Incarnation and decay: reconciling the organizational decision-making and organizational institutional theory perspectives on budgetary research

Zahirul Hoque, Matt Kaufman
{"title":"Incarnation and decay: reconciling the organizational decision-making and organizational institutional theory perspectives on budgetary research","authors":"Zahirul Hoque, Matt Kaufman","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-07-2023-6554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The organizational decision-making perspective (ODM) has a legacy regarding its concern for budgeting as an essential organizational routine in decision-making. Budgeting has also become a direct concern to organizational institutional theory (OIT) because of its prominent role in institution building, where budgeting can build trust in inter-organizational relationships. This paper builds on these two perspectives to explore organizational budget processes' formation, disruption, and re-creation over time.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We conducted a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the ODM and OIT perspectives, focusing on a fundamental paradox between ODM's emphasis on stability through organizational routines and OIT's focus on organizational legitimacy through the decoupled expression of organizational values. We then expanded on these paradoxical concerns in the context of budgeting, formalizing them into specific research propositions for future studies.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Tensions around the stability, decay, and re-creation of budgets as organizational routines emerge as a pressing issue requiring further empirical investigation from the ODM perspective. A critical issue in the OIT perspective is the potential for organizational budgets to provide an opportunity to decouple from practice through routinized expressions of rationality and to facilitate loose coupling in practice. These findings offer a fresh perspective and open up new avenues for future research in this area.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This paper contributes to the accounting and organizational research literature by shedding light on how organizations respond to the potential decay of budget routines and the manifestation of organizational values in decoupling processes by further re-creating and elaborating budget processes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":501027,"journal":{"name":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-07-2023-6554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The organizational decision-making perspective (ODM) has a legacy regarding its concern for budgeting as an essential organizational routine in decision-making. Budgeting has also become a direct concern to organizational institutional theory (OIT) because of its prominent role in institution building, where budgeting can build trust in inter-organizational relationships. This paper builds on these two perspectives to explore organizational budget processes' formation, disruption, and re-creation over time.

Design/methodology/approach

We conducted a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the ODM and OIT perspectives, focusing on a fundamental paradox between ODM's emphasis on stability through organizational routines and OIT's focus on organizational legitimacy through the decoupled expression of organizational values. We then expanded on these paradoxical concerns in the context of budgeting, formalizing them into specific research propositions for future studies.

Findings

Tensions around the stability, decay, and re-creation of budgets as organizational routines emerge as a pressing issue requiring further empirical investigation from the ODM perspective. A critical issue in the OIT perspective is the potential for organizational budgets to provide an opportunity to decouple from practice through routinized expressions of rationality and to facilitate loose coupling in practice. These findings offer a fresh perspective and open up new avenues for future research in this area.

Originality/value

This paper contributes to the accounting and organizational research literature by shedding light on how organizations respond to the potential decay of budget routines and the manifestation of organizational values in decoupling processes by further re-creating and elaborating budget processes.

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
化身与衰变:调和预算研究中的组织决策和组织机构理论观点
目的 组织决策理论(ODM)将预算编制作为决策过程中必不可少的组织例行程序,这是对预算编制的关注,也是对组织机构理论(OIT)的直接关注。组织机构理论(OIT)也直接关注预算编制,因为预算编制在机构建设中发挥着突出作用,可以在组织间关系中建立信任。本文以这两种观点为基础,探讨组织预算过程的形成、中断和随时间推移的再创造。设计/方法/方法我们对组织发展管理(ODM)和组织制度理论(OIT)的观点进行了全面回顾和批判性分析,重点关注组织发展管理强调通过组织例行程序实现稳定性,而组织制度理论则强调通过组织价值的脱钩表达实现组织合法性之间的根本悖论。然后,我们在预算编制的背景下对这些悖论性问题进行了扩展,并将其正式转化为未来研究的具体研究命题。研究结果围绕作为组织常规的预算的稳定性、衰减性和再创造性所产生的紧张关系成为了一个亟待解决的问题,需要从 ODM 的角度进行进一步的实证调查。OIT 视角中的一个关键问题是,组织预算有可能通过合理性的常规化表达与实践脱钩,并促进实践中的松散耦合。这些发现提供了一个崭新的视角,并为该领域未来的研究开辟了新的途径。本文阐明了组织如何通过进一步重新创建和阐述预算流程来应对脱钩过程中预算常规的潜在衰减和组织价值的体现,从而为会计和组织研究文献做出了贡献。
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
Ways of not seeing: visibility, blindness, and the transparency game Accounting for racial inequality in South Africa with the black economic empowerment policy Boundary objects: sustainability reporting and the production of organizational stability Responding to employee-based race inequalities in National Health Service (England): accountability and the Workforce Race Equality Standard The failure of the United Kingdom’s accounting and fiscal governance
×
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