Tuomas Korhonen

Boundary subjects and boundary objects in accounting fact construction and communication

Purpose This paper aims to elaborate the concepts of boundary subjects and boundary objects in constructing and communicating relevant accounting facts for managing product development (PD). Boundary subjects as reflective actors benefit effective accounting enactment, by building a shared understanding about different actors’ roles and information needs, and by helping to respond to these needs with new boundary objects. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses a longitudinal interventionist case study of a machinery manufacturer. The focus of this case study was the production ramp-up phase at the end of a PD program. Different actors’ needs were first collected and elaborated by interventionist researchers (boundary subjects). Then accounting prototypes (boundary objects) provided new means of communication. Findings The findings show that dealing with boundaries is crucial in accounting development. The role of boundary subjects was fundamental in the process of choosing, constructing, elaborating and communicating accounting facts. During this process, accounting prototypes integrated new accounting facts, the boundary subjects mitigated the boundaries and the boundary objects focused and restricted communication about accounting facts. Research limitations/implications The paper tests the pragmatic constructivism approach by examining accounting enactment under uncertainty and ambiguity. The study refines pragmatic constructivism in terms of boundaries, boundary subjects as actors and boundary objects. Practical implications The intentional use of boundary subjects and objects as communication platform could push a more active inclusion of business controllers as active business partners. Originality/value The paper contributes to the literature on accounting development by highlighting the use of boundary subjects and boundary objects as fundamental mechanisms in constructing and communicating accounting facts.

Innovation for Multiproject Management: The Case of Component Commonality

To attain benefits and value, multiproject R&D management seeks synergy between projects. Selecting or inventing appropriate end-product components within R&D programs is a concrete example of the synergy between projects. Lowering the number of different components used across projects (i.e., increasing component commonality) can lower end-product costs, which can contribute to firm-level profitability. Prior research, however, shows component commonality as a limitation of innovativeness in multiproject R&D. Conversely, this article shows that component commonality can also serve as the source of innovation, making component commonality an area of special interest to multiproject R&D management and research.

Engaging the economic facts and valuations underlying value for money in public procurement

ABSTRACT This paper examines the possibilities and limitations in pursuing value for money (VfM) in public procurement. There is ambiguity about the VfM concept and the methods that public procurers should be using. It is difficult for decision-makers to thoroughly understand the economic facts and valuations underlying VfM. The authors explain the conceptual VfM challenges and present a path to overcoming these with a lifecycle costing (LCC) approach in an indepth case study in the Finnish waste management context. IMPACT Policy-makers and managers need to be aware that different stakeholders could have different views of what value for money (VfM) is. The authors present a new way of overcoming VfM challenges. They show that lifecycle costing (LCC) provides clear benefits for public procurers to assess the potential for VfM in the pre-tendering phase.