Abstract

This paper contributes to the ongoing debate about the relevance of management accounting. In doing so, we widen the definition of ‘relevance’ from the largely managerialist focus dominating this debate to examine how management accounting innovations get imbued with a broader range of societal interests and how actors representing vested interests go about entrenching and resisting such innovations. We explore these issues with reference to the institutionalisation of Economic Value Added (EVA™) as a governance mechanism for Chinese and Thai state-owned enterprises. Adopting a comparative, institutional field perspective, we theorise our observations through the conceptual lens of institutional work, or the human agency involved in creating, maintaining and disrupting institutions. We extend extant research on institutional work by exploring how the evolution of such work was conditioned by differences in field cohesiveness, defined in terms of how consistent and tightly coordinated key interests clustered around EVA™ are. Our analysis also draws attention to how different types of institutional work support and detract from each other in the process of upholding such cohesiveness. We discuss the implications for future research on the societal relevance of management accounting innovations and institutional work.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.