Bridging management control systems and innovation

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to present the evolution of thinking on the role of management control systems (MCSs) in innovation, according to the development of control practices, and to provide a reflection on the achievements of the more recent literature. Design/methodology/approach This paper assesses articles, books and book chapters that have explored MCSs in innovation, together with seminal works on management accounting and control. Findings Moving from the traditional phase where MCSs were seen as detrimental to innovation, the literature has now reached a new consensus that attributes a positive role to control. In this recent phase, it arises from the literature that MCSs in the realm of innovation should embrace a multiplicity of controls; MCSs depend on the magnitude and innovation mode of a company; MCSs evolve over time; and that synergies and tensions are expected to arise. Adding these factors to the inherent complexity of innovation, the assertion is that qualitative approaches should be undertaken to infuse the field with more fine-grained evidence. It is also proposed that this methodological approach be used to address the following points: (1) the use of multiple controls; (2) synergies and tensions; and (3) behavioural aspects of controls in relation with innovation. Originality/value The paper is of value for researchers who have an interest in studying the use of MCSs in innovation and in qualitative research and proposes some areas of research that could be explored.

The performance effects of management control instruments in different stages of new product development

“…It complements earlier research that considered a limited selection of instruments (Davila et al, 2009;Markham and Lee, 2013), provided case-based evidence (Akroyd and Maguire, 2011;Akroyd et al, 2016;Feeney and Pierce, 2018;Bürkland et al, 2019) or focussed on small firms (de Waal and Knott, 2016, 2019a, 2019b. We also answer Barros and da Costa Ferreira's (2019) call for more research on the application of controls in different stages of the NPD process. We provide evidence that the effectiveness of qualitative and quantitative instruments varies throughout the different stages.…”

“…Following a call by Henri and Wouters (2019), we study a comprehensive set of MC instruments, both quantitative and qualitative and their effects on NPD performance, innovation performance and firm performance. We also answer Barros and da Costa Ferreira's (2019) call for more research on MC in innovation considering the application of controls in different stages of NPD projects. We empirically determine the impact of 58 MC instruments in different stages of the NPD process.…”

“…MC instruments are commonly distinguished into financial and non-financial (Hertenstein and Platt, 2000;Ylinen and Gullkvist, 2014;Tervala et al, 2017;Henri and Wouters, 2019) or Performance effects of management control qualitative and quantitative instruments (Brown and Gobeli, 1992;Chiesa and Frattini, 2007;Werner and Souder, 1997). For instance, activity-based costing (Barros and da Costa Ferreira, 2019), benchmarking (Cooper et al, 2004c), budgeting (Davila, 2000), target costing (Davila and Wouters, 2004) and life cycle costing (Chenhall and Moers, 2015) represent quantitative instruments (Barros and da Costa Ferreira, 2019), whereas stage-gate processes (Cooper, 1990(Cooper, , 2008 can be classified as non-financial, qualitative instruments. In this paper, we follow the distinction between qualitative and quantitative instruments as it is more comprehensive, i.e.…”

Exploring the Role of Management Control Anchor Practices in new Product Development

“…> their NPD activities. Contrasting early studies in that field (Abernethy & Brownell, 1997;Abernethy & Lillis, 1995;Birnberg, 1988;Brownell, 1985;Hayes, 1977;Rockness & Shields, 1984), more recent research demonstrates that management control practices do not merely constrain but also in various ways enable NPD (Adler & Chen, 2011;Barros & Ferreira, 2019;Chenhall & Moers, 2015;Davila et al, 2009;Moll, 2015). Consequently, one important aspect is that management control practices mediate between an organization's NPD activities and wider organizational concerns (Jørgensen & Messner, 2009Mouritsen et al, 2009;Revellino & Mouritsen, 2009).…”

“…The role of management controls in NPD settings is a relatively young research domain (see Lukka & Vinnari, 2014) that emerged in the 1980s (Brownell, 1985;Rockness & Shields, 1984 and started to flourish in the late 1990s (see Davila et al, 2009). While early studies argued that financial control practices constrain NPD activities (Abernethy & Brownell, 1999;Abernethy & Lillis, 1995;Birnberg, 1988;Brownell, 1985;Hayes, 1977;Rockness & Shields, 1984), more recent reviews talk about a 'new paradigm' in terms of understanding the role of management control in NPD as rather enabling than constraining (Adler & Chen, 2011;Barros & Ferreira, 2019;Chenhall & Moers, 2015;Davila et al, 2009;Moll, 2015). This enabling role of management control practices in NPD settings has been illustrated through studies conducted in various contexts and on different hierarchical levels (Berhausen & Thrane, 2018;Curtis & Sweeney, 2017;Davila, 2000;Davila & Ditillo, 2017;Jørgensen & Messner, 2009;Miller & O'Leary, 2007;Revellino & Mouritsen, 2009).…”