The persistence of delegitimated structures

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to ascertain whether the deinstitutionalization of management accounting is better described using structuration theory (techniques are reproduced until replaced) or sedimentation (layering of a new technique upon an earlier technique).Design/methodology/approachAn archival study of management accounting at the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) between 1670 and 2005.FindingsWith the delegitimation of management accounting at the HBC, both structuration and sedimentation processes occurred. However, delegitimation did not mean all of the techniques within a set were eliminated. Several management accounting techniques often continued from one set to another (e.g. indents, outfits, standards of trade) reflecting continued reproduction of existing practices. Sometimes new techniques were added to allegedly make the set more effective, but these overlays did not always replace the former.Research limitations/implicationsThe usual limitations of single firm study generalizations.Practical implicationsThe research provides practitioners with insights into how management accounting practices change. With change some aspects of management accounting will remain the same.Originality/valueThis case study is based upon a unique primary archival. The HBC has made its accounting and other corporate records available to the public for the period 1670‐1970. The archival data set is supplemented by access to some of the Company's private (and more recent) corporate records, plus interviews with retired and existing senior managers about these changes to their management accounting techniques, up to 2005. Therefore, this study is based upon an extensive, unique and robust longitudinal data set.