This study aims to contribute to the scant contingency theory literature on the determinants of strategic management accounting (SMA) practices and the role management accountants play. We develop and test a more complex theoretical model than in prior studies, to simultaneously examine the role of three variables: management accountant networking, information systems (IS) quality and organizational culture. These have not been examined in a single model before in the SMA literature. Using data from 149 UK manufacturing business units and the partial least square structural equation modeling, our findings document a positive relationship between management accountant networking and the implementation of SMA practices. However, this relationship is positively moderated by IS quality, which further enables management accountants to implement SMA practices. Unlike IS quality, we do not find empirical support for similar moderating effects by the outcome-oriented culture and innovation-oriented culture. Instead, the innovation-oriented culture has a significant indirect positive effect on SMA implementation through management accountant networking but not a direct one. In contrast, we find a direct positive impact of outcome-oriented culture on SMA implementation but not an indirect one through management accountant networking. These results suggest that in outcome-driven business units, the implementation of SMA practices may not be limited to the accounting function. Managers in other functions may be motivated to implement SMA practices even when management accountants are not part of the process.

1. Introduction

The literature on strategic management accounting (SMA) has significantly expanded since the work of Simmonds (1981) and a number of SMA practices have been introduced (Rigby and Bilodeau, 2015; Cadez and Guilding, 2012, 2008; Langfield-Smith, 2008; Guilding et al., 2000). Since then, interest has been growing to establish the popularity of such practices among firms and determine their impact on firm performance (Rigby and Bilodeau, 2015; Guilding et al., 2000). However, while some empirical studies have documented that SMA practices brought into use have led to better firm performance (Alamri, 2019; Pavlatos and Kostakis, 2018; Turner et al., 2017; Cravens and Guilding, 2001; Guilding et al., 2000), others have reported disappointing implementation rates (Lachmann et al., 2013; Langfield-Smith, 2008; Hyvonen, ¨ 2003; Cravens and Guilding, 2001; Guilding et al., 2000). Such results are surprising to many researchers who have expected SMA practices to spread widely in practice given their potential in helping managers address increasing levels of competition and uncertainty, and to make more informed strategic decisions (Bhimani and Langfield-Smith, 2007; Bromwich and Bhimani, 1994; Dixon and Smith, 1993; Bromwich, 1990; Simmonds, 1981).

Background to the study

Conventional management accounting practices were geared towards providing information to aid managers in internal decision making in a firm and as such the focus of the management accounting systems has also tended to be internally orientated. In the late 1980s, scholars and academics particularly (Johnson and Kaplan, 1987; Bromwich and Bhimani, 1989) noticed that the traditional management accounting was not adjusting to changes in the modern business environment hence was fall short of its basic function as an aid to managers in formulating policies and decision making. It is to fulfill the need to enhance the quality of management accounting information for managers it was necessary to focus more widely on the external environment of the firm and thus the concept of strategic management accounting developed. Strategic Management Accounting therefore came into being as a result of a quest for a substitute to the conventional management accounting in providing more relevant and reliable information for competitive advantage. SMA involves the provision of information, which is externally orientated, market-driven and customer-focused and provides managers with a range of techniques and tools to facilitate strategically-orientated decision making. Simmonds (1986) described Strategic Management Accounting as the collection of management accounting information about a business and its competitors for use in developing and monitoring the business strategy. SMA permits a firm to make more pertinent and precise information to efficiently design its competitive strategies for competitive advantage in the industry (Egbunike, Egolum & Agwaramgbo, 2015; Ojua, 2016). The SMA is a set of accounting tools that provide accurate and timely information to various aspects of an enterprise’s decision making needs, including strategic costing, target costing, competitors accounting, consumer accounting, strategic decision, planning, control and performance management, and evaluation (Alsoboa, Nawaiseh, Karaki & Khattab, 2015). Tillman and Goddard (2008) in their study described SMA as the use of management accounting systems in evaluating strategic decision-making.

This study examines the relationship between strategic choices and the use of strategic management accounting (SMA) techniques in large manufacturing companies and investigates whether external factors such as environmental uncertainty and competitive forces afect the SMA system. The survey results show that SMA usage does not depend on strategy type and only marginally depends on geographic orientation. These fndings have been integrated using qualitative data collected in seven large companies through interviews. Although signifcant progress has been made over the last two decades in describing SMA practices in Europe, the contribution of this study to the accounting (SMA) literature involves both the research content and design. Having identifed gaps in previous SMA research, we design a study focused on large manufacturing frms that considers diferent hypotheses and adopts a mixed method approach.

Introduction

This study examines the relationship between strategic choices and the use of strategic management accounting (SMA) techniques in large manufacturing companies and investigates whether external factors such as environmental uncertainty and competitive forces afect the SMA system. It provides feld-based evidence by employing a mixed-method approach that combines survey and exploratory interviews of a subset of respondents in corporate fnancial and accounting departments. To respond to the challenges of global competition, companies express strategic purposes and identify their strategy. The complexity of business strategy presents challenges for managers tasked with evaluating strategic activities, which is crucial to defning competitive scope and competitive advantage. Many scholars argue that conventional (or traditional) management accounting (MA) does not provide enough information to support strategic decisions (Lord 2007). Whereas strategic processes consider plans and the possible actions of competitors, management accounting supports strategic decisions by providing managers with internal fnancial and non-fnancial information and with fnancial and non-fnancial information on the environment and on a frm’s competitors. As suggested by Johnson et al. (2014: 445), “Structure is a key ingredient of organising for success. But structures can only work if they are supported by formal and informal organizational systems”. SMA, as a type of organizational system, provides information that aids strategic decision-making processes. The focus of a strategic perspective on management accounting (SMA) is to align accounting and strategy. In contrast with traditional MA, SMA techniques embody an outward-looking and forward-looking orientation. They tend to comprise multiple periods and are proactive in all stages of strategic decisions (see Wilson 1995). The motivation for the present research is to provide a broad assessment of the current usage of SMA techniques to support strategic choices, such as strategy type and geographic orientation, through a survey. Through qualitative interviews, the study also aims to interpret corporate accountants’ perception of strategic costing and competitor accounting as primary SMA technique categories to support strategic choices in seven large companies.

During the last few years, management accounting literature has progressively recognized the growing influence of quality management on management control systems. Nevertheless, academic studies providing guidelines for the integration of these two distinct disciplines in practice are still scarce. Due to its strategic focus, strong interaction with operational processes and direct connections with different interested parties, strategic management accounting (SMA) appears as a possible link between conventional managerial accounting practices and traditional quality programs. The present research explores the relationships between SMA and a specific quality management model: the ISO 9000 quality management system (QMS). Its main objectives are to assess the potential benefits of their joint utilization, to identify and analyze their theoretical commonalities, and to put forward an approach for their combination in practice. For this purpose, Section 2 presents a comprehensive theoretical framework on SMA, which consists of the definition of the tools it encompasses and the assessment of its current status. Similarly, Section 3 introduces some broad concepts and facts associated with the ISO 9000 QMS, covering the requirements for its implementation in organizations and its practical limitations. Subsequently, the reasons for suggesting the integration of these management innovations are introduced in Section 4, through the explanation of the potential benefits of their simultaneous application and an account of previous references to more general connections between management accounting and quality management. Finally, Section 5 provides guidelines for the effective consolidation of SMA practices and QMSs, including a detail of the theoretical links between these two models and a description of a tentative scheme for their use in conjunction.

Abstract

The French legislature has mandated in 2008 that the board chairperson reports on governance, internal controls, and risk management approach with the objective to enhance corporate disclosures to investors. This study examines the content of board chair reports to assess their relevance and compliance with mandated disclosure requirements. Based on a sample of 109 french publicly listed comapnies in 2009, Our results show that, with the exception of banks subject to a more stringent regulatory standard, the mandatory nature of the legislation did not translate in extended disclosures about internal controls and risk management practices. We further observe significant variations among the different indices of disclosure particularly with regards internal accounting and financial control. The multivaraite results validate the influence of the chosen internal control framework as well as firm characteristics on the content of the information disclosed about governance, internal control, and risk management practices.

Introduction

To restore investor confidence shaken by successive financial scandals in the early 2000s, the French Parliament voted on August 1, 2003, to enact the Law on Financial Security (LSF, 2003), similar to the United States’ Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Act requires that the board’s chair report annually on the organization of the board’s work and on internal control practices implemented at the company level. This transparency requirement fulfills one of the principles of good governance issued by the OECD (2004). However, the French legislation did not initially mandate a particular framework for reporting on internal control and risk management practices.1 Therefore, board chairpersons enjoyed a significant discretion on the matters to be reported to shareholders. Previous studies (Gumb & Noel, 2009) confirmed the diversity in board chairs’interpretations of disclosure requirements as well as their visions on what they think their shareholders want to know (Gumb & Noël, 2009). This institutional vacuum was filled by first establishing a French framework on internal control and risk management (Autorite des Marches Financiers (AMF2 ), 2007) and then by creating a code of corporate governance practices for companies listed, better known under the AFEP/MEDEF code (2008)3 . Thus, French companies now have choices between several internal control frameworks (AMF, COSO and other industry specific standards) and corporate governance reporting requirements on which they will now base their board reports to be in accordance with article 116 of the Financial Security Act as amended by the act of July 3, 2008, which requires disclosure of the following (LSF, 2003):

Over two decades ago, the ideology of strategic management accounting (SMA) was introduced into the literature as a seminal development with Simmonds and Bromwich as lead academics. During this period, SMA came to prominence among other innovative techniques designed to restore the declining relevance of management accounting practices (AlMaryani & Sadik, 2012; Cinquini & Tenucci, 2007; Drury, 2002; Juras, 2014; Moores, 1992; Roslender & Hart, 2003; Roslender, 1995; Simmonds, 1981; Tillmann, 2003). At first, the term SMA was used by Simmonds in the 1980s to identify an externally oriented approach to the practice of management accounting (Roslender & Hart, 2010). Along this thought, Bromwich (1990) described SMA as positing a sophisticated & more involving order of management accounting practices, of which Roslender and Hart (2003), Cadez and Guilding (2007) and Juras (2014) noted to be an important departure from the traditional management accounting practice to a dynamic and strategic positioning. In the literature, SMA is thought to be both an extension and a distinct orientation that provides a complete external approach towards management accounting practice from its archaic tradition towards a strategic innovation outside the norms (Drury, 2002; Juras, 2014). In itself, SMA incorporates a broader emphasis and longer-term outlook than the greater part of management accounting. An approach that lies at the interface between strategic management and accounting (Juras, 2014; Roslender & Hart, 2003, 2010). At present, the ‘external’ orientation of Simmonds’ description of SMA has been widely established in the literature. It has also attracted mixed viewpoints among academics and practitioners. In Cinquini and Tenucci (2007), the term ‘external’ refers to ‘competitors.’ Simmonds (1981) idea of relating external with competitors was based on the expectation that to understand competitors’ information organizations develop and monitor new business strategies. The term ‘external’ also speaks of suppliers and customers in a sense that demonstrates expediency of external information that helps companies explore fruitful linkages with suppliers and customers (Shank & Govindarajan, 1993; Simmonds, 1981). Similarly and more specifically, the term ‘external’ speaks of the market, of which apt attention is given to products offered to satisfy customers’ needs with a careful recognition of the product attribute costs (Bromwich, 1990; Roslender & Hart, 2003; Simmonds, 1981). SMA as a thriving concept both in literature and in empirical studies is open to a number of interpretations and diversities of persuasions depending on a researcher’s scientific background, underlying assumptions and starting points (Juras, 2014; Fu, 2007). However, Roslender and Hart (2003, 2010) described SMA as a generic approach to accounting for strategic positioning, defined by an attempt to integrating insights from management accounting and marketing management within a strategic management framework. Hitherto, despite its novel introduction scholars still hold that there is little or no consensus on what constitutes the term strategic management accounting (Drury, 2002; Juras, 2014; Roslender & Hart, 2010). Although, it is well accepted that SMA describes a generic approach to accounting for strategic positioning (Roslender & Hart, 2010), this only leaves unsolved the problem of defining what is intended with the term SMA. Thus, there is yet to be a well-defined framework for SMA (Drury, 2002; Cinquini & Tenucci, 2007; Juras, 2014; Roslender & Hart, 2010; Tomkins & Carr, 1996).

In the past few years, scholars of management accounting and control have shown increased interest in family firms (e.g., Giovannoni et al. 2011; Songini and Gnan 2015; Speckbacher andWentges 2012). Most of this research is motivated by the notion that family firms display considerable differences in the way they implement and use management accounting and control systems. Meanwhile, there have been more than 20 published papers which highlight the specifics of management accounting and control in family firms (see Table 1; for reviews of this literature, see Helsen et al. 2017; Prencipe et al. 2014; Salvato and Moores 2010; Senftlechner and Hiebl 2015; Songini et al. 2013). While the insights from this literature have helped us to gain a better understanding of how management accounting and control differs along varying degrees of family influence, the general management accounting and control literature has so far not considered family firms to a great extent. Instead it has rather focussed on a generic class of business that ignores family influence. This generic type of firm which dominates the management accounting and control literature shares many characteristics of non-family firms, amongst others: separation of ownership and control, stock market listing, and large firm size. In management accounting and control research based on contingency approaches, the most researched external variables include market competition, technology, environmental uncertainty and national culture, whereas the most researched internal variables include organizational size, structure and strategy (Chenhall 2003; Otley 2016). However, family influence so far does not feature in prominent reviews of this contingency-based management accounting and control literature such as Chenhall (2003) and Otley (2016). We believe this neglect of family firms in the management accounting and control literature is regrettable since the above-mentioned growing literature clearly indicates that family firms are not only different in their use and design of management accounting and control systems but also significant in all economies. Empirical findings from this literature underpin the specifics of family firms regarding management accounting and control. In addition, widely-used economic theories have been evoked to further explain these differences. For instance, several articles summarized in Table 1 adopt a theoretic viewpoint rooted in agency theory (e.g., Dekker et al. 2013, 2015; García Pérez de Lema and Duréndez 2007; Hiebl et al. 2012, 2013; Songini and Gnan 2015; Speckbacher and Wentges 2012).

Over the last decades, the dynamic evolution of management accounting has led to some controversy as to its scope. It is not always apparent which concepts, tools, and institutions constitute the domain of management accounting. Its role has expanded significantly from merely supplying cost information to creatively interpreting data related to the strategic environment. Thus, management accounting now participates in the strategic management process (Siegel and Sorensen (1999, 4-5)). The management accounting aspects that focus on strategic issues usually relate not only to management accounting, but also to strategic management and marketing. The term “strategic management accounting” represents an attempt to find a framework for the various strategic elements in the field of management accounting. Coined originally by Simmonds (1981), the term has spread throughout the academic literature, but its significance and justification remain controversial. This controversy is reflected in critical comments that regard strategic management accounting as an “esoteric notion” (Simmonds (1981, 26)) or a “figment of academic imagination” (Lord (1996, 364)). To decide whether this strategic dimension represents a genuinely distinct framework within management accounting, and to determine if it has become accepted in the academic world, in this paper we review German and English general management accounting textbooks. A distinct framework exists if we can find congruent, or at least basically similar, concepts and notions that are unique to the discipline. The results of the textbook analysis can be used to gain a better understanding of the relevance of different strategic management accounting concepts and thus guide lecturers to decide on the composition of their syllabi and recommended readings. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the general concept of strategic management accounting and reviews the current academic literature on the issue. Section 3 describes the research design. We present the findings of the content analysis of 20 textbooks in Chapter 4. In Section 5 we discuss the limitations of this study. In the concluding section we summarize our findings and provide a brief outlook on future research directions.

Companies highly invest in corporate governance and expect that it be panacea for business success, however it often fails to deliver desirable results to stakeholders. This false expectation occurs because corporate governance itself does not aim to provide tools for business success. Instead, it provides assurance and compliance for business operation. This discrepancy between corporate governance deliverables and stakeholders’ expectation from it gives rise to the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) newly defined “enterprise governance.” In 2004, IFAC broadens corporate governance and sets forth a framework of “enterprise governance” so as to provide tools for successful business results and value creation. The IFAC’s framework expands to strategic governance that includes strategic management accounting (SMA) tools which play an important role in management support for both control and strategy perspectives. Under the IFAC’s framework, SMA is designated to support corporate governance but the literature has yet to show direct evidence of relationships between corporate governance and SMA. Rather, related literature studies and provides evidence with respect to relationships between corporate governance and management accounting. Collier et al. (2007) demonstrate that corporate governance marginalizes management accountants. Ratnatunga and Alam (2007) report that management accounting is extensively applied to support the policy-management interface between corporate governance and business operation because the board of directors cannot handle all management tasks such as day-to-day guidance and oversight of all operations of an organization. The board also has to depend upon others – management and other stakeholders – to comprehensively collaborate in governance accountability. The authors also report that management accounting plays a vital role in integration of corporate governance and enterprise risk management. In addition, Seal (2006) argues that management accounting can provide non-executives board members with sufficient information to assess risk, check on strategy, and monitor the behavior of executive board members.

مقاله سال 2017

در مطالعه حاضر، ادعا می‌شود که برای افزایش رقابت و عملکرد، هتل‌ها باید سیاست‌ها و شیوه‌های داخلی را توسعه دهند و پیاده‌سازی کنند، ازجمله حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک که با استراتژی‌های کسب‌وکار سازگاری دارند و برای تغییر نیازهای رقابتی موردتوجه قرار می‌گیرند. در اینجا، یک نمونه متشکل از 80 هتل برای بررسی عامل پیشرو کلیدی مزیت حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک هتل و تأثیر آن بر مشتری هتل و عملکرد نهایی مورداستفاده قرارگرفته است. نتایج به‌دست‌آمده نشان‌دهنده تأثیر استراتژی کسب‌وکار جهت‌گیری بازار ، یکی از عوامل تعیین‌کننده مزیت حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک هتل و اثر واسطه‌ای حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک هتل و عملکرد مشتری هتل بر ارتباط میان استراتژی کسب‌وکار جهت‌گیری بازار هتل و عملکرد مالی هتل می‌باشند. برای محققان و مدیران هتل که در رابطه بامطالعه یا استفاده از حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک در آینده نگران هستند، پیشنهاداتی ارائه‌شده‌اند.

مقدمه
محققان اظهار داشته‌اند که برای افزایش رقابت و عملکرد، هتل‌ها باید سیاست‌ها و شیوه‌هایی که با استراتژی‌های کسب‌وکار آن‌ها سازگاری دارد را توسعه دهند و پیاده‌سازی کنند، و آن‌ها را برای نیازهای رقابتی در نظرگیرند (ترسی و همکاران ، 2008). هرچند در مطالعات اخیر اندازه هتل (پاولاتوس،2015) و استراتژی‌های کسب‌وکار (مک مانوس ، 2013؛ پاولاتوس،2015) به‌عنوان پیش سازهای بالقوه حسابداری مدیریت استراتژیک هتل (SMA)، تأثیر مثبت و بالقوه استراتژی کسب‌وکار جهت‌گیری بازار هتل (مک مانوس ، 2013 ؛ وانگ و همکاران،2012) و مزیت SMA (مک مانوس ،2013) بر مشتری هتل و عملکرد مالی نشان داده‌شده‌اند، کمبود شواهد تجربی منعکس‌کننده این اثرات می‌باشند (به کارلسونوال و همکاران ، 2015 مراجعه کنید). ازاین‌رو، هدف این مطالعه بررسی عوامل تعیین‌کننده مزیت SMA هتل و تأثیر آن بر مشتری هتل و عملکرد مالی می‌باشد.

مقاله سال 2017

مطالعه حسابداری و فرهنگ عامه، دستور کار تحقیق هیجان انگیز جدید برای مدیریت حسابداران ارائه می دهد. این مطالعه این توسعه را از دیدگاه استراتژیک بررسی می کند. به ویژه، این مقاله برای مدیریت استراتژیک حسابداری در عمل با مطالعه مکان معروف از پایان موزیکال جهان غرب به دانش پتانسیل ما می افزاید. این مطالعه با استفاده از یک روش مطالعه موردی، تفکر SMA معمولی از دیدگاه “استراتژی به عنوان عمل”، با استفاده از فرایند نمونه فعالیت های مشهور در حال توسعه تئاتر را به چالش می کشد. یافته ها نشان می دهد که استراتژی عمل پیچیده ای که دارای ذاتا فرایند اجتماعی است: تولید کنندگان تئاتر یک مسیر به بازار را مذاکره می کنند که توسط اعتبار سازمان واسطه می شود که به شهرت محصولات فرهنگی جدید کمک و ارتباط برقرار می کنند و در نتیجه فرایند استراتژیک را حمایت می کند.