No abstract

No abstract

This study sheds light on how self‐developed local accounting and control systems (so‐called vernacular accounting systems; VAS) can influence knowledge integration in development processes of enabling global accounting and control systems. We focus on accounting and control systems as devices that enable local actors to build on codified knowledge to create “new” knowledge that can facilitate local problem solving. We argue that local actors would evaluate a proposed global system as enabling or coercive depending on both their ability to manipulate the knowledge codified within as well as the consequences that the codified knowledge has for their authority in the local knowledge creation process. Based on a case study of the development process of a global accounting and control system, we demonstrate that VAS can play a crucial role in both local actors’ evaluation of a proposed system (as points of reference) and their influence on knowledge integration (as knowledge transformation devices). Furthermore, local actors may continue to rely on their VAS if they realize that the proposed global system does not fit their needs. Local actors can thus use their VAS (as negotiation devices) to strengthen their position in the development process as counterparts to the global system designers because the “threat” of continuing to use the VAS may prompt system designers to integrate local knowledge into the proposed global system. We thus also suggest that, if made visible to others and actively mobilized, VAS may foster productive debates that facilitate the migration of local knowledge into global systems.

Purpose This paper aims to examine how managers use planning meetings to coordinate their actions in light of an uncertain future. Existing literature suggests that coordination under uncertainty requires a “dynamic” approach to planning, which is often realized in the form of rolling forecasts and frequent cross-functional exchange. Not so much is known, however, about the micro-level process through which coordination is achieved. This paper suggests that a sensemaking perspective and a focus on “planning talk” are particularly helpful to understand how actors come to a shared understanding of an uncertain future, based upon which they can coordinate their actions. Design/methodology/approach This paper builds upon a qualitative case study in the Austrian production site of an international manufacturing company. Drawing on a sensemaking perspective, the paper analyses monthly held “planning meetings” in which sales and production managers discuss sales forecasts for the coming months and talk about how to align demand and supply. Findings The authors show how collective sensemaking unfolds in planning meetings and highlight the role that “plausibilization” of expectations, “calculative reasoning” and “filtering” of information play in this process. This case analysis also sheds light on the challenges that such a sensemaking process may be subject to. In particular, this paper finds that competing hierarchical accountabilities may influence the collective sensemaking process and render coordination more challenging. Originality/value The paper contributes to the hitherto limited management accounting and control literature on operational planning, especially its coordination function. It also extends the management accounting and control literature that draws on the concept of sensemaking. The study shows how actors involved in planning meetings create a common understanding of the current and future situation and what sensemaking mechanisms facilitate this process. In this respect, this paper is particularly interested in the role that accounting and other types of numbers can play in this context. Furthermore, it theorizes on the conditions that allow managers to overcome concerns with hierarchical accountabilities and enact socializing forms of accountability, which is often necessary to come to agreements on actions to be taken.

No abstract