Search results

The widespread adoption of the Balanced Scorecard has led to a need to understand how performance measures affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Despite the growing trend in the implementation of the Balanced Scorecard, there is little research evidence available on the behavioral outcomes resulting from the use of nonfinancial performance measures. This study seeks to address this gap by examining several behavioral outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment and managerial performance, resulting from the use of financial and nonfinancial performance measures.

Data were collected using a mailed questionnaire survey to manufacturing organizations in Singapore. Path analysis technique was employed in this study to investigate the relationships.

The results of the study show that behavioral outcomes are indifferent regardless of the nature and type of performance measures used. However, the relationships between performance measures and behavioral outcomes are indirect through procedural fairness and trust in supervisor.

Survey questionnaire method was used in this study and there are limitations associated with survey questionnaire method. As our sample was selected from large organizations, it is unclear if our results are generalizable to small organizations. Also, as our sample was selected from the manufacturing sector, generalizing our results to the nonmanufacturing sectors should be made with caution.

This study highlights the need for organizations to pay attention to issues pertaining to procedural fairness and interpersonal trust in the design and implementation of performance measurement systems.

This study revisits the area of reliance on budget to evaluate employee performance. It contributes in several ways. First, it updates this traditional research area making it more relevant to the current debate on the use of financial vis-à-vis nonfinancial measures in multidimensional performance measurement systems. Second, it examines the relationship between reliance on budget and budgetary participation in a manner that is different from that used by prior studies. Instead of treating budgetary participation as a moderating variable, the study examines it as a mediating variable. Specifically, the study hypothesizes that reliance on budget as performance measures affects the extent of employee budgetary participation. Third, it incorporates the recent interest by management accounting researchers in organizational fairness into this research area. It hypothesizes that budgetary participation affects the extent of employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness, which, in turn, influences employee job satisfaction and performance. The structural equation modeling results based on a sample of 152 managers indicate that the use of budget targets for performance evaluation is positively associated with employee job satisfaction and performance. However, much of these effects are indirect via (1) budgetary participation and (2) procedural fairness.

This study contributes to the management accounting (MA) literature by exploring the effect of managers’ perception of justice in the budgeting process (as a subsystem of MA) on their satisfaction and motivation to achieve organizational objectives. Drawing on the Habermasian concept of deliberative democracy, which underscores the importance of gaining legitimacy to achieve desirable outcomes, our analysis focuses on seven constructs related to situational and intrinsic participation, procedural and distributive justice, and attitude on two outcome constructs: satisfaction and motivation. We surveyed managers with an accounting background who are directly involved in the budgeting process and analyzed our data using partial least squares-based path analysis–structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The results of this study indicate that both dimensions of justice – distributive and procedural – are positively associated with participation, and in turn, positively impact satisfaction and motivation. Contrary to expectations, managers’ influence on the final budget does not seem to be as important as we expected. Budgeting is an important managerial function that involves setting targets based on an organization’s strategy and allocating resources for its execution. Such a fundamental process requires managers’ participation at various levels to ensure that the process is fair and just. Our study’s findings imply that justice perceptions are an essential fabric of organizational processes that drive human behavior. Specifically, our findings reveal that perception of justice influences participation and satisfaction and motivation.

Prior studies on the interactive effects of performance evaluative style and budgetary participation on managers' budgetary performance have overlooked several important issues. First, the moderating effects of organisational commitment have largely been overlooked. Since managers, who are highly committed to their organisations, are likely to pursue their organizations' goals much more intensely than managers who are not committed to their organisations, the effects of performance evaluative style and budgetary participation on the budgetary performance of these two groups of managers are likely to differ. Second, prior studies in this research area have concentrated mainly on the manufacturing sector. The services sectors have received relatively little attention. Third, differences between privately owned service organisations and publicly funded service organisations and their effects on performance have also not been considered. To address these gaps in the literature, this study investigates the three‐way interaction between reliance on financial measures for performance evaluation, budgetary participation and organisational commitment affecting budgetary performance in the health services sector. Based on a sample of 170 managers, the results indicate that highly committed managers react very differently to reliance on financial measures for performance evaluation and budgetary participation from lowly committed managers. Differences were also found between managers from the privately funded service organisations and those from the publicly funded service organisations.

Prior research suggests that goal setting with an emphasis on accurate and tight budget targets may influence the extent of subordinates' performance. This study, however, argues that such goal setting alone is not sufficient. The implementation of other accounting controls is needed before improved performance is possible. Specifically, this study investigates: (i) if budgetary performance is increased only when an emphasis on accurate and tight budget targets is complemented with a high extent of cost control; and (ii) if these effects are found only for the production function, but not for the marketing function. The results, based on a sample of 104 senior Australian managers, support a significant two‐way interaction between an emphasis on tight budget targets and cost control affecting budgetary performance. Budgetary performance is high only when both emphasis on tight budget targets and cost control are high. These results are applicable to both the production and marketing functions.

Purpose – The adoption of performance measurement and evaluation systems comprising nonfinancial measures has rendered the investigation of behavioral consequences of such measures an increasingly important research issue. The purpose of this study is to investigate the process by which the use of nonfinancial measures affects employees’ perceptions of procedural fairness. It proposes that the effects of nonfinancial measures on procedural fairness are indirect through the mediating variables of (1) job relevant information and (2) role clarity.

Methodology – Data collected from a survey of 276 managers in different functional areas are used to test the models. The data are analyzed using structural equation modeling (Partial Least Square).

Findings – Results from structural models indicate that the use of nonfinancial measures has a positive impact on job relevant information, role clarity, and procedural fairness. In addition, the findings suggest that the use of nonfinancial measures is indirectly related to procedural fairness through job relevant information and role clarity. Specifically, the results indicate that the use of nonfinancial measures affects job relevant information. Job relevant information then influences role clarity. Role clarity, in turn, is positively related to procedural fairness.

Value of paper – This study provides systematic empirical evidence on how the use of nonfinancial measures for performance measurement and evaluation can affect employee perceptions of procedural fairness. It helps organizations to understand how this process occurs and provides them with some assurance that the adoption of nonfinancial measures may be beneficial particularly through the higher information content of such measures and the consequential enhancement of employee role clarity and perception of fairness. By studying the effects of nonfinancial measures, in isolation, this study also helps to demonstrate to organizations that some of the beneficial effects on employee outcomes found by prior management accounting studies involving a combination of financial and nonfinancial measures may be achievable from the use of nonfinancial measures alone without the need of financial measures. This may assist organizations in designing simpler performance measurement systems.

Examines the three‐way interaction between budget emphasis, participation and task difficulty affecting managerial performance within the framework suggested by Harrison (1992) with a sample of 197 functional heads from Singaporean and Australian manufacturing companies. The results support a three‐way interaction between budget emphasis, budgetary participation and task difficulty affecting managerial performance and second, cultural differences between Singapore and Australia (pertaining to power distance) which interact neither with budgetary participation nor budget emphasis. The results also suggest that high budgetary participation (regardless of budget emphasis) in high task difficulty situations and high budget emphasis (regardless of budgetary participation) in low task difficulty situations are associated with improved managerial performance in Singapore and Australia.

Research on how performance measurement systems affect employees’ perceptions of workplace fairness is important. As organizations often rely on their performance measurement systems to communicate information to their employees, it is useful to ascertain if and how the developments of performance measurement systems that are far more comprehensive than traditional financial systems affect employees’ perceptions of informational fairness through the information communicated to employees. Informational fairness refers to employees’ perceptions of workplace fairness that is based on the amount and the truthfulness of information that organizations provide to their employees. Based on a sample of managers from manufacturing organizations, the Partial Least Square results indicate that comprehensive performance measurement systems (comprehensive PMS) have a significant direct effect on job-relevant information. They also indicate that comprehensive PMS have an indirect effect on informational fairness via job-relevant information. In contrast, systems that are based on financial measures have no significant effects on job-relevant information and informational fairness. These results demonstrate how comprehensive PMS (through the communication of a greater amount of job-relevant information) can be used to engender employees’ perceptions of high workplace fairness.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain if it is procedural fairness, or role clarity, or both procedural fairness and role clarity that mediate the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance. Role clarity and procedural fairness may mediate the relationship between performance measures and managerial performance.

A survey questionnaire was used to collect the required data. The sample was drawn from 149 managers from 103 large manufacturing organisations located in the UK. The data were analysed by structural equation modelling.

The results indicate that it is role clarity that significantly mediates the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance. Surprisingly, procedural fairness has no significant mediating effect on the relationship.

To date, no prior studies have investigated systematically the effects of non-financial measures as well as the mechanism by which non-financial measures influence role clarity, procedural fairness and managerial performance. This study contributes by incorporating both procedural fairness and role clarity within an integrated model. This assists the research to ascertain precisely which variable (procedural fairness or role clarity) mediates the relationship between non-financial measures and managerial performance as well as the relative strengths of the two mediating variables.

This research examines the interactive effect of accounting controls (Emphasis on meeting tight budget targets, External scanning, Results monitoring and Cost control) and task uncertainty on budgetary slack with a sample of 104 marketing and production managers. The results indicate that two accounting controls (Emphasis on meeting tight budget targets and External scanning) reduce the extent of budgetary slack creation in high task uncertainty situations, but not in low task uncertainty situations. Budgetary slack is lowest when the intensity of accounting controls and task uncertainty are both high. Whilst Emphasis on meeting tight budget targets has a significant effect on slack for both the production and marketing managers, External scanning has a significant effect only for the marketing managers.