Performance measurement, modes of evaluation and the development of compromising accounts

Abstract

In this paper we develop the concept of compromising accounts as a distinctive approach to the analysis of whether and how accounting can facilitate compromise amongst organizational actors. We take the existence of conflicting logics and values as the starting point for our analysis, and directly examine the ways in which the design and operation of accounts can be implicated in compromises between different modes of evaluation and when and how such compromises can be productive or unproductive. In doing so, we draw on Stark's (2009: 27) concept of 'organizing dissonance', where the coming together of multiple evaluative principles has the potential to produce a 'productive friction' that can help the organization to recombine ideas and perspectives in creative and constructive ways. In a field study of a non-government organization, we examine how debates and struggles over the design and operation of a performance measurement system affected the potential for productive debate and compromise between different modes of evaluation. Our study shows that there is much scope for future research to examine how accounts can create sites that bring together (or indeed push apart) organizational actors with different evaluative principles, and the ways in which this 'coming together' can be potentially productive and/or destructive.2

How performance measurement influences stakeholders in not-for-profit organizations

“…This influence was most apparent in planning procedures and meetings, where stakeholders had the opportunity to openly discuss their respective performance aims and ask questions to the stakeholders of another logic. The role of PM as a means to reconcile logics is similar to what was found by Chenhall et al (2013): accounting practices can enhance compromise across stakeholder groups with divergent views if they are designed to be both about 'learning and uniqueness' (e.g., by encompassing narratives, case studies, qualitative data) and about 'consistency and competition' (e.g., standardized metrics, financial KPIs, quantitative data).…”

“…Over the past years, research in PM has progressively shifted from the design of effective tools (e.g., frameworks and systems) to the exploration of how PM practices can enable positive behaviors, such as creative discussions (Chenhall et al, 2013), high levels of workforce participation (Groen et al, 2012) and individual improvements (Micheli and Mari, 2014). For example, Koufteros et al (2014) showed that the link between PM systems and performance depends not simply on how systems are structured, but how stakeholders use them.…”

“…Following calls from both the PM literature (Bititci et al, 2011;Chenhall et al, 2013;Micheli and Mari, 2014) and institutional theorists (Besharov and Smith, 2014;Mair et al, 2015), we explore the intricacies between PM and institutional logics, to better comprehend how PM 10 practices are valued and utilized by stakeholders in NFPs, and, in turn, how resulting understandings affect stakeholders' behaviors and actions in their pursuit of organizational goals.…”

IPOs, institutional complexity, and management accounting in hybrid organisations: A field study in a state-owned enterprise in China

“…More recently, instead of studying how compromises between incompatible logics can be designed into performance measurement systems (PMS) (cf. Chenhall et al, 2013;Sundin et al, 2010), Carlsson-Wall et al (forthcoming) examine how managers used the information from a PMS to compromise between sports and business logics within a Swedish football organisation. They find that the compatibility of the two logics varied between situations, and that situation-specific compromises were made based on PMS.…”

Managing Identity Conflicts in Organizations

“…Chenhall et al, 2013), that is, that appropriate mechanisms are in place to reinforce all competing identities to organizational members. In this way, a nonprofit could potentially adopt new identities with less opportunity for them to be seen to threaten existing identities.…”