The performativity of Accounting Information System in interfirm relationships

Author/s Carmela Rizza, Daniela Ruggeri
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/1 Language English
Pages 19 P. 71-89 File size 74 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2016-001005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Over the last decades, contributions in Management Accounting have focused at the forms of controls that are suited in situations of strategic alliances with suppliers, investigating the role of accounting tools, such as Accounting Information System (AIS), in supplier selection. We investigate the performative role of AIS in selecting suppliers. More specifically, we interpret AIS not just as an accounting tool, which explains reality but as an actor who contributes to create reality, performing it. Drawing on Actor Network Theory (ANT) as a proper method theory, we study the dynamics among actors (human and non-human) directly involved and their interactions. In doing so, we carry out a longitudinal case-study at a manufacturing firm located in the south of Italy, where we examine the performative role of the AIS in supplier selection from 2012 up to 2014. ANT lens provides a better understanding of role played by AIS in selecting suppliers by mobilising all actors enrolled in the selection process.

Keywords: Performativity, Accounting Information System, supplier selection, interfirm relationship

  1. Andon P., Baxter J., Chua W.F. (2007), Accounting change as relational drifting: A field study of experiments with performance measurement, Management Accounting Research, 18(2), pp. 273‐308. DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2006.06.007
  2. Bengtsson F., Agerfalk P.J. (2011), Information technology as a change actant in sustainability innovation: Insights from Uppsala, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, pp. 96-112. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2010.09.007
  3. Briers M., Chua W.F. (2001), The role of actor networks and boundary objects in management accounting change. A field study of an implementation of activity based costing, Accounting Organisations and Society, 26 (3), pp. 237-269.
  4. Callon M. (1986), Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay, in Law J. (Ed.), Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge?, London, Routledge, pp. 196-233. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113.x
  5. Callon M. (1991), Techno-Economic Networks and Irreversibility, in Law J. (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London, Routledge.
  6. Castellano N. (2011), Modelli e misure di performance aziendale: analisi della letteratura e spunti di ricerca, Management Control, 1, pp. 41-63. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2011-00100
  7. Cuganesan S., Lee R. (2006), Intra-organisational influences in procurement networks controls: The impacts of information technology, Management Accounting Research, 17, pp. 141170. DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2005.12.005
  8. Dekker H.C. (2007), Partner selection and governance design in interfirm relationships, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, pp. 915-941. DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2007.02.002
  9. Emsley D. (2008), Different interpretations of a “fixed” concept: Examining Juran’s cost of quality from an actor-network perspective, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21, 3, pp. 375-397. DOI: 10.1108/09513570810863978
  10. Evans P.B., Wurster T.S. (1997), Strategy and the new economics of information, Harvard Business Review, pp. 70-82.
  11. Gao P. (2007), Counter-networks in standardization: a perspective of developing countries, Information Systems Journal, 17 (4), pp. 391-420. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00262.x
  12. Mouritsen J., Thrane S. (2006), Accounting, Network Complementarities and the Development of Inter-organisational Relations, Accounting Organisations Society 31, pp. 241-275.
  13. Granlund M. (2011), Extending AIS research to management accounting and control issues: A research note, International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 12, pp. 3-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.accinf.2010.11.001
  14. Granlund M., Mouritsen J. (2003), Introduction: problematizing the relationship between management control and information technology, European Accounting Review, 2 (1), pp. 77-83.
  15. Justesen L., Mouritsen J. (2011), Effects of actor-network theory in accounting research, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24, 2, pp.161-193. DOI: 10.1108/09513571111100672
  16. Kajüter P., Kulmala H.I. (2005), Open-book accounting in networks: Potential achievements and reasons for failures, Management Accounting Research, 16, 2, pp.179-204. DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2005.01.003
  17. Koufteros X., Vickery S., Dröge C. (2012), The effects of strategic supplier selection on buyer competitive performance in matched domains: does supplier integration mediate the relationships?, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48 (2), pp. 93-115.
  18. Langfield-Smith K., Smith D. (2003), Management control systems and trust in outsourcing relationships, Management Accounting Research, 14(3), pp. 281-307. DOI: 10.1016/S1044-5005(03)00046-5
  19. Latour B. (1987), Science in Action. How to follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
  20. Latour B. (2005), Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory, Oxford, Clarendon.
  21. Law J. (2000), Transitivities, Society and Space, 18, pp. 33-148. DOI: 10.1068/d212t
  22. Lowe A. (2000), The construction of a network at Health Waikato. The ‘towards clinical budgeting’ project, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 84-114. DOI: 10.1108/02689230010359200
  23. Lucianetti L., Battista V. (2015), La manipolazione dei valori di bilancio: pressione del management e tratti personali nell’attività del controller, Management Control, 1, pp. 101-132. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2015-001005
  24. Lukka K. (2005), Approaches to case research in management accounting: The nature of empirical intervention and theory linkage, in Jönsson S., Mouritsen J. (eds.), Accounting in Scandinavia – the Northern lights, Copenhagen, Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press, pp. 375-399.
  25. Lukka K., Vinnari E. (2014), Domain theory and method theory in management accounting research, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 27, 8, pp. 1308-1338. DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1265
  26. Mahama H. (2006), Management control systems, cooperation and performance in strategic supply relationships: A survey in the mines, Management Accounting Research, 17, pp. 315-339.
  27. Mancini D. (2010), Il sistema informativo e di controllo relazionale per il governo della rete di relazioni collaborative d’azienda, Milano, Giuffrè.
  28. Mancini D. (2011), L’azienda-rete e le decisioni di partnership: il ruolo del Sistema informative relazionale, Management Control, 1, pp. 65-97. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2011-001004
  29. Marchi L. (2012), Editoriale. Il controllo di gestione nella prospettiva relazionale e la sua evoluzione nelle aziende di servizi, Management Control, 1, pp. 5-6. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2012-001001
  30. Miraglia R.A. (2012), Editoriale. Nuove tendenze nei sistemi di controllo e di misurazione delle performance, Management Control, 2, pp. 5-14. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2012-002001
  31. Mouritsen J. (2005), Beyond accounting change: design and mobilization of management control systems, Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 1(1), pp. 97-113.
  32. Nor-Aziah A., Scapens R.W. (2007), Corporatisation and Accounting Change: The Role of Accounting and Accountants in a Malaysian Public Utility, Management Accounting Research, 18, pp. 209-247. DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2007.03.003
  33. Orlikowski W.J. (1991), Integrated information environment or matrix of control? The contradictory implications of information technology, Accounting Management Information Technology, 1(1), pp. 9-42. DOI: 10.1016/0959-8022(91)90011-3
  34. Quattrone P., Hopper T. (2001), What does organisational change mean? Speculations on a Taken-for-granted Category, Management Accounting Research, 12(4), pp. 403-435. DOI: 10.1006/mare.2001.0176
  35. Quattrone P., Hopper T. (2006), What is IT? SAP, accounting, and visibility in a multinational organization, Information and Organisation, 16(3), pp. 212-250.
  36. Shachar R., Eckstein Z. (2007), Correcting for bias in retrospective data, Journal of applied econometrics, 22, pp. 657-675. DOI: 10.1002/jae.939
  37. Scapens R.W. (2004), Doing case study research, in Christopher E., Lee B. (Ed), The real life guide to accounting research, Oxford, UK, Elsevier Ltd.
  38. Van der Meer-Kooistra J., Vosselman E.G.J. (2000), Management control of interfirm transactional relationships: the case of industrial renovation and maintenance, Accounting, Organization and Society, 25, pp. 51-77.
  39. Vosselman E.G.J. (2014), The ‘performativity thesis’ and its critics: towards a relational ontology of management accounting, Accounting and Business Research, 44/2, pp. 181-203. DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2013.856748
  40. Wu C., Barnes J. (2011), A literature review of decision-making models and approaches for partner selection in agile supply chains, Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 17, pp. 256-274.
  41. Wu W.Y., Shih H., Chanm H. (2009), The Analytic Network Process for Partner Selection Criteria in Strategic Alliances, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, pp. 446-465. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.049.

  • La Network Governance a supporto dell'Open Innovation: un'analisi della letteratura Palmira Piedepalumbo, Concetta Metallo, Daniela Mancini, in MANAGEMENT CONTROL 3/2017 pp.79
    DOI: 10.3280/MACO2017-003006

Carmela Rizza, Daniela Ruggeri, The performativity of Accounting Information System in interfirm relationships in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 1/2016, pp 71-89, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2016-001005