IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v23y1995i5p485-497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organic decision and communication processes and management accounting systems in entrepreneurial and conservative business organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Chenhall, R. H.
  • Morris, D.

Abstract

This study examines the combined effect of organic decision and communication processes (organic processes) and management accounting systems (MAS) on performance. A model based on 'effective paradoxes' is developed which suggests that the interaction of organic processes with use of MAS is more closely associated with superior performance in organizations pursuing entrepreneurial as opposed to conservative strategies. This hypothesized relationship was supported by evidence from a study of managers from 72 firms. The interaction was significant for entrepreneurial organizations but not for conservative entities. Moreover, in entrepreneurial entities performance was significantly associated with organic decision processes for organizations using MAS extensively, but not when MAS was used less extensively.

Suggested Citation

  • Chenhall, R. H. & Morris, D., 1995. "Organic decision and communication processes and management accounting systems in entrepreneurial and conservative business organizations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 485-497, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:5:p:485-497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0305-0483(95)00033-K
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gordon, Lawrence A. & Miller, Danny, 1976. "A contingency framework for the design of accounting information systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 59-69, January.
    2. Govindarajan, V. & Gupta, Anil K., 1985. "Linking control systems to business unit strategy: impact on performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-66, January.
    3. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    4. Danny Miller & Peter H. Friesen, 1982. "Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Otley, D. T. & Berry, A. J., 1980. "Control, organisation and accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 231-244, April.
    6. Simons, Robert, 1987. "Accounting control systems and business strategy: An empirical analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 357-374, June.
    7. Otley, David T., 1980. "The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 413-428, October.
    8. Kim S. Cameron, 1986. "Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Conceptions of Organizational Effectiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 539-553, May.
    9. R. T. Lenz & Jack L. Engledow, 1986. "Environmental analysis units and strategic decision‐making: A field study of selected ‘leading‐edge’ corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 69-89, January.
    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. Chapman, Christopher S., 1997. "Reflections on a contingent view of accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 189-205, February.
    2. Langfield-Smith, Kim, 1997. "Management control systems and strategy: A critical review," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 207-232, February.
    3. Bedford, David S. & Malmi, Teemu & Sandelin, Mikko, 2016. "Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 12-28.
    4. Verbeeten, F.H.M., 2005. "New’ Performance Measures: Determinants of Their Use and Their Impact on Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-054-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    5. Vincent Chong & Kar Chong, 1997. "Strategic Choices, Environmental Uncertainty and SBU Performance: A Note on the Intervening Role of Management Accounting Systems," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 268-276.
    6. Henri, Jean-Francois, 2006. "Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 529-558, August.
    7. Chenhall, Robert H., 2003. "Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 127-168.
    8. Moores, Ken & Yuen, Susana, 2001. "Management accounting systems and organizational configuration: a life-cycle perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 351-389.
    9. Hartmann, Frank G. H., 2000. "The appropriateness of RAPM: toward the further development of theory," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 451-482, May.
    10. Chenhall, Robert H. & Moers, Frank, 2015. "The role of innovation in the evolution of management accounting and its integration into management control," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-13.
    11. Adler, Ralph W., 2011. "Performance management and organizational strategy: How to design systems that meet the needs of confrontation strategy firms," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 251-263.
    12. Ittner, Christopher D. & Larcker, David F., 2001. "Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 349-410, December.
    13. O’Connor, Neale G. & Vera-Muñoz, Sandra C. & Chan, Francis, 2011. "Competitive forces and the importance of management control systems in emerging-economy firms: The moderating effect of international market orientation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 246-266.
    14. Bouwens, Jan & Abernethy, Margaret A., 2000. "The consequences of customization on management accounting system design," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 221-241, April.
    15. Maurice Gosselin, 2000. "Influence de la stratégie sur l'adoption et la mise en oeuvre d'une comptabilité par activités," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 3(4), pages 37-56, December.
    16. Cinquini, Lino & Tenucci, Andrea, 2007. "Is the adoption of Strategic Management Accounting techniques really “strategy-driven”? Evidence from a survey," MPRA Paper 11819, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Cooper, Christine, 2015. "Entrepreneurs of the self: The development of management control since 1976," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 14-24.
    18. Cadez, Simon & Guilding, Chris, 2008. "An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency model of strategic management accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 836-863.
    19. Davila, Tony, 2000. "An empirical study on the drivers of management control systems' design in new product development," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 383-409, May.
    20. Sarah A. Hinchliffe, 2019. "A Focus on ‘Control’: Reconciling Contemporary Transaction Cost Economics with Behavioural Contingency Accounting Perspectives," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 8(2), pages 189-189, May.

    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:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:5:p:485-497. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.