An institutional perspective of accountants' new roles – the interplay of contradictions and praxis

By John Burns, G. Baldvinsdottir. 2005

413 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Public Administration

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/59cf1a23df378c313b205ee9c4c6f2d2eb79a014

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

1. V. Maas
2. F. Hartmann
3. Trevor Hopper
4. David Naranjo-Gil
5. Marko Järvenpää
6. John Burns
7. M. Major
8. J. Weber

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. John Burns
2. Trevor Hopper
3. Marko Järvenpää
4. F. Hartmann
5. V. Maas
6. M. Major
7. J. Weber
8. Massimo Contrafatto

In Public Administration

1. V. Maas
2. F. Hartmann
3. David Naranjo-Gil
4. John Burns
5. Trevor Hopper
6. M. Tayles
7. Yi Ma
8. M. Major

Citations in the corpus

• Extending Institutional Analysis through Theoretical Triangulation: Regulation and Activity-Based Costing in Portuguese Telecommunications (2007, background): “Seo and Creed (2002) illustrate how dialectical analysis can overcome NIS theory’s neglect of power, agency, intra-organizational factors and their microlevel theoretical foundations (Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005).”
• Institutional Contradiction and Management Control Innovation: A Field Study of Total Quality Management Practices in a Privatized Telecommunication Company (2010, neutral): “, 2009), we need to go beyond isomorphism and symbolic conformity to emphasise actors and practices as well as the relationship between institutional forces and micro-processes (Burns, 2000; Soin et al., 2002; Johansson and Baldvinsdottir, 2003; Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005; Siti-Nabiha and Scapen”
• Social and environmental accounting, organisational change and management accounting: a processual view (2013, background): “…usually sufficient to trigger (nor enact) intra-organisational change; agency is key, normally underpinned by the power ‘to get things done’ (Burns, 2000; Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005), as one interviewee implied: There was a significant change of pace in 200[X], when our new CEO was appointed.”
• On the emergence of strategic management accounting: An institutional perspective (2009, background): “…institutional theories in the research area of management accounting change, especially old institutional economics (OIE) (Burns and Scapens, 2000; Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005; Lukka, 2007) and new institutional sociology (NIS) (Granlund and Lukka, 1998; Granlund, 2001), this neoinstitutional…”
• Integration of Financial and Management Accounting Systems: The Mediating Influence of a Consistent Financial Language on Controllership Effectiveness (2011, background): “This notion is not only supported by Järvenpää (2007), who finds changes of management accounting culture towards an increasing business orientation, but also by Burns and Baldvinsdottir (2005).”
• Risk and risk management in management accounting and control (2013, background): “Burns and Baldvinsdottir (2005) highlight the emergence of ‘hybrid accountants’ who they found “were becoming involved in wider, integrated business situations, agendas and decision-making forums” (p.749).”
• The development of controller tasks: explaining the nature of controllership and its changes (2011, background): “A wide range of variables affect controllership, from changing market conditions and improved IT tools to myths about the benefits of change (see Burns and Baldvinsdottir 2005, p. 726 in brief).”
• Making Business Partners: A Case Study on how Management Accounting Culture was Changed (2007, background): “…function from being the scorekeeper and watchdog (bean counter) to being the active advisor of management and an increasing participant in decision-making (business partner) (Kaplan, 1995; IMA, 1996; Granlund and Lukka, 1997; 1998a; Lukka, 1998; Malmi, 2001; Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005).”
• Back to the future: New potential for structuration theory in management accounting research? (2009, background): “However, more recent workhas applied a corrective to the overemphasis on structural determinism, often drawing on principles adopted from structuration theory, to reflect a mutually constitutive nature of structure and agency (e.g. Barley and Tolbert, 1997; Clemens and Cook, 1999; Seo and Creed, 200”
• How CFOs Determine Management Accounting Innovation: An Examination of Direct and Indirect Effects (2009, positive): “Research indicates that accountants differ in the extent to which they are open to management accounting innovation and take initiatives to improve operational and strategic decision-making processes (Hopper, 1980; Johnston et al., 2002; Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005; Emsley, 2005).”
• The effects of uncertainty on the roles of controllers and budgets: an exploratory study (2011, neutral): “Over the past two decades, the organisational role of the management accountant (or controller1) has become a topic of considerable practical and academic interest (Burns and Baldvinsdottir 2005, Maas and Matějka 2009).”