IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/17700.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Within- and Between-group Agreement in Supervisor’s Evaluative Behaviours: Do evaluative ‘styles’ exist?

Author

Listed:
  • Noeverman, J.

Abstract

Several management accounting studies have investigated the behavioural impact of evaluative style, a concept that generally refers to the manner in which supervisors use accounting information to evaluate the performance of subordinates. Although most studies study this behavioural impact at the individual level of the subordinate, the term “evaluative style” suggests that evaluative behaviours and attitudes of single supervisors will show (some) consistency across subordinates. This paper investigates whether “evaluative styles” exist by examining within-group and between-group agreement in evaluative behaviours by subordinates reporting to the same supervisor. The findings from two empirical studies indicate that evaluative behaviours in both organisations show both within-group and between-group variability. These findings suggest that evaluative behaviours of supervisors are more appropriately analysed at the level of individual subordinates than at the level of groups, although a dyadic level of analysis should be considered as well. An implication of these findings is that the concept of “evaluative style” is misleading. A suggestion is made to use the term “evaluatorship” instead as an umbrella concept to refer to evaluative behaviours and attitudes of supervisors at different levels of analysis in future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Noeverman, J., 2010. "Within- and Between-group Agreement in Supervisor’s Evaluative Behaviours: Do evaluative ‘styles’ exist?," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-002-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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:17700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/17700/ERS-2010-002-FA.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Briers, Michael & Hirst, Mark, 1990. "The role of budgetary information in performance evaluation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 373-398.
    2. Otley, David & Pollanen, Raili M., 2000. "Budgetary criteria in performance evaluation: a critical appraisal using new evidence," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 483-496, May.
    3. Decoster, Dt & Fertakis, Jp, 1968. "Budget-Induced Pressure And Its Relationship To Supervisory Behavior," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 237-246.
    4. Otley, David & Fakiolas, Alexander, 2000. "Reliance on accounting performance measures: dead end or new beginning?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 497-510, May.
    5. Nahrgang, Jennifer D. & Morgeson, Frederick P. & Ilies, Remus, 2009. "The development of leader-member exchanges: Exploring how personality and performance influence leader and member relationships over time," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 256-266, March.
    6. Luft, Joan & Shields, Michael D., 2003. "Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 169-249.
    7. Pratt, Jamie & Jiambalvo, James, 1981. "Relationships between leader behaviors and audit team performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 133-142, April.
    8. Pratt, Jamie & Jiambalvo, James, 1982. "Determinants of leader behavior in an audit environment," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 369-379, October.
    9. Hopwood, Ag, 1972. "Empirical Study Of Role Of Accounting Data In Performance Evaluation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10, pages 156-182.
    10. Moers, Frank, 2005. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-80, January.
    11. Hartmann, Frank G. H. & Moers, Frank, 1999. "Testing contingency hypotheses in budgetary research: an evaluation of the use of moderated regression analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 291-315, May.
    12. Brownell, Peter, 1983. "Leadership style, budgetary participation and managerial behavior," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 307-321, October.
    13. Otley, Dt, 1978. "Budget Use And Managerial Performance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 122-149.
    14. Hartmann, Frank & Slapnicar, Sergeja, 2009. "How formal performance evaluation affects trust between superior and subordinate managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 722-737, August.
    15. Luft, Joan & Shields, Michael D., 2003. "Erratum to "Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research" [Accounting Organizations and Society 28 (2003) 169-249]," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(7-8), pages 815-815.
    16. Otley, David T. & Pierce, Bernard J., 1995. "The control problem in public accounting firms: An empirical study of the impact of leadership style," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 405-420, July.
    17. Vagneur, K. & Peiperl, M., 2000. "Reconsidering performance evaluative style," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 511-525, May.
    18. 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.
    19. Dunk, Alan S., 2003. "Moderated regression, constructs and measurement in management accounting: a reflection," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(7-8), pages 793-802.
    20. Jan Noeverman & Bas A.S. Koene & Roger Williams, 2005. "Construct measurement of evaluative style: a review and proposal," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 77-107, April.
    21. Hartmann, Frank G. H. & Moers, Frank, 2003. "Testing contingency hypotheses in budgetary research using moderated regression analysis: a second look," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(7-8), pages 803-809.
    22. Wiersma, Eelke, 2008. "An exploratory study of relative and incremental information content of two non-financial performance measures: Field study evidence on absence frequency and on-time delivery," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 249-265.
    23. Hopwood, Ag, 1972. "Empirical Study Of Role Of Accounting Data In Performance Evaluation - Reply," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10, pages 189-193.
    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. Klaus Derfuss, 2015. "Relating Context Variables to Participative Budgeting and Evaluative Use of Performance Measures: A Meta-analysis," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(2), pages 238-278, June.
    2. Noeverman, J. & Koene, B.A.S., 2010. "Contextual Influences on Evaluative Style and its Effectiveness: Three Avenues for Future Research," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-047-ORG, 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.
    3. Marginson, David & Ogden, Stuart, 2005. "Coping with ambiguity through the budget: the positive effects of budgetary targets on managers' budgeting behaviours," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 435-456, July.
    4. Adam Maiga & Anders Nilsson & Fred Jacobs, 2014. "Assessing the impact of budgetary participation on budgetary outcomes: the role of information technology for enhanced communication and activity-based costing," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 5-32, September.
    5. Jan Noeverman & Bas A.S. Koene & Roger Williams, 2005. "Construct measurement of evaluative style: a review and proposal," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 77-107, April.
    6. Larissa Kyj & Robert J. Parker, 2008. "Antecedents of Budget Participation: Leadership Style, Information Asymmetry, and Evaluative Use of Budget," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 44(4), pages 423-442, December.
    7. R. Murray Lindsay, 2018. "Construct Clarity in Management Accounting (With a Specific Application to Interactive Control Systems)," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 555-587, December.
    8. Chong, Vincent K. & Eggleton, Ian R.C. & Leong, Michele K.C., 2005. "The impact of market competition and budgetary participation on performance and job satisfaction: a research note," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 115-133.
    9. Derfuss, Klaus, 2016. "Reconsidering the participative budgeting–performance relation: A meta-analysis regarding the impact of level of analysis, sample selection, measurement, and industry influences," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 17-37.
    10. Bisbe, Josep & Batista-Foguet, Joan-Manuel & Chenhall, Robert, 2007. "Defining management accounting constructs: A methodological note on the risks of conceptual misspecification," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(7-8), pages 789-820.
    11. B. Pierce & B. Sweeney, 2004. "Cost-quality conflict in audit firms: an empirical investigation," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 415-441.
    12. Prabhu Sivabalan & Peter Booth & Teemu Malmi & David A. Brown, 2009. "An exploratory study of operational reasons to budget," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 49(4), pages 849-871, December.
    13. David Otley, 2007. "Beyond Performance Measurement," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 17(43), pages 26-32, November.
    14. Reheul, Anne-Mie & Jorissen, Ann, 2010. "Do CEOs Shape Planning, Control and Performance Evaluation Systems in SMEs?," Working Papers 2010/26, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    15. Bhimani, Alnoor & Sivabalan, Prabhu & Soonawalla, Kazbi, 2018. "A study of the linkages between rolling budget forms, uncertainty and strategy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 306-323.
    16. Hartmann, Frank & Slapnicar, Sergeja, 2009. "How formal performance evaluation affects trust between superior and subordinate managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 722-737, August.
    17. Sholihin, Mahfud & Pike, Richard & Mangena, Musa & Li, Jing, 2011. "Goal-setting participation and goal commitment: Examining the mediating roles of procedural fairness and interpersonal trust in a UK financial services organisation," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 135-146.
    18. Henk Ter Bogt, 2001. "Politicians and output-oriented performance evaluation in municipalities," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 621-643.
    19. David Marginson & Laurie McAulay & Melvin Roush & Tony Van Zijl, 2010. "Performance measures and short‐termism: An exploratory study," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 353-370.
    20. Luft, Joan & Shields, Michael D., 2003. "Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 169-249.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accountancy; decision theory;

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    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:ems:eureri:17700. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.