Change, Standardization and Contingency Theory

Smith, Delmonize A.; Nichol, R. T.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1981.tb00092.x

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By stating that contingency studies leave "no obvious starting point for an explanation of an increasing body of often contradictory results" (Chapman 1997, 189), reviewers started to discover the unmarked state of this theoretical perspective in management control (Argyris 1972;Child 1972;Hendry 1979;Smith and Nichol 1981). In particular, Bisbe and Otley state that contingency research provides "inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between formal MCS and product innovation" (Bisbe and Otley 2004, 710).…”

Section: Categorization 1: Types Of Managerial Control In the Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Fried

2016

J Manag Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article reviews the terminological distinctions (e.g. action and result control, interactive and diagnostic control) used for control in twenty-five empirical studies on management control in the context of innovation. The terminological distinctions are classed in three categorizations. These are (a) the types of managerial control, (b) the design and use mode of managerial control instruments and (c) the enabling and constraining character of managerial control instruments. By analyzing the categorizations, it becomes evident that there are two, almost independent ontological streams shaping the empirical field: the determinist perspective and the voluntarist perspective of management control with different understandings of contingency. The 'ideal fit' approach to contingency of the determinist perspective adds little cumulative knowledge to the field of management control in the context of innovation. Therefore, the article suggests to strengthen the voluntarist perspective and to develop a 'quasi fit' interpretation of contingency. The agenda for prospective research in management control in the context of innovation includes to investigate deviant and repair behavior related to management control systems (MCS) in innovating activities, to understand MCS as dependent as well as independent variable and to explore the role of MCS in economizing innovative activities.All papers listed in the references which are marked with * belong to the remaining study sample (see also "Appendix 2") after the systematic literature search.

show abstract

Section: Categorization 1: Types Of Managerial Control In the Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Fried

2016

J Manag Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The field of organizational behavior is dominated by many different contingency theories whose general import is that there is no one best way to solve all organizational problems. Instead, contingency theories imply that people or organizations, in order to sustain excellence over time (Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000), need to engage in one set of behaviors when confronted with one set of conditions, but engage in a different set of behaviors under an alternative set of conditions (Smith & Nichols, 1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetric Adaptability: Dynamic Team Structures as One-Way Streets

Moon

Hollenbeck

Humphrey

et al. 2004

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tested whether teams working on a command and control simulation adapted to structural change in the manner implied by contingency theories. Teams shifting from a functional to a divisional structure showed better performance than teams making a divisional-to-functional shift. Team levels of coordination mediated this difference, and team levels of cognitive ability moderated it. We argue that the static logic behind many contingency theories should be complemented with a dynamic logic challenging the assumption of symmetrical adaptation.

show abstract

Management Accounting and Organization Theory: A Review of their Interrelationship

Otley¹

1984

Management Accounting, Organizational Theory and Capital Budgeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Change, Standardization and Contingency Theory

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Asymmetric Adaptability: Dynamic Team Structures as One-Way Streets

Management Accounting and Organization Theory: A Review of their Interrelationship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About