IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/raaexx/v28y2021i1p1-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bottom-up (top-down) rolling budgeting and job autonomy: consequences for the role of role overload and managerial performance

Author

Listed:
  • Yu-Lin Chen
  • Mei-Chu Huang

Abstract

Drawing on job demands-control theory, this study examined how bottom-up (BU) versus top-down (TD) approaches for implementing a rolling budget can impact lower-level managers’ performance. The analysis of survey data of 98 solar firms in Taiwan demonstrated that BU relative to TD rolling-budget approaches in three phases of the budgeting process (namely, the issuance of guidelines, development of the budget proposals, and negotiation of final budgets) increased self-perceived role overload among lower and middle-level managers. Further, the difference between BU and TD rolling-budget approaches in their effect on perceptions of role overload will be smaller when job autonomy is higher in the two phases of the budgeting process (namely, development of the budget proposals and negotiation of final budgets). Lastly, role overload was found to play a full mediating role in the relationship between rolling-budget approaches, and self-perceived performance in all three phases of the budget process. Overall, these insights suggest that in order to fully understand the consequences of rolling budgets, we should consider both job autonomy and role overload.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu-Lin Chen & Mei-Chu Huang, 2021. "Bottom-up (top-down) rolling budgeting and job autonomy: consequences for the role of role overload and managerial performance," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:raaexx:v:28:y:2021:i:1:p:1-21
    DOI: 10.1080/16081625.2020.1844997
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/16081625.2020.1844997
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/16081625.2020.1844997?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:taf:raaexx:v:28:y:2021:i:1:p:1-21. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/raae20 .

    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.