the value chain, this generated
practices such as:
– lean manufacturing & lean accounting (translating management
accounting to the shop floor: Culter, 2006; Mouritsen & Hanson,
2006)
– flexible manufacturing
– TQM
– JIT
– MRP
• Research opportunities: relate horizontal
accounting to developments in operations
management
– Agile manufacturing
(Gunasekaran & Yusuf, 2002)
• It highlights the development of dynamic capabilities
–
–
–
–
the strategic use of new technologies,
the integration of strategies and operations,
customer satisfaction through new forms of interfirm cooperation
knowledge management
– Modularisation
(Baldwin & Clark, 1997)
• the building of a product from smaller subsystems that can be
designed independently, yet function together as a whole
• manages variety, flexibility & task uncertainty
– Six sigma as an organization wide approach
(Antony &
Banuelas 2001)
• cultural change
– needs project reviews & tracking
– Networks
• understanding control within and beyond the value chain
(Mouritsen & Hanson, 2006)
– Developments in TQM
• How is TQM considered? (Kaynak 2003)
–
–
–
–
–
process management, and in addition:
leadership, strategy and planning
customer focus
information and analysis
people management
• TQM and knowledge based theories
• TQM and horizontal organizations
• Strong interest in applications to not-for-profit
organizations:
– government
– NGOs
– community
Leadership
Vision & change
Style
Elements of Best Practice
External factors
Secure
funding
Collaboration
& networking
with external bodies
Historical
Context
Cultural enablers
self esteem
identity
Program
outcomes
Substance abuse
Crime
MCS
Strategic planning
–
Objectives
–
Action plans
Costing
Performance
measurement
Governance
Internal factors
Program delivery:
process quality assurance
Learning & training:
technical & social
Indigenous
community
controlled
organizations
Human Resource Management Perspective
• HRM has moved from concerns with employee
welfare to consider the influence of HR initiatives
on profitability
– However, note the role of industrial relations on the
implementation of MCS
– Areas that have been employed to understand how
employees work with MCS:
•
•
•
•
•
Empowerment
Commitment
Some good MCS studies in this area
Trust
Justice
Leadership:
– Leadership as style:
» MCS has studied style (initiating and consideration)
– Research opportunities
• Leadership as process
– Transformational leadership (work of Bass, B.M.)
(Zaccaro, & Banks, 2004)
» Develop ‘strategic flexibility: involves organizational
visioning and ability to manage change
» Predicts: trust, commitment, self and team-efficacy
(Arnold et al, 2001)
– Changing mental models, facilitating
collaboration
– Attracting & selecting employees
– In flat structures, consider shared and shifting
leadership roles (Scapens, 2006, 346)
– Soft assets (some good MCS research)
• intangible assets
(Grojer, 2001),
• knowledge-based organizations
• intellectual capital
(Ditillo, 2004),
( Andriessen, 2004).
– role of intellectual capital and the design of MCS (Widener, 2004),
– using intellectual capital for managing knowledge (Mourisen,
Larsen & Bukh, 2001)
– for mobilizing change (Johanson, Martensson & Skoog, 2001).
– Performance measurement (some direct links to MCS)
• corporate social reporting (triple bottom line and environmental
reporting (Gray, 2002; Patten, 2002; Al-Tuwaijri et al
2004)
• human resources balanced scorecard (Becher & Huselid, 2001)
• 360o performance evaluation (Brett & Atwater, 2001; Hazucha et al 1993))
– combining hard and soft measures (objective & subjective)
• how to combine multiple measures
– multi attribute utility analysis (Roth & Bobko, 1997)
– total performance effectiveness (Kane, 1996)
– Organizational culture & climate
– Meaning of culture (Ravasi, Davide; Schultz & Majken, 2006; Tagiuri
& Litwin, 1968).
» Organizational culture is a pattern of knowledge,
belief, and behaviour that includes social forms.
» Culture circumscribes and includes organizational
structure: it is the form, beliefs, norms, social
patterns, the way things are done, the symbols and
rituals
» Culture affects the way employees see the
organization.
» Limited MCS research
(Ahrens & Mollona’s, (2006): ethnography of culture; Henri (2004): specific
aspects of culture, control & flexibility)
– Climate as psychological climate
• psychological climate is a set of global perceptions held by
individuals about their organization's internal environment,
feeling about actual events based upon the interaction
between actual events and the perception of those events
(James & Jones, 1974): .
• It has been measured along dimensions such as
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
disengagement
hindrance
esprit
intimacy
aloofness
production emphasis
trust
consideration
– Culture is organizational while climate is at the individual level.
Conclusions on horizontal
accounting
• Strategy is still important
– We need to study more complex notions of strategy
related to both content and process
• Attributes of SCM are still important
as they help understand the value
chain
– If we give up others will do this (or are doing it): IT,
HR, marketing, operations management
• Note: Many management disciplines are considering
themselves more holistically (boundaries between disciplines
are breaking down)
• Studying the dynamics of horizontal
accounting
– Pick up on studies of dynamics in strategy, operations
management, organizational behaviour & human
resource management
• Governance & risk management are
key areas given corporate collapses
– implications for managing the value chain and
designing horizontal accounting are important areas
for research.
• Implications of external networks on
the internal value chain need to be
explored (other literatures provide
interesting directions)
– E.g. organizational clusters, agile manufacturing,
horizontal management
• Innovations in organizational structure
need to be explored
– E.g. dynamics of changing and using structures,
teams, patching and modular structuring, horizontal
management, organizational culture & climate
References
•
Ahrens, T. & Mollona, (2006) Organisational control as cultural practice—A shop floor ethnography of a Sheffield steel mill , Accounting.
Organizations & Society, forthcoming.
•
Al-Tuwaijri, S.A., Christensen, T.E. and Hughes II, K.E. (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and
economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29, 5,6, 447-471.
•
Anderson, S.W. (2006) Managing costs and cost structure throughout the value chain: research on strategic cost management, in Chapman, C,
Hopwood, A & Shields, M. Handbook of Management Accounting Research, vol 2, Oxford, Elsevier.
•
Anderson, S. & S. Mark Young. (2001) Implementing management innovations: lessons learned from ABC in the US Automobile Industry, Kluwer
Academic Publication,
•
Andeiessen, D. (2004). Making Sense of Intellectual Capital: Designing a Method For The Valuation of Intangibles. Boston, MA: Butterworth
Heinemann.
•
Antony J. & Banuelas, R. (2001). A strategy for survival, Manufacturing Engineer 80, 3,119–121.
•
Arnold, K.A., Barling, J. & Kelloway, E.K. (2001). Transformational leadership or the iron cage which predicts trust, commitment, and team efficacy,
Leadership and organizational development journal, 22, 7, 315-320
•
Baldwin C. Y. & Clark, K.B. (1997) Managing in an age of modularity, Harvard Business Review , September–October (1997), pp. 84–93.
•
Barney, J. (1991) "Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage," Journal of Management (17) 1, pp. 99-120.
•
Baum, R. & Wally S (2003) Strategic decision speed and firm performance, Strategic Management Journal, 24,11, 1107-1129
•
Becher.B.E., Huselid. M.A & D. Ulrich, (2001) The HR Scorecard, HBR Press 2001.
•
Bhimani, A. (2003) Management accounting in the digital economy, Oxford Univerrsity Press.
•
Bromwhich, M. & Bhimani, A. (1994), Management Accounting: Pathways to Progress, London, CIMA
•
Brett, J. F., & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360-feedback: Accuracy reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 930-942.
•
Burt, R. (1978) Cohesion versus structural equivalence as a basis for network sub-groups, Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 189-212.)
•
Chenhall. R.H. (2005) Strategy and Management Accounting: Content and Process, in Chapman, C. Strategy, Management Accounting and
Performance Measurement, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 10-36.
•
Chenhall, R.H. & Euske, K. (2006) The Role of Management Control Systems in Planned Organizational Change, Accounting, Organizations and
Society. forthcoming
•
Choonwoo L, Kyungmook L, & J. M. Pennings (2001) Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: a study on technology-based
ventures 3, Strategic Management Journal, 22, 6-7, 615-640
•
Collier, P.M., Berry A. J. & Burke. G.T (2007 Risk and Management Accounting, Oxford CIMA,
•
Culter, T.R. (2006) Lean accounting for manufacturers, Accounting Software411.com
•
Das T. K. & Teng, B. (2000). Instabilities of strategic alliances: an internal tension perspective, Organization Science, 11, 1: 77-101.
•
DeRosa, D. M., Hantula, D.A. Kock, N, & D'Arcy. J. (2004) Trust and leadership in virtual teamwork: a media naturalness perspective, Human
Resource Management. 43, 2-3, 219
•
Ditillo, A. (2004). Dealing with uncertainty in knowledge-intensive firms: the role of management control systems as knowledge integration mechanisms.
Accounting, Organizations and Society 29, 3, 4, 401-421.
•
Drori, G.S., Meyer, J.W. & Hwang. H. (2006) Globalization and organization. World society and organizational change. Oxford, Oxford University Press
2006.
•
Szulanski , G. & Jensen, R.J. (2006) Presumptive adaptation and the effectiveness of knowledge transfer, Strategic Management Journal, 27, 10, 937957
•
•
Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations, USA, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
•
Galbraith, J. R. (1994). Competing with flexible lateral organizations, Reading MA, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
•
Galbraith, J.R. (2005), Designing the customer-centric organization, A guide to strategy, structure and process, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
•
Grandori, A. & Soda, G. (1995) Inter-firm networks: antecedents, mechanisms and forms, Organisation Studies, 16, 2: 183-214.
•
Gray, R. (2002). The social accounting project and Accounting, Organizations and Society: privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and
pragmatism over critique? Accounting, Organizations and Society 27, 7, 687-708.
•
Grojer, Jan-Erik. (2001). Intangibles and accounting classifications: in search of a classification strategy. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26, 7, 8,
695-713.
•
Gunasekaran A. & Yusuf, Y. (2002) Agile manufacturing: a taxonomy of strategic and technological imperatives, International Journal of Production
Research 40, 6,1357–1385
•
Gupta, A. K.; Smith, K. G. & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation, Academy of Management Journal, 49, 693-706
•
James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. (1974). Organizational climate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1096-1112.
•
Johanson, U., Martensson, M. and Skoog, M. (2001). Mobilizing change through the control of intangibles. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26, 7,
8, 715-733.
•
Johnson, H.T. (1992). Relevance Regained, New York: Free Press
•
Hazucha, J.F. Hezlett, S.A. and Schneider, R.J. (1993). The Impact Of 3600 Feedback On Managerial Skill Development. Human Resource
Management 32, 325-351.
•
Helfat, C.E. & Peteraf, M The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles, Strategic Management Journal, 24, 10, 997-1010
•
Henri, J-F. (2004). Organizational culture and performance measurement systems. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, .
•
Huber, G.P. (1991). Organizational learning: the contributing processes ad the literatures. Organizational Sciences, 2/1, 88-115.
•
Kaplan, R. & Johnson, H.T. (1987). Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
•
Kane, J.S. (1996). The conceptualization and representation of total performance effectiveness, Human Resource Management Review, 6, 2, 123-145
•
Karim, S. (2006), Modularity in organizational structure: the reconfiguration of internally developed and acquired business units, Strategic Management
Review, 27, 799-823
•
Kaynak, H (2003) The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance, Journal of Operations
Management, 21, 405–435.
•
Lord, B.R. (1996). Strategic management accounting: the emperor’s new cloths, Management Accounting Research, 7, 3, 346-366
•
•
•
Mitsuru, Kodama (2006) Strategic community: foundation of knowledge creation.. Research Technology Management, 49, 5, 49-58,
•
Mouritsen, J & Hanson, A (2006), Management accounting, operations, and network relations: debating the lateral dimension in, in Bhimani, A.
Contemporary Issues in Management Accounting, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 266-290
•
Mouritsen, J., Larsen, H.T. and Pukh, P.N.D. (2001). Intellectual capital and the “capable firm”: narrating, visualizing and numbering for managing
knowledge. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26, 7, 8. 735-767.
•
Mouritsen, J. & Thrane, Sof (2006). Accounting networks, complementarities and the development of interorganizational relations, Accounting,
Organizations and Society 31, 241-275
•
Neely A. & Najjar, A. California Management Review, Spring, 2006, BA failure to use BSC.
•
Oliver, A. L & Ebers, M. (1998) Networking network studies: an analysis of inter-organisational relationships, Organisation Studies, 19, 4: 549-583.
•
Ostroff, F. (1999), The Horizontal Organization, New York, Oxford University Press
•
Patten, D.M. (2002). The relationship between environmental performance and environmental disclosure. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27, 8,
763-773.
•
Perrow, (1970), Organizational analysis: a sociological view, California, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
•
Romme, G.L. (1996 ). A Note on the hierarchy-team debate, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 5, 411-417
•
Roslender, R & Hart, S.J. (2003) In search of strategic management accounting: theoretical and filed study perspectives, Management Accounting
Research, 14, 3, 255-279
Mitsuru. K (2005) Knowledge Creation through Networked Strategic Communities. Long Range Planning, 381, 27-49.
•
Ravasi, Davide Schultz Majken (2006) Responding to organizational identity threats: exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of
Management Journal, 49, 3, 433-458
•
Roth, P.L. & Bobko, P. (1997), A research agenda for multi-attribute utility analysis in human resource management, Human Resource Management
Review, 7, 3, 341-368
•
Scapens, R. (2006). Changing times: management accounting research and practice from a UK perspective, in Bhimani, A. Contemporary Issues in
Management Accounting, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 329-354
•
Shank, J.K. (2006) Strategic cost management: upsizing, downsizing, and right(?) sizing, in Bhimani, A. Contemporary Issues in Management
Accounting, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 354-379
•
Shank J.K. (1989), Strategic cost management: new wine, or just new bottles. Journal of Management Accounting Research, Fall
•
Shank, J.K. (1993), Strategic Cost Management, New York, Free Press
•
Sanchez, B., Minguela, R, Rodrigues Duarte, A. & Sandulli F (2006), Is the Internet productive? A firm-level analysis, Technovation, 26, 7, 821-826
•
Simmonds, K. (1981). Strategic management accounting, Management Accounting, (UK), 59, 4, 26-29
•
Tagiuri, R., & Litwin, G. H. (1968). Organizational culture: A key to financial performance. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
•
Teece, D. J., G. Pisano, and A. Shuen (1997) "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal (18) 7, pp. 509-533.
•
Thomson, C. & Carr, C. (1996). Reflections on the papers in this issue and a commentary on the state of strategic management accounting,
Management Accounting Research, 7, 2, 271-280
•
Thompson, J.D. (1967) Organizations in action, New York, McGraw Hill
•
Van de Ven, A. (1991) The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing 8, 211-230.
•
Von Oetinger, B. (2004) From idea to innovation: making creativity real. Journal of Business Strategy, 2004, Vol. 25 Issue 5, 35-41
•
Widener, S.K. (2004). An empirical investigation of the relation between the use of strategic human capital and the design of management control
system. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29, 3 ,4, 377-399.
•
Winter, S. (2003) "Understanding dynamic capabilities", Strategic Management Journal, 24, 10, 991-995.
•
Zaccaro, S. & Banks, D. (2004) Leader visioning and adaptability: bridging the gap between research and practice on developing the ability to manage.
Human resource Management, 43, 3, 367
•
Zajac E,J, Matthew S. Kraatz, R K. & Bresser, F (2000) Modelling the dynamics of strategic fit: a normative approach to strategic change Strategic
Management Journal 21, 4 429-453