Power and Politics and Their Interrelationship with Management Accounting Change

Yazdifar, Hassan; Askarany, Davood; Askary, Saeed; Daneshfar, Alireza

doi:10.18848/1447-9524/cgp/v05i05/49585

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The influence of power on organizational management and its implications for change have been viewed from many different angles. Some authors highlight this influence in terms of its impact on organizational structure, while others highlight dominance over other key organizational process driving factors (Yazdifar et al, 2006). It is worth mentioning here that the management accounting literature contains very little on power and politics, and its interrelationship with MAC processes (Burns, 2000;Yazdifar, 2004).…”

Section: Hardy's Model Of Power and Politics Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…extra-organizational factors also influence organizational and MAC. However, other authors argue that both internal and external factors together have an active role to play in the success or failure of change, and that these factors impact on the encoding or enacting of MAPs and systems over time (Burns, 2000;Scapens and Burns, 2000;Scapens, 2006;Yazdifar et al, 2006). However, they call for developing theoretical frameworks that deal with the interplay of internal and external institutions and the impact of power in institutional change.…”

Section: Management Accounting Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…OIE stresses the importance of power and politics for 487 Management accounting change shaping organizational ongoing processes (at organizational level) (Van de Ven, 1993), while NIS considers power and politics in terms of the pressures (isomorphism drivers) exerted on organizations by "rationalized myths" (institutions) within society (Collier, 2001). By doing so, both theories involve power and politics mobilization as a primary focus of the analysis (Yazdifar et al, 2006).…”

Section: Hardy's Model Of Power and Politics Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Management accounting change: critical review and a new contextual framework

Alsharari

Dixon

Youssef

2015

Journal of Accounting &Amp; Organizational Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – This paper aims to introduce and discuss a new contextual framework to explain the processes of management accounting change in various organizations. Design/methodology/approach – Having an institutional perspective, the paper develops a “conceptual contextual framework” of management accounting change. The methodology to accomplish this theory building consists of an integration of a number of different works summarizing the common elements, contrasting the differences and extending the work in some fashion. Particularly, it draws on theoretical triangulation by adopting three approaches: old institutional economics for internal processes and factors (Burns and Scapens, 2000); new institutional sociology for external processes and pressures (Dillard et al., 2004); and power and politics mobilization (Hardy, 1996). Findings – The proposed framework provides an understanding of the complex “mixture” of interrelated factors that may influence management accounting change at multi-institutional levels: political and economic level, organizational field level and organizational level. Research limitations/implications – The framework extends institutional theory-based management accounting research as well as provides a comprehensive basis for examining dynamics of accounting in the institutionalization process. Through further research, the framework will be extended and refined. Practical implications – The paper has practical implications for practitioners and officers as well as for the accounting profession and academics alike. Originality/value – The proposed contextual framework provides insights into the processes of change by focusing attention on the underlying institutions that encode accounting systems or practices in three institutional levels: political and economic level, the organizational field level and organization level. Examining the tension between institutionalized beliefs and values that may occur between these three levels of institutions will enhance our understanding of management accounting change in organizations.

show abstract

Section: Hardy's Model Of Power and Politics Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Management Accounting Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hardy's Model Of Power and Politics Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Management accounting change: critical review and a new contextual framework

Alsharari

Dixon

Youssef

2015

Journal of Accounting &Amp; Organizational Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…MA researchers have intended to explain the processes of MAC within specific organizations by tackling a number of issues, including the processes of change in MA (Innes and Mitchell 1990, Burns et al 1999, Busco et al 2001, Ahmed and Scapens 2003, Ridder et al 2005, Yazdifar and Tsamenyi 2005, Ribeiro and Scapens 2006, Nor-Aziah and Scapens 2007, Cruz et al 2009, Busco and Scapens 2011, resistance to MA change (Scapens and Roberts 1993, Ribeiro and Scapens 2004, Jansen 2011, stability and change (Granlund 2001, Kasim and Aziah 2004, Siti-Nabiha and Scapens 2005, Lukka 2007), and power and change (Wax 1971, Markus 1983, Covaleski and Dirsmith 1986, Fincham 1992, Hardy and Redivo 1994, Buchanan and Badham 1999, Burns 2000, Morgan and Sturdy 2000, Collier 2001, Ribeiro 2003, Ribeiro and Scapens 2004, Yazdifar et al 2006, Oliveira 2010. These studies illustrate socio-technical factors that impact the process of change in MA inside the organization.…”

Section: Mechanistic Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management Accounting Relevance: Practice, Variance and Current Research Agenda

Alsharari¹

2022

HSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to discuss the relevance of management accounting by considering the practice variance and current research agenda. It also aims to review the relevant literature on management accounting and its alternative perspectives. It provides a comprehensive basis for the research of management accounting change conducted in terms of theories used, influential factors, systems applied, dynamics and aspects of change. This paper helps to understand the concerns of current mainstream in management accounting literature and the importance of this subject. It introduces a comprehensive view about the relevance of institutional theory in the management accounting literature. By reviewing a subset of the accounting literature published during the period 1980 - 2015, this paper updates accounting literature with a focus on management accounting research. The study contributes to the existing accounting literature by presenting the discussions of management accounting change and alternative perspectives. It also explains the possible application of different theoretical perspectives in the management accounting.

show abstract

“…This theory suggested that a wide range of contextual factors (such as organizational strategy, organizational culture, organizational structure, characteristics of innovations, communication channels, and environmental factors, etc.) could influence the diffusion of innovations in organizations (Adam & Fred, 2008;Al-Omiri & Drury, 2007a;Askarany, 2006;Askarany & Smith, 2004Berling, 2008;Englund & Gerdin, 2008;Qian & Ben-Arieh, 2008;Yazdifar, Askarany, Askary, & Daneshfar, 2005). However, while the majority of studies initiated by the above theories and metaphors and found some associations between management accounting changes and some contextual factors (addressed by adopted theories), the findings are inconclusive, inconsistent, and mixed (Al-Omiri & Drury, 2007a;Baird, 2007;Baird, Harrison, & Reeve, 2007;Cobb, Innes, & Mitchell, 1993;Innes & Mitchell, 1995;Innes, Mitchell, & Sinclair, 2000;Langfield-Smith, 1997;Pierce, 2004;.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%