بازنگری تناسب بین طراحی سیستم های اطلاعات حسابداری و عملکرد با تحلیلی از نوع استراتژیک

In considering the Miles and Snow analyzer strategic-type, this paper re-examines the relationship between strategic choice, accounting information systems design (AIS), and business-unit performance. This paper also examines the construct validity of the variables considered in the study. In response to previous studies that called for triangulation of variables with other sources, the validity of the results have been improved by using a multi-method, multiple-respondent approach for business strategy classification and business-unit performance assessment. Results of a research survey and secondary data analysis of 88 Canadian business units suggest that for prospector strategic-types, and to a lesser extent for defender strategic-types, broad-scope AIS is associated with higher performance. Managers of prospector and defender units need external, non-financial, and future-oriented information for decision-making, which represents an evolution in defenders' information needs. Results also support the assumption that information needs of analyzer strategic-type units differ from those of defender units.

This paper aims to revisit our understanding of the relationship between business strategy, accounting information systems design (AIS), and business unit performance. Accounting theoreticians have claimed that, from a contingency perspective, the AIS must fit the unit's strategic-type to achieve performance (Simons, 1987 and Chenhall and Langfield-Smith, 1998). Only a few studies, however, have investigated this essential relationship, limiting what is known about the association between AIS design and strategy (Langfield-Smith, 1997). The lack of studies in this area is surprising as studies including business strategy are considered to be among the most important new literature in contingency research (Chenhall, 2003). Inappropriate design and implementation of information systems has been very costly to firms in terms of time and money, suggesting the need for a careful examination of the fit between strategy and AIS design. 1 For instance, previous research indicates that broad scope AIS has a positive effect on performance for firms operating under dynamic/hostile business environment and adopting an innovative strategic profile, while this same AIS setting (broad scope) may have a negative effect on performance for firms operating under stable/friendly business environment and adopting a defensive strategic profile ( Gul, 1991 and Abernethy and Guthrie, 1994). Previous studies investigating the business strategy/AIS link with Miles and Snow, 1978 and Miles and Snow, 1994 strategy typology forced respondents to categorize their units as either defender or prospector (for instance see Simons, 1987). Such a forced and dichotomous classification between defender and prospector does not accommodate units that have pursued an analyzer strategic-type.2 Recent studies have consistently reported that when respondents have a choice between defender, prospector, or analyzer strategic-types to describe their units, they often choose the analyzer (see Collins et al., 1997 and Sabherwal and Chan, 2001). Miles and Snow expected that information needs for managers of analyzer units would vary from those of prospector and defender strategic-types, although they did not describe how these information needs would differ. In the present study, the analyzer is included as a strategic-type. Examining the relationship between business strategy and AIS scope with the analyzer strategic-type allows respondents to choose the business strategy profile that may more closely correspond to their unit, and yields results that shed some light on the analyzer's information needs for decision-making; in other words, how analyzers' information needs differ from those of defenders and prospectors? To the researcher's knowledge, no other study has examined the strategy/AIS relationship with analyzer-type businesses. It is important for research to have a better understanding of analyzer's information needs for decision-making since an appropriate fit between strategic-type and AIS design is a prerequisite to achieve higher business performance ( Abernethy and Guthrie, 1994). The present research initiative aims also to encourage future studies to incorporate the analyzer strategic-type. Recent research indicates that defenders' information needs may have evolved, which leads us to examine whether they have changed and, if so, in what direction. This type of investigation is important for the AIS and contingency research literature as business units change their strategy to deal with new business environments, thus we need to reexamine the AIS design to include information that is pertinent for decision-making. This paper extends the Ismail and King (2005) study in the following ways: 1) Ismail and King restricted their study to manufacturing firms only, while the present study includes both manufacturing and service industries; 2) they adopted the moderation perspective to measure fit between variables, while the present study uses the matching perspective and 3) Ismail and King obtained subjective measures from a survey with one respondent per unit while in the present study both subjective and objective measures are obtained from survey research and secondary data via two respondents per unit. A limitation of prior research stems from the ways that business strategies are categorized and business performance is measured. Sole reliance on subjective assessments has been criticized and a recommendation has been made for triangulation of strategy and performance variables with objective measures and multiple respondents ( Govindarajan and Gupta, 1985 and Young, 1996). One way to address this issue is to refer to the concept of convergent validity (the extent to which assessment of different measurement methods produces correlated measures Brownell, 1995) by using a multi-method and multiple respondent approach for strategy classification and performance assessment. It is important to obtain triangulation of the measures investigated since this approach reduces the threat of response bias and enhances the construct validity of variables. Drawing upon contingency research in accounting, hypotheses are developed in this study regarding the fit between business strategy and AIS design. The hypotheses are empirically tested by gathering data from a sample of business units. Two questionnaires were sent: the first asked for objective data and was to be answered by the highest position in finance, while the second collected subjective assessments and was to be answered by highest management position. The final sample consists of 88 pairs of usable questionnaires. The results suggest that for prospector strategic-types, and to a lesser extent for defenders, broad-scope AIS is associated with higher performance. Managers of prospector and defender units need external, non-financial, and future-oriented information for decision-making. This represents an evolution in the information needs of defenders. Results also support the assumption that information needs of analyzer differ from those of defenders. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the hypotheses and the research model; Section 3 describes the methodology; Section 4 reports the results. The last, Section 5, discusses the findings and limitations of the study, and suggests directions for future research.

This paper aimed to reexamine the relationship Strategy/AIS scope/Performance with the analyzer strategic-type and enhance the validity of variables in research. It is a core assumption in accounting research that an AIS that provides relevant information to managers, in line with strategy pursued, is associated with higher performance (Merchant and Simons, 1986 and Dehning and Richardson, 2002). The present study supports this relationship since results indicate that for prospector strategic-types broad-scope AIS is associated with higher performance. In other words, managers of prospectors need external, non-financial, and future-oriented information. For defender strategic-types, the results supported their recent evolution toward the usage of a broader set of information for decision-making. This current development explains why the defender/broad-scope relationship is actually weaker than the prospector/broad-scope. For analyzers, results supported the idea that their information needs are different from those of defenders and more complex. Furthermore, we increased the validity of our results by using a multi-method approach. As previous studies have called for triangulation of variables with other sources, we utilized different assessments to support our primary measures of business strategy and performance. Also, we used multiple respondents in the data collection, an approach that reduces the threat of response bias compared to the use of a single respondent. From the three variables examined in the present study, only AIS scope was not triangulated. In the future, the information scope classification could be strengthened by asking respondents to report on the types of information systems that are used in their units. (For example, the presence of sophisticated devices such as executive information systems corresponds to broad-scope AIS.) Moreover, other constructs such as organizational life-cycle stages should be included in research models to explore further contingency relationships. The present study has two main limitations. First, the sample used to test our hypotheses is small; a larger sample would increase the statistical validity and add to the generalizability of results. Second, performance is a multi-dimensional construct and we covered only the financial perspective. Despite these limitations, this study makes a contribution in revisiting the relationship between AIS design and strategic choices with the analyzer strategic-type, and a methodological contribution in using a multi-method, multiple respondent approach. For many years, accountants have been involved in the analysis and design of information systems for decision-making. With the advent of integrated AIS, the function of information producer for accountants is more challenging; they must closely examine the match between the business strategy pursued and the information scope provided by the AIS. If mismatches are identified, accountants should actively participate in the design of AISs.