Content area
Full Text
1 Introduction
A considerable number of scholars have conducted reviews on management accounting and control research, within a particular timeframe and scope[1] . The purpose of this paper is to extend these reviews, particularly by [76] Hesford et al. (2007), [88] Ittner and Larcker (1998b), [141] Otley et al. (1995), [148] Scapens and Bromwich (2001), [150] Selto and Widener (2004), [152] Shields (1997) and [169] Young and Selto (1991). Building upon these reviews in general, and more specifically [152] Shields' (1997) analytical framework, this paper reports findings from a literature search of the use of management accounting innovations (MAIs). The paper explores recent developments in research on MAIs and presents suggestions for future research. Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] summarizes the attributes of existing reviews and illustrates how the current review differs from existing reviews by its specific focus on MAIs and the recent time period covered.
Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] gives that [169] Young and Selto (1991) reviewed empirical research on cost management topics published prior to 1990. Their review centered around a framework that outlines several interrelated variables in order to explain the productivity paradox. [141] Otley et al. (1995) presented research on management control systems (MCS) covering the period between 1954 and 1995. They focused on the MCS literature and categorized various managerial aspects into closed or open systems and rational or natural systems perspectives. [88] Ittner and Larcker (1998b) captured the trend of research on performance measurement innovations such as economic value measures, non-financial measures, and performance measurement initiatives in government agencies prior to 1997. They selected articles that were mainly based on surveys conducted by consulting firms and government agencies.
[150] Selto and Widener (2004) presented wider coverage, but limited themselves to articles on conventional management accounting topics and topics that are prominent in professional finance and accounting literatures. Their review involved 14 management and accounting research journals and seven professional magazines and journals, in order to identify the divergence between management accounting research topics and practice issues. Other reviews, however, did not rely on a specific area of management accounting. For example, [152] Shields' (1997) review focused on articles published by North Americans during the period of 1990-1996. His review was confined to...