Author
Abstract
Purpose - The literature on managing inter‐organisational relationships typically suggests managing these relationships based on the formalised exchange of information across the organisational boundary with due respect to trust build‐up through successive interactions. The purpose of this paper is to argue that a focus on trust reduces the flexibility and accessibility of resources and hence ruins the advantages of inter‐organisational relationships. The paper focuses on power as a means for absorbing uncertainty when managing inter‐organisational relationships. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is based on findings from a case study of inter‐organisational relationships. Governmentality is used as a framework for analysing the practise of managing inter‐organisational relationships. Findings - A number of representations are employed along the boundary between the case study parties and thereby the boundary is emphasised. These representations are used to set the discourse for negotiating the terms of the cooperation. During negotiations a common understanding of cooperation is constructed and thereby fine‐grained information is assembled. In this specific case, the contract plays a central role as a representation of the project in focus. In the construction of the price for the product, open book and benchmark data are used. Information does not cross‐organisational boundaries at face value. Information is applied to the representations and brought into play during negotiations. Thereby managing and management accounting become significant components of the boundary between the parties. Originality/value - The paper shows that power, as a means for absorbing uncertainty in inter‐organisational relationships, can solve the dilemmas regarding flexibility and access to resources that trust can cause.
Suggested Citation
Morten Jakobsen, 2010.
"Management accounting as the inter‐organisational boundary,"
Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 6(1), pages 96-122, March.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jaocpp:18325911011025713
DOI: 10.1108/18325911011025713
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:eme:jaocpp:18325911011025713. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.