IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/afr111/v12y2023i2p64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cognitive Motivational Perspectives of Performance Measurement System and Organisational Commitment: Role Ambiguity as a Mediator

Author

Listed:
  • Zarinah Abdul Rasit
  • Che Ruhana Isa Mohamed Isa
  • Nadiah Abdul Hamid
  • Siti Nurhazwani Kamarudin

Abstract

The use of Comprehensive Performance Measurement System (CPMS) in facilitating and influencing decisions has been predominant for such purposes. It is also a complex link of CPMS with individual performance which has been evidenced in the literature in recent years. Nonetheless, prior studies have shown inconsistent findings on CPMS informational characteristics and their behavioral implications. Therefore, by taking the cognitive motivational theory and role theory into account, the current study contends the usefulness of CPMS information in increasing role expectation and motivation. Accordingly, this study examines the influence of CPMS on the role ambiguity of managers and organizational commitment by collecting data from 120 business unit managers of manufacturing companies that are registered under the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM). To further examine the mediating effect, the study employed Partial Least Squares and the Sobel test and found that the informational characteristics of CPMS enhance organizational commitment by reducing role ambiguity. Overall, CPMS may provide useful information or feedback to better understand the roles of managers to essentially enhance motivation and improve commitment.

Suggested Citation

  • Zarinah Abdul Rasit & Che Ruhana Isa Mohamed Isa & Nadiah Abdul Hamid & Siti Nurhazwani Kamarudin, 2023. "Cognitive Motivational Perspectives of Performance Measurement System and Organisational Commitment: Role Ambiguity as a Mediator," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 12(2), pages 1-64, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/download/23844/14840
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/view/23844
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ittner, Christopher D. & Larcker, David F. & Randall, Taylor, 2003. "Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(7-8), pages 715-741.
    2. Nguyen, Thi Thu & Mia, Lokman & Winata, Lanita & Chong, Vincent K., 2017. "Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 202-213.
    3. R. Alan Webb, 2004. "Managers' Commitment to the Goals Contained in a Strategic Performance Measurement System," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4), pages 925-958, December.
    4. Ghalayini, Alaa M. & Noble, James S. & Crowe, Thomas J., 1997. "An integrated dynamic performance measurement system for improving manufacturing competitiveness," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 207-225, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thi Cam Tu Luong & Ann Jorissen & Ine Paeleman, 2019. "Performance Measurement for Sustainability: Does Firm Ownership Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-35, August.
    2. Hall, Matthew, 2008. "The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 141-163.
    3. Banker, Rajiv D. & Chang, Hsihui & Pizzini, Mina, 2011. "The judgmental effects of strategy maps in balanced scorecard performance evaluations," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 259-279.
    4. Burney, Laurie L. & Henle, Christine A. & Widener, Sally K., 2009. "A path model examining the relations among strategic performance measurement system characteristics, organizational justice, and extra- and in-role performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 305-321, April.
    5. Ralph Kober & Deryl Northcott, 2021. "Testing cause‐and‐effect relationships within a balanced scorecard," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1815-1849, April.
    6. Abdel-Maksoud, Ahmed & Cheffi, Walid & Ghoudi, Kilani, 2016. "The mediating effect of shop-floor involvement on relations between advanced management accounting practices and operational non-financial performance indicators," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 169-184.
    7. Smith, Julia A. & England, Claire, 2019. "An ethnographic study of culture and performance in the UK lingerie industry," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 241-258.
    8. Rafał Haffer, 2018. "Supply Chain Performance Measurement System Of Logistics Service Providers. A Conceptual Framework And Research Agenda," Business Logistics in Modern Management, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Economics, Croatia, vol. 18, pages 85-108.
    9. Cäker, Mikael & Siverbo, Sven, 2018. "Effects of performance measurement system inconsistency on managers’ role clarity and well-being," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-266.
    10. Gabriela Chmelíková, 2011. "Framework of performance measurement system for Czech small breweries," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 59(7), pages 167-176.
    11. Wynder, Monte, 2010. "Chemico: Evaluating performance based on the Balanced Scorecard," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 221-236.
    12. Jan Bouwens & Laurence Van Lent, 2007. "Assessing the Performance of Business Unit Managers," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 667-697, September.
    13. Shana Clor-Proell & Steven Kaplan & Chad Proell, 2015. "The Impact of Budget Goal Difficulty and Promotion Availability on Employee Fraud," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(4), pages 773-790, November.
    14. Vladimir Shatrevich & Valentina Strautmane, 2015. "Industrialisation factors in post-industrial society," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 3(2), pages 157-172, December.
    15. Nguyen, Thi Thu & Mia, Lokman & Winata, Lanita & Chong, Vincent K., 2017. "Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 202-213.
    16. Jarmila Horváthová & Martina Mokrišová & Mária Vrábliková, 2021. "Benchmarking—A Way of Finding Risk Factors in Business Performance," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Anne M. Farrell & Joan Luft & Michael D. Shields, 2007. "Accuracy in Judging the Nonlinear Effects of Cost and Profit Drivers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 1139-1169, December.
    18. Lisa-Marie Wibbeke & Maik Lachmann, 2020. "Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 275-328, September.
    19. Hofmann, Thorsten, 2011. "Balanced Scorecard: Theoretische Konzeption und Anwendung in der Praxis," Research Papers on Marketing Strategy 4/2011, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Lehrstuhl für BWL und Marketing.
    20. Amanda Curry, 2019. "Across the great divide: a literature review of management accounting and operations management at the shop floor," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 75-119, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.