The effects of user participation on the design of accounting information systems

Information and Management

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 185-198

  Choe, Jong Min ^a  

^a Kyungpook National University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Contextual variables; Information characteristics; Management accounting information systems; Three way interaction model; User participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 0010098750     PISSN: 03787206     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00055-X     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. S.W. Anderson, A framework for assessing cost management system changes: The case of activity based costing implementation at General Motors, 1986-1993, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Fall 1995, pp. 1-51.
2. M. Briers, M. Hirst, The Role of budgetary information in performance evaluation, Accounting, Organizations and Society 15(4), 1990, pp. 373-398.
3. T. Burns, G.M. Stalker, The Management of Innovation London, Tavistock, 1961.
4. R.H. Chenhall, D. Morris, The Impact of Structure, Environment and Interdependence on the Perceived Usefulness of Management Accounting Systems, The Accounting Review, January 1986, pp. 16-35.
5. J.M. Choe, The relationships among performance of accounting information systems, influence factors and evolution level of information systems, Journal of Management Information Systems, Spring 1996, pp. 215-239.
6. V.K. Chong, Management accounting systems, task uncertainty and managerial performance: A research note, Accounting, Organizations and Society 21(5), 1996, pp. 415-421.
7. D.W. Conarth, O.P. Mignen, What is being done to measure user satisfaction with EDP/MIS? Information and Management 19(1), 1990, pp. 7-19.
8. R.L. Daft, R.H. Lengel, Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design, Management Science 32(5), 1986, pp. 554-571.
9. R.L. Daft, N.B. Macintosh, A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units, Administrative Science Quarterly 26, (1981) pp. 207-224.
10. J.F. Dent, Strategy, organization and control: Some possibilities for accounting research, Accounting, Organizations and Society 15(1), 1990, pp. 3-25.
11. W.J. Doll, Avenues for top management involvement in successful MIS developmenet, MIS Quarterly, March 1985, pp. 17-35.
12. M. Ezzamel, M. Bourn, The roles of accounting information systems in an organization experiencing financial crisis, Accounting, Organizations and Society 15(5), 1990, pp. 399-424.
13. K. Ewusi-mensah, The external organizational environment and its impact on management information systems, Accounting, Organizations and Society 6(4), 1981, pp. 301-316.
14. J.D. Ford, J.W Slocum, Jr., Size, technology, environment and the structure of organizations, Academy of Management Review, October 1977, pp. 561-575.
15. D. Goodhue, I/S attitudes: Toward theoretical and definitional clarity, Data Base, Fall-Winter 1988, pp. 6-15.
16. L.A. Gordon, V.K. Narayanan, Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and organization structure, Accounting, Organizations and Society 9(1), 1984, pp. 33-47.
17. V. Govindarajan, Impact of participation in the budgetary process on management attitudes and performance: Universalistic and contingency perspectives, Decision Sciences, 1986, pp. 496-516.
18. F.A. Gul, Y.M. Chia, The effects of management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and decentralization on managerial performance: A test of three-way interaction, Accounting, Organizations and Society 19(4), 1994, pp. 413-426.
19. J. Hage, M. Aiken, Relationship of centralization to other structural properties, Administrative Science Quarterly 12, 1967, pp. 72-92.
20. D.C. Hayes, The contingency theory of managerial accounting, The Accounting Review, January 1977, pp. 22-39.
21. F.D. Hertog, C. Wielinga, Control systems in dissonance: The computer as an ink blot, Accounting, Organizations and Society 17(2), 1992, pp. 103-127.
22. O.A. Imoisili, The role of budget data in the evaluation of managerial performance, Accounting, Organizations and Society 14(4), 1989, pp. 325-335.
23. E. Kim, J. Lee, An exploratory contingency model of user participation and MIS use, Information and Management 11, 1986, pp. 87-97.
24. L.S. Kim, Technological innovation, structure, environment and policy implications: Contingency approaches, doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1976, unpublished.
25. D.F. Larker, The perceived importance of selected information characteristics for strategic capital budgeting decision, The Accounting Review LVI(3) (1981) 519-538.
26. A.L. Lederer, G.L. Smith, Jr., Individual differences and decision making using various levels of aggregation of information, Journal of Management Information Systems 5(3), 1989, pp. 53-69.
27. J. Lee, S.H. Kim, The relationship between procedural formalization in MIS development and MIS success, Information and Management 22, 1992, pp. 89-111.
28. M.L. Markus, J. Pfeffer, Power and the design and implementation of accounting and control systems, Accounting, Organizations and Society 8(2), 1983, pp. 205-218.
29. N.B. Macintosh, R.L. Daft, User department technology and information design, Information and Management 1, 1978, pp. 123-131.
30. R.L. Mann, H.J. Watson, A contingency model for user involvement in DSS development, MIS Quarterly, March 1984, pp. 27-38.
31. L. Mia, R.H. Chenhall, The usefulness of management accounting systems, functional differentiation and managerial effectiveness, Accounting, Organizations and Society 19(1), 1994, pp. 1-13.
32. J. Nunally, Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978.
33. M.H. Olson, B. Ives, User involvement in system design: An empirical test of alternative approaches, Information and Management 4, 1981, pp. 183-195.
34. D.T. Otley, The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis, Accounting, Organizations and Society 5(5), 1980, pp. 413-428.
35. J.M. Pennings, The relevance of the structural-contingency model for organizational effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly 20, 1975, pp. 393-410.
36. V. Sathe, D. Watson, Contingency Theories of Organizational Structure, in K.R. Ferris, J.L. Livingston (Eds.), Management Planning and Control, Century VII, Beavercreek, OH, 1987, pp. 59-81.
37. C.B. Schoonhoven, Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency theory, Administrative Science Quarterly 26, 1981, pp. 349-377.
38. M.D. Shields, An empirical analysis of firms' implementation experience with activity-based costing, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Fall 1995, pp. 148-165.
39. K.E. Southwood, Substantive theory and statistical interaction: Five models, American Journal of Sociology, March 1978, pp. 1154-1203.
40. P.M. Specht, Job characteristics as indicants of CBIS requirements, MIS Quarterly, September 1986, pp. 272-286.
41. P. Tait, I. Vessey, The effect of user involvement on system success: A contingency approach, MIS Quarterly, March 1988, pp. 91-108.
42. R.L. Tung, Dimensions of organizational environments: An exploratory study of their impact on organization structure, Academy of Management Journal 22(4), 1979, pp. 672-693.
43. M.L. Tushman, D.A. Nadler, Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design, Academy Management Review, July 1978, pp. 613-624.
44. A.H. Van de Ven, A.L. Delbecq, A task contingent model of work unit structure, Administrative Science Quarterly 19, 1974, pp. 183-197.
45. A.H. Van de Ven, A.L. Delbecq, R. Koenig, Determinants of coordination modes within organizations, American Sociological Review, April 1976, pp. 322-338.
46. A.H. Van de Ven, D.L. Ferry, Measuring and Assessing Organizations, Wiley Interscience 1980.
47. T.B. Wan, L.T. Wah, Validation of a user satisfaction instrument for office automation success, Information and Management 18, 1990, pp. 203-208.