Influence of budgetary slack and elements of the budgetary process on perceptions of justice,

V. Santos, I. Beuren, Suzimara Skrepitz
{"title":"Influence of budgetary slack and elements of the budgetary process on perceptions of justice,","authors":"V. Santos, I. Beuren, Suzimara Skrepitz","doi":"10.1590/1808-057x202113780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examined the relationships between elements of the budgetary process (budgetary participation, the use of budgetary goals for performance assessments, and the use of budgetary goals for variable remuneration purposes), budgetary slack, and perceptions of justice, on the assumption that budgetary slack is an antecedent of perceptions of justice and acts as an intervening variable between elements of the budgetary process and perceptions of justice. Studies addressing the relationship between justice and slack have not considered the positive aspects derived from budgetary slack such as necessary and emergency resources. Moreover, most of these studies have focused on procedural justice and on an element of the budgetary process (budgetary participation), to predict feelings of justice and the creation of slack. The results of the study suggest alternative conceptions for analyzing the relationship between perceptions of justice and budgetary slack, going beyond the economic lens for the latter. By resorting to social exchange theory (SET), a perspective is provided on how elements of the budgetary process affect managers’ perceptions of justice and how budgetary slack, as an economic and social exchange resource, shapes those effects. Although researchers have already pointed to budgetary slack as being beneficial for the organization, no studies were found that have analyzed it as a predictor of perceptions of justice. A survey was conducted with a sample of 114 company managers and the hypotheses were tested with the application of structural equation modeling. The results reveal that budgetary slack is an inherent element of the budgetary process, conceived as an economic and socioemotional resource, according to the principles of SET, and used by organizations with a view to greater perceptions of justice. Budgetary slack is essential for predicting managers’ feelings of distributive and procedural justice regarding the budgetary process.","PeriodicalId":251378,"journal":{"name":"Revista Contabilidade & Finanças","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Contabilidade & Finanças","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x202113780","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study examined the relationships between elements of the budgetary process (budgetary participation, the use of budgetary goals for performance assessments, and the use of budgetary goals for variable remuneration purposes), budgetary slack, and perceptions of justice, on the assumption that budgetary slack is an antecedent of perceptions of justice and acts as an intervening variable between elements of the budgetary process and perceptions of justice. Studies addressing the relationship between justice and slack have not considered the positive aspects derived from budgetary slack such as necessary and emergency resources. Moreover, most of these studies have focused on procedural justice and on an element of the budgetary process (budgetary participation), to predict feelings of justice and the creation of slack. The results of the study suggest alternative conceptions for analyzing the relationship between perceptions of justice and budgetary slack, going beyond the economic lens for the latter. By resorting to social exchange theory (SET), a perspective is provided on how elements of the budgetary process affect managers’ perceptions of justice and how budgetary slack, as an economic and social exchange resource, shapes those effects. Although researchers have already pointed to budgetary slack as being beneficial for the organization, no studies were found that have analyzed it as a predictor of perceptions of justice. A survey was conducted with a sample of 114 company managers and the hypotheses were tested with the application of structural equation modeling. The results reveal that budgetary slack is an inherent element of the budgetary process, conceived as an economic and socioemotional resource, according to the principles of SET, and used by organizations with a view to greater perceptions of justice. Budgetary slack is essential for predicting managers’ feelings of distributive and procedural justice regarding the budgetary process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预算松弛和预算程序要素对正义观念的影响;
本研究考察了预算过程要素(预算参与、使用预算目标进行绩效评估以及将预算目标用于可变薪酬目的)、预算松弛和公平感之间的关系,假设预算松弛是公平感的先决条件,并作为预算过程要素和公平感之间的干预变量。关于正义与宽松之间关系的研究没有考虑到预算宽松带来的积极方面,如必要和紧急资源。此外,这些研究大多集中于程序公正和预算过程的一个因素(预算参与),以预测公正的感觉和造成懈怠。这项研究的结果为分析正义观念与预算松弛之间的关系提供了另一种概念,而不是从经济角度来分析后者。通过运用社会交换理论(SET),本文提供了一个视角,说明预算过程的要素如何影响管理者对公正的看法,以及预算松弛作为一种经济和社会交换资源,如何塑造这些影响。尽管研究人员已经指出,预算松弛对组织是有益的,但还没有发现研究将其分析为公正观念的预测因素。本文以114名公司管理者为样本进行调查,运用结构方程模型对假设进行检验。结果表明,预算松弛是预算过程的一个固有因素,根据SET原则,它被视为一种经济和社会情感资源,并被组织用于更好地感知正义。预算松弛对于预测管理者对预算过程的分配和程序公正的感受至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Academic research for impact Influence of budgetary slack and elements of the budgetary process on perceptions of justice, Viability of Universal Life insurance in Brazil from the supply and demand perspectives Dynamic tensions in the budgetary system of a family business and the duality of structure Workforce and earnings management: Evidence in the Brazilian capital market
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1