Agency and structure in management accounting research: Reflections and extensions of Kilfoyle and Richardson

Abstract

► Kilfoyle and Richardson are unclear as to what duality of structure means. ► A flat and local duality view dissolves the separation of agency and structure. ► A general framework outlines four principal origins of embedded agency. ► A number of avenues for future management accounting research are proposed. This paper is a reaction to and extension of Kilfoyle and Richardson's (K&R) paper “Agency and structure in budgeting : thesis, antithesis and synthesis” [Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2011;2:183–199] with the aim of contributing to the ongoing discussion about how to conceptualize agency and structure in management accounting research. More specifically, while we fully sympathize with K&R's overall conclusion that a duality perspective (as opposed to dualism) has the best potential to address the intriguing paradox of embedded agency, we also argue that some of their writings open up for multiple interpretations, of which some may be problematic if we want to dissolve the separation of agency and structure. As a reaction to this, we propose a number of specifications resulting in a duality perspective which is grounded in a ‘flat and local’ ontology. This perspective, in turn, forms the basis for the development of a general framework which identifies four principal origins of embedded agency, of which K&R mainly discuss one. In relation to K&R, our paper thus extends their line of argument by suggesting a number of interesting, yet largely unexplored avenues for future management accounting research.