Forms of use of non-financial measuresevidence from the manufacturing sector in Navarra (Spain)

  1. Aranda León, Carmen
  2. Arellano Gil, Javier
  3. Basabe, Marisol
Revue:
Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

ISSN: 0210-2412

Année de publication: 2008

Número: 139

Pages: 441-468

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1080/02102412.2008.10779650 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

D'autres publications dans: Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

Objectifs de Développement Durable

Résumé

La literatura en contabilidad de gestión reconoce que el distinto uso de indicadores financieros refleja necesidades diferentes. Sin embargo, la literatura sobre indicadores no financieros se ha centrado en el peso o relevancia de dichas medidas en el sistema de medida del performance. En este artículo argumentamos que los indicadores no financieros no constituyen una categoría uniforme y que, por tanto, su papel en los sistemas de medida del desempeño requiere ser estudiado desde una doble dimensión: cuántos indicadores y cómo se usan dichos indicadores no financieros. A través del análisis de 31 casos, concluimos que: i) la percepción de los managers sobre la importancia de las cualidades de relevancia y fiabilidad de la información no financiera dependen del contexto en el que la empresa opera, y ii) estas distintas percepciones se traducen en la existencia de dos formas de uso de los indicadores no financieros.

Références bibliographiques

  • ABERNETHY, M. A., and LILLIS, A. M. 1995. The Impact of manufacturing flexibility on Management Control System Design, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20 (4), 241-258.
  • AMIR, E., and LEV, B. 1996. Value relevance of non-financial information: the wireless communication industry. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 22 (August-December), 3-30.
  • ASHER, H. B. 1983. Casual modeling, Newbury Park. CA: Sage Publishing.
  • BAINES, A., and LANGFIELD-SMITH, K. 2003. Antecedents to management accounting change: a structural equation approach, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28 (7-8), 675-698.
  • BANKER, R. D.; POTTER, G., and SCHROEDER, R. G. 1993. Reporting manufacturing performance measures to workers: an empirical study, Journal of Management Accounting Research, 5, 33-55.
  • BANKER, R. D.; POTTER, G., and SRINTVASAN, D. 2000. An empirical investigation of an incentive plan based on non-financial measures, The Accounting Review, 75 (1). 65-94.
  • BRADLEY, P. C, and THOMAS, A. L. 2000. Bayes and empirical bayes methods for data analysis, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Second edition.
  • BRANCATO, C. K. 1995. New corporate performance measures, a research report, The Conference Board Europe, Report Number 1118-95 RR.
  • CARR, S.; MAK, Y. T., and NEEDHAM, J. E. 1997. Differences in strategy, quality management practices and performance reporting systems between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies, Management, Accounting Research, 6, 383-403.
  • CAVALUZZO, K. S., and ITTNER, C. D. 2004. Implementing performance measurement innovations: evidence from government, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29 (3-4). 243-267.
  • CHANG, R.; CHANG, Y, and PAPER, D. 2003. The effect of task uncertainty, decentralization and AIS characteristics on the performance of AIS: an empirical case in Taiwan, Information & Management, 40, 691-703.
  • CHENHALL, R. H. 1993. Reliance on manufacturing performance measures, strategies of manufacturing flexibility, advanced manufacturing practices, and organizational performance: an empirical invesligation, Paper presented at the Strategic Management Accounting Seminar, Macquarie University, Sydney.
  • CHENHALL, R. H. 1997. Reliance on manufacturing performance measures, total quality management and organizational performance, Management Accounting Research, 8 (2-3), 187-206.
  • CHENHALL, R. H. 2003. Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 127-168.
  • CHENHALL, R. H., and MORRIS, D. 1986. The impact of structure, environment, and interdependence on the perceived usefulness of management accounting systems, The Accounting Review, 61 (1), 16-35.
  • CHENHALL, R. H., and LANGFIELD-SMITH, K. 1998. The relationship between strategic priorities, management techniques and management accounting: an empirical investigation using a system approach, Accounting, Organization and Society, 23 (3), 243-264.
  • DAVILA, A., and FOSTER, G. 2007. Management Control Systems in Early-Stage Startup Companies, Accounting Review, 82 (5), 907-937.
  • DENT, J. F., and EZZAMEL, M. 1987. Organizational control and management accounting, en EZZAMEL, M. Hart, Advanced Management Accounting: An Organizational Emphasis, 86-112.
  • DHAVALE, D. G. 1996. Problems with existing manufacturing performance measures. Journal of Cost Management, Winter, 50-55
  • DIXON, J. R.; NANNI, A. J., and VOLLMANN. T. E. 1990. The New Performance Challenge: Measuring Operations for World-Class Competition, Homewood, Illinois, Business One Irwin.
  • EMMANUEL, C., and OTLEY, D. 1995. Readings in Accounting for Management Control, Chapmann and Hall.
  • EUSKE, K. J.; LEBAS, M. J., and MCNAIR, C. J. 1993. Best practices in world class organization, CAM-I, R-93-CMS-01. February.
  • FASB. 1980. Statement of financial accounting concepts no. 2.: Qualitative characteristics of accounting information. Financial Accounting Standards Board, of the Financial Accounting Foundation.
  • FASC. 2002. «Recommendations on disclosure of non-financial performance measures», American Accounting Association, Accounting Horizons, 16 (4), 353-362.
  • FISHER, J. 1992. «Use of non-financial performance measures», Journal of Cost Management, Spring, 31-38.
  • GOOLD, M., and QUINN, J. J. 1990. The paradox of strategic controls, Strategic Management Journal, 11. 43-57.
  • GORDON, J. N. 1984. Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty, and organization structure: an empirical investigation, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9 (1), 33-47.
  • GOVINDARAJAN, V. 1984. Appropriateness of accounting data in performance evaluation: an empirical examination of environmental uncertainty as an intervening variable, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9 (2), 25-135.
  • - 1988. A contingency approach to strategy implementation at tin; business unit level: integrating administrative mechanisms with strategy, Academy of Management Journal, 31 (4), 828-853.
  • GREEN, W. 1993. Econometric Analysis, Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall, Inc.
  • GRÖJER, J. E. 2001. «Intangibles and accounting classifications: in search of a classification strategy», Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26 (7-8), 695-713.
  • HARTMANN, F. 2000. The appropriateness of RAPM: toward the further development of theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25 (4-5), 451-482.
  • HIRST, M. K. 1983. Reliance on accounting performance measures, task uncertainty and dysfunctional behavior, Journal of Accounting Research, 21, 596-605.
  • HOQUE, Z., and ALAM, M. 1997. Competition, new manufacturing practices, changes in MAS and managerial choice of the balanced scorecard to performance measures: an empirical investigation, Paper presented at the 1997 European Accounting Association Annual Congress in Graz, April.
  • ITTNER, C. D., and LARCKER, D. F. 1995. Total quality management and the choice of information and reward systems. Journal of Accounting Research, 33 (Supplement), 1-34.
  • - 1997. Quality strategy, strategic control systems, and organizational performance, Accounting, Organizations and Society. 22 (3-4), 293-314.
  • - 1998a. Innovations in performance measurement: trends and research implications, Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 205-239.
  • - 1998b. Are non-financial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction, Journal of Accounting Research, 36, 1-35.
  • ITTNER, C. D.; LARCKER, D. F., and MEYER, M. W. 2003a. Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: evidence from a Balanced Scorecard, The Accounting Review, 78 (3), 725-758.
  • ITTNER, C. D.; LARCKER, D. F., and RANDALL, T. 2003b. Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firms, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28 (7-8), 715-741.
  • KAPLAN, R. S. 1983. Measuring manufacturing excellence: a new challenge for managerial accounting. The Accounting Review, 58 (4), 686-705.
  • KAPLAN, R. S., and NORTON, D. P. 1992. The balanced scorecard-measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review, January/February, 71-79.
  • - 1993. Putting the balanced scorecard to work, Harvard Business Review, September/October, 134-147.
  • LANGFIELD-SMITH, K. 1997. Management control systems and strategy: a critical review, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22 (2), 207-232.
  • LI, E. Y. 1997. Perceived importance of information system success factors: a meta analysis of group differences, Information & Management, 32, 15-28.
  • LIPE, M., and SALTERIO, S. E. 2000. The balanced scorecard: judgmental effects of common and unique performance measures, The Accounting Review, 75 (3), 283-298.
  • LUFT, J., and SHIELDS, M. 2002. Learning drivers of financial performance: judgement and decision effects of financial measures, non-financial measures, and statistical models, Working Paper, Michigan State University.
  • MCKINNON, S. M., and BRUNS, W. J. 1992. The Information Mosaic. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
  • MANGALISO, M. 1995. «The strategic usefulness of management information as perceived by middle managers», Journal of Management, 21 (2), 231-250.
  • MILES. R. E., and SNOW, C. C. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process, New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.
  • MOONEY, C, and DUVAL, R. 1993. Bootstrapping: A nonparametric approach to statistical inference, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • MORISSETTE, R. 1998. Financial and non-financial information: toward an integrative theory of information choices in organizations, Paper presented at the European Accounting Association Annual Conference in Antwerp.
  • OTLEY, D., and FAKIOLAS, A. 2000. Reliance on accounting performance measures: dead end or new beginning?, Accounting, Organization and Society, 25, 497-510.
  • PARKER, R. J., and KOHLMEYER, J. M. 2005. Organizational justice and turnover in public accounting firms: a research note, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30 (4), 357-369.
  • PERERA, S.; HARRISON, G., and POOLE, M. 1997. Customer-focused manufacturing strategy and the use of operation-based non-linancial performance measures: a rosearen note, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22 (6), 557-572.
  • PORTER, M. 1985. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance, New York: Free Press.
  • SINGLETON-GREEN, B. 1993. If it matters, measure it!, Accountancy, May, 111 (1197), 52-53.
  • STRAUSS, A., and CORBIN, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • VAGNEUR. K., and PEIPERL. M. 2000. Reconsidering performance evaluative style, Accounting, Organization and Society. 25, 511-525.
  • VENKATRAMAN, N. 1989. The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14 (3), 423-444.
  • WIDENER, S. K. 2004. An empirical investigation of the relation between the use of strategic human capital and the design of management control systems, Accounting Organizations and Society, 29 (3-4), 377-399.
La source de données: Dialnet