Andrea Dossi

Methodological strategies for benchmarking accounting processes

In this article it is contended that methodological issues implicit in benchmarking studies have to be clearly appreciated by management in assessing the reliability of performance gaps and the identification of sound practices that can be successfully adopted by other firms. There is no doubt that organisational design aspects of the benchmarking process are crucial to the success of the project. However, there are at least four methodological issues, extremely critical to the success of benchmarking projects, that have not yet been adequately analysed. These four methodological issues are: how to define the performance measures; how to achieve comparability of performances; how to identify best practices; how to evaluate the transferability of best practices. Strategies are developed to address these benchmarking issues. Then, these strategies are summarised in the components of a benchmarking model linking performances and best practices.

Management accounting system (MAS) change: field evidence

This paper critically discusses one of the prescriptions of traditional control literature according to which the management accounting system (MAS) should be adaptive to changes in the organizational and strategic context. Drawing from contingency and institutional theories, the paper drafts a framework to pragmatically identify key phases and features of the management accounting change process to highlight its organizational nature. Using this framework, the paper documents four longitudinal case studies of the design and the implementation of management accounting changes. The field studies show how accounting systems are difficult to change despite the formally acknowledged need for change. Findings highlight that the need for change, the technical feasibility of change, the availability of traditional, and the contemporary methodologies are – alone – insufficient reasons to change. A number of other elements interplay in the process of change, namely, the intended MAS use, the stage of the organization life cycle, the potential impact of change on the organization, and the role of key individuals in linking the phases of the change process.

Hospital acquisitions, parenting styles and management accounting change: An institutional perspective:

Many healthcare scholars have applied institutional theories to the study of management accounting systems (MAS) change. However, little attention has been devoted to MAS change within groups. Kostova et al. highlight the limitations of traditional institutional frameworks in studying groups since they are characterised not only by the existence of external institutional environments but also by intra-organisational (meso-level) ones. Given this background, the research question is: how does the meso-level institutional environment affect MAS change in healthcare groups? We use a longitudinal multiple-case study design to understand the role of headquarters in shaping local MAS change. We would expect companies to adopt similar MAS. However, we argue that the relationship between external institutions and MAS change cannot be wholly understood without taking into consideration the role of headquarters. Our analysis shows how hospitals facing the same external institutional environment implement different MAS as a consequence of different parenting styles. From a scientific perspective, our article contributes to broaden traditional institutional theoretical frameworks.

Does the organizational life cycle affect the Management Accounting System (MAS) change pattern? A review of case studies

Drawing from previous research on accounting change and on the impacts of organizational life-cycle on MAS, the paper aims at discussing how the MAS change process differentiates at birth, at growth, at maturity, at revival and at decline stages of an organization. Using a framework developed by Zoni et al (2012) the paper documents key phases and features of the management accounting change process to highlight its organizational nature in five longitudinal case studies of design and implementation of MAS changes. The field study shows how accounting systems are difficult to change despite the formally acknowledged need for change. Findings highlight that the success of change depends on how effectively organizations managed key phases in the MAS change, which in turn depends on the stage of the organization life cycle. Conclusions posit that in order to manage MAS change successfully the organization would pay more attention to the design phase at birth and at revival stages and more attention to the implementation phase at growth, at maturity and at decline ones. Furthermore, we could conclude that the main aim of MAS change spans from selection to variation of MAS along the stages of organizational life cycle: variations are more frequent at birth and at revival stages , selections are more frequent at growth and at decline ones.