Research Seminar on Digitalization and Management Accounting

The seminar starts with providing an in-depth understanding of the nature of management accounting as well as the counterpart role in the finance function, i.e. the role of controllers, financial directors, and chief financial officers. In a second step, the impact of digitalization is discussed.

Maas, V. S., & Matejka, M. (2009). Balancing the dual responsibilities of business unit controllers: Field and survey evidence. The Accounting Review, 84(4), 1233-1253. Hartmann, F. G., & Maas, V. S. (2011). The effects of uncertainty on the roles of controllers and budgets: an exploratory study. Accounting and Business Research, 41(5), 439-458.Morales, J. & Lambert, C. (2013). Dirty Work and the Construction of Identity. An Ethnographic Study of Management Accounting Practices. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38 (3), 228-244.Goretzki, L., Strauss, E., & Weber, J. (2013). An institutional perspective on the changes in management accountants’ professional role. Management Accounting Research, 24(1), 41-63.Bol, J., Kramer, S. & Maas, V.S. (2016). How control system design affects performance evaluation compression: The role of information accuracy and outcome transparency, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 64-73.Hopper, T. & Macintosh, N. (1993): Management accounting as disciplinary practice: the case of ITT under Harold Geneen. Management Accounting Research, 4, 181-216.Elbashir, M. Z., Collier, P. A., & Sutton, S. G. (2011). The role of organizational absorptive capacity in strategic use of business intelligence to support integrated management control systems. The Accounting Review, 86(1), 155–184.Mundy, J. (2010). Creating dynamic tensions through a balanced use of management control systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(5), 499–523.Quattrone, P. (2016): Management Accounting goes digital: will the move make it wiser? Management Accounting Research 31, 118-122.Günther, W. A., Rezazade Mehrizi, M. H., Huysman, M., & Feldberg, F. (2017). Debating big data: A literature review on realizing value from big data. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 26(3), 191–209.

The participants of this course will intensely discuss the papers from the list below.

Every paper is presented by a “seller”, i.e. a person who does not present the paper in detail, but that sets the hook, tries to sell the contribution and relates it to other literature (approx. 10 minutes). The presenter is then followed by one or two particpants who act as “challengers”, i.e. persons who try to find the weaknesses of a paper and bring forward open questions (approx. 10-20 minutes). Those talks are followed by a Q&A and a hopefully intensive discussion between all doctoral students and faculty. The discussion shall deal with how the papers differ, what their intention is, how the paper tries to direct attention, what approach they take in developing the literature and your view of the world. Does the paper create, shift, and/or destruct consensus? Draw on the AMJ editorials to critique and discuss the papers’ strong and weak points. What can we learn for our own research? Sellers and challengers are allowed a maximum of 2-3 slides per paper. Maximum time per paper including discussion: 45 minutes.

For fruitful and inspiring discussions, it it is absolutely essential that every participant has thoroughly read all ten papers in advance.

Presentation, discussant presentation and discussion

90