|
MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING WEB |
| Introduction | Main Topics | Bibliography | Books | Journals | Textbooks | Marketplace | Links | Software |
| Contents | Search maaw | Summaries | Maaw's Book | Featured Pubs | Grad Course | Maaw's Blog | Gadgets | Videos |
|
McNair,
C. J. and L. P. Carr. 1994. Responsibility redefined: Changing concepts of
accounting-based control. Advances in Management Accounting (3): 85-117 Summarized by |
This paper discusses the changes in accounting-based
controls that are occurring in organizations that have adopted new manufacturing
techniques such as Just In Time (JIT) and Total Quality Management (TQM). The paper first discusses three aspects of the initial research question
(When an organization introduces one or several of the new
management techniques, what is the impact on the traditional responsibility
control system?), then the empirical methodology is examined and finally
the field observations and implications are discussed.
The Basic Nature of Accounting-Based Controls
McNair and Carr begin by discussing the traditional view
of responsibility accounting. The
traditional approach focuses on responsibility accounting as a means of cost
control and therefore better management. It
is implied that responsibility lies with the managers and that the other
workers are passive and must be controlled. Emerging techniques, needed to keep up with the global economy, instead
focus on team based authority and companies find the traditional controls are
either not applicable or even detrimental to the new techniques.
This leads the authors to the first refinement of the initial question:
In
companies that are implementing a primary emergent technique (JIT of TQM),
accountability will be redefined from the individual to the team
level. In addition, the controllability criterion will be employed lower in the
organization through empowerment.
Another area where traditional responsibility accounting
is different from the emerging techniques is in the area of results-based
controls versus the more recent balanced scorecard approach.
It seems the control system is shifting from results oriented to action
oriented. This leads the authors to
yet another refinement of the research question: In
companies that are implementing a primary emergent technique, the focus of the
control system will shift from results to process-oriented control at the point
of action, decreasing the emphasis on the financially based control measures.
The authors next stress the role of continuous
improvement that so many believe is at the heart of emergent techniques. The traditional view believes in “meeting current standards of
performance” versus the emerging view of integrated improvement features that
are ongoing and involve all employees. Hence, the finial revision of the question: In
organizations implementing one or more of the emergent techniques, the control
process will focus on supporting learning, or continuous improvement, rather
than enforcing the status quo.
Methods
and Data
Information
on nine companies:
All
different industries.
Different
levels of revenues ($25million- $15billion).
Each
successfully implemented either JIT or TQM or both.
Study
conducted over five years with 3-15 day visits at each company.
Individuals
from throughout the companies were interviewed.
The changes in the accounting system were explored
on two levels: 1) standard costing to ABC, 2) site-specific changes to existing
accounting based control methods. In seven of the nine sites some form of accounting based control system
change was observed. One of the two unchanged companies, failed within five years
and the other's status was undeterminable when the article was written.
The first refinement of the research question was
involved in the increase in team importance.
From the evidence, it appears that team orientation was present at every
company. Several of the companies
had incorporated this team focus into the accounting-based control system. It seemed though, that these controls were very informal and in some ways
were used to help buffer the inaccurate traditional measures.
Accountabilities did seem to be moving lower in the companies through
empowerment and formal measurements.
The second refinement dealt with the newer view of
action based controls. Across every
company in the study, there was an increase in the reliance on operational
controls. Six of the plants had
very minimal reliance on financial measurements within their operational
controls. Furthermore, action
(process) controls emerged in response to the empowerment phenomenon.
The final refinement question dealt with the concept
of continuous improvement. The
companies were looked at to determine their static versus dynamic standards. Dynamic standards are any that measure based on
rolling averages of
actual results instead of a static standard that changes only after a new
efficiency study. All but two of
the companies switched to dynamic measures, although it is impossible to tell if
the emergent techniques caused this shift.
Conclusion
Accounting-based
control system changes appear to be related to the success of JIT/TQM
implementations.
The
focus of control systems has switched to cell based controls.
Control
seems to be shifting lower in the organization through empowerment.
Operational
controls have an increasing role.
Financial (results) controls are used
when they “fit”.
A “bottom-up” point of action control seems to be emerging.
Personnel controls (peer pressure) now make up about 80% of total controls.
Dynamic standards are replacing static standards.
Emphasis is shifting to decision support and continuous improvement and learning.
| ABC Main Page | ABM Main Page |
| Cost Management Main Page | JIT Main Page |
| Quality Related Main Page | Responsibility Accounting Main Page |