عواقب ناشی از سفارشی سازی در طراحی سیستم مدیریت حسابداری

The understanding of the antecedent conditions influencing the design of management accounting systems (MASs) is very limited. In recent years, significant research attention has been devoted to understanding how different strategic priorities influence these systems. However, the results of these studies have been, at best, equivocal and numerous calls have been made for further research to “unravel” the conflicts that have emerged in the literature. The purpose of this study is to examine not only the relation between strategy and MAS but also to develop a theoretical model to explain how and why this relation exists. The model draws on Galbraith [Galbraith, J. (1973). Designing complex organisations. Reading: Addison-Wesley] to develop a theoretical argument concerning the inter-relations among customization, interdependence and MAS. We are particularly interested in assessing whether the relation between customization and MAS is a direct one or whether the relation operates via interdependence. The results indicate that customization affects MAS via interdependence, rather than directly. The study of 170 production and sales managers further revealed little difference in MAS use between production and sales managers facing similar amounts of customization or interdependence.

To differentiate products and services from competitors an increasing number of firms, both large and small, are pursuing customer-responsive strategies such as customization or manufacturing flexibility (Gilmore and Pine, 1977 and Kotha, 1995). The pursuit of such strategies poses significant challenges for the management of these firms particularly in the design of appropriate structures and information systems (Abernethy and Lillis, 1995 and Brickley, Smith and Zimmerman, 1997). The purpose of this study is to examine the implications for the design of management accounting systems when firms pursue customization as a strategic priority. Customization requires the development of an organizational culture where individuals are encouraged to be innovative and responsive to customer requirements. To manage effectively in this setting requires the implementation of a sophisticated information system to ensure that managers have the information necessary to cope with continual changes in product design and processes. The pursuit of customization also changes the nature of the relation between functional subunits within the firm, as the work flows between subunits become highly interdependent. These interdependencies create additional information requirements to ensure that these work flows are coordinated. The challenge for management becomes one of satisfying the information needs of departments as well as co-ordinating the work-flows among functional subunits that have become highly interdependent. Management accounting systems (MASs) can play an important role in this situation. They can be designed to provide more sophisticated information that will not only facilitate decision making within departments but will also facilitate co-ordination between functional departments. While there is considerable normative support for this role of MAS (Drury, 1996 and Horngren, Foster and Datar, 1997) there is relatively little empirical research examining how or in what circumstances MASs can serve this purpose.1 This study draws on the theoretical frameworks developed by Galbraith (1973) and others (Earl & Hopwood, 1981) to examine the implications of strategic choice, namely, customization for the design of MASs. It examines not only the relation between customization and use of MASs for decision making, but also explores why this occurs. The theory developed in this study argues that it is the interdependencies flowing from customization that primarily influences the relation between customization and MAS design. The study contributes to the management accounting literature in several ways. Despite the importance of understanding the conditions that give rise to the design and use of MASs (Kren, 1997 and Kotler, 1989), this is the first study, of which the authors are aware, that has examined the linkages between strategic choice, interdependence and MAS. The model pays particular attention to the way in which customization and interdependence are conceptualized. This enables the development of a more coherent theoretical model for specifying the nature of the relations examined (Chapman, 1997, Otley, 1980 and Otley and Pollanen, 1998). Several methodological limitations associated with prior research have also been addressed. For example, the way in which the model is operationalized limits the potential for correlated omitted variable bias. This ensures a more distinct attribution of the results to the theoretical model at test. The method used attempts to overcome threats of common-rater bias by using two different respondents for the variables of interest. The study design also pays particular attention to construct validity issues. The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. The next two sections define the constructs and develop the theoretical model ending with testable hypotheses. This is followed by the results and discussion. The final section identifies the limitations of the study and provides some direction for further research.