accounting and business research impact factor

Accounting and Business Research

Journal Abbreviation: ACCOUNT BUS RES Journal ISSN: 0001-4788

You may also be interested in the following journals

• ► Geoarabia
• ► Journal of Management
• ► Comptabilite Controle Audit
• ► Personality and Social Psychology Review
• ► Journal of Finance
• ► Psychological Reports
• ► Perspectives on Psychological Science

Top Journals in social

• Psychological Inquiry
• Psychological Science in the Public Interest
• Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice
• Clinical Psychology Review
• Perspectives on Psychological Science
• Personality and Social Psychology Review
• Academy of Management Annals
• Academy of Management Review
• Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
• Health Psychology Review
• Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science
• Review of Educational Research

Journal Impact

Accounting and Business Research - Impact Score, Ranking, SJR, h-index, Citescore, Rating, Publisher, ISSN, and Other Important Details

Published By: Routledge

Abbreviation: Account. Bus. Res.

Impact Score The impact Score or journal impact score (JIS) is equivalent to Impact Factor. The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly mean number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal, as indexed by Clarivate's Web of Science. On the other hand, Impact Score is based on Scopus data.

Important details.

About Accounting and Business Research

Accounting and Business Research is a journal published by Routledge . This journal covers the area[s] related to Accounting, Finance, etc . The coverage history of this journal is as follows: 1970-2022. The rank of this journal is 5545 . This journal's impact score, h-index, and SJR are 2.12, 65, and 0.841, respectively. The ISSN of this journal is/are as follows: 21594260, 00014788 . The best quartile of Accounting and Business Research is Q1 . This journal has received a total of 287 citations during the last three years (Preceding 2022).

Accounting and Business Research Impact Score 2022-2023

The impact score (IS), also denoted as the Journal impact score (JIS), of an academic journal is a measure of the yearly average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal. It is based on Scopus data.

Prediction of Accounting and Business Research Impact Score 2023

Impact Score 2022 of Accounting and Business Research is 2.12 . If a similar downward trend continues, IS may decrease in 2023 as well.

Impact Score Graph

Check below the impact score trends of accounting and business research. this is based on scopus data..

Accounting and Business Research h-index

The h-index of Accounting and Business Research is 65 . By definition of the h-index, this journal has at least 65 published articles with more than 65 citations.

What is h-index?

The h-index (also known as the Hirsch index or Hirsh index) is a scientometric parameter used to evaluate the scientific impact of the publications and journals. It is defined as the maximum value of h such that the given Journal has published at least h papers and each has at least h citations.

Accounting and Business Research ISSN

The International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) of Accounting and Business Research is/are as follows: 21594260, 00014788 .

The ISSN is a unique 8-digit identifier for a specific publication like Magazine or Journal. The ISSN is used in the postal system and in the publishing world to identify the articles that are published in journals, magazines, newsletters, etc. This is the number assigned to your article by the publisher, and it is the one you will use to reference your article within the library catalogues.

ISSN code (also called as "ISSN structure" or "ISSN syntax") can be expressed as follows: NNNN-NNNC Here, N is in the set {0,1,2,3...,9}, a digit character, and C is in {0,1,2,3,...,9,X}

Accounting and Business Research Ranking and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)

SCImago Journal Rank is an indicator, which measures the scientific influence of journals. It considers the number of citations received by a journal and the importance of the journals from where these citations come.

Accounting and Business Research Publisher

The publisher of Accounting and Business Research is Routledge . The publishing house of this journal is located in the United Kingdom . Its coverage history is as follows: 1970-2022 .

Call For Papers (CFPs)

Please check the official website of this journal to find out the complete details and Call For Papers (CFPs).

Abbreviation

The International Organization for Standardization 4 (ISO 4) abbreviation of Accounting and Business Research is Account. Bus. Res. . ISO 4 is an international standard which defines a uniform and consistent system for the abbreviation of serial publication titles, which are published regularly. The primary use of ISO 4 is to abbreviate or shorten the names of scientific journals using the technique of List of Title Word Abbreviations (LTWA).

As ISO 4 is an international standard, the abbreviation ('Account. Bus. Res.') can be used for citing, indexing, abstraction, and referencing purposes.

How to publish in Accounting and Business Research

If your area of research or discipline is related to Accounting, Finance, etc. , please check the journal's official website to understand the complete publication process.

Acceptance Rate

• Interest/demand of researchers/scientists for publishing in a specific journal/conference.
• The complexity of the peer review process and timeline.
• Time taken from draft submission to final publication.
• Number of submissions received and acceptance slots
• And Many More.

The simplest way to find out the acceptance rate or rejection rate of a Journal/Conference is to check with the journal's/conference's editorial team through emails or through the official website.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the impact score of accounting and business research.

The latest impact score of Accounting and Business Research is 2.12. It is computed in the year 2023.

What is the h-index of Accounting and Business Research?

The latest h-index of Accounting and Business Research is 65. It is evaluated in the year 2023.

What is the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) of Accounting and Business Research?

The latest SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) of Accounting and Business Research is 0.841. It is calculated in the year 2023.

What is the ranking of Accounting and Business Research?

The latest ranking of Accounting and Business Research is 5545. This ranking is among 27955 Journals, Conferences, and Book Series. It is computed in the year 2023.

Who is the publisher of Accounting and Business Research?

Accounting and Business Research is published by Routledge. The publication country of this journal is United Kingdom.

What is the abbreviation of Accounting and Business Research?

This standard abbreviation of Accounting and Business Research is Account. Bus. Res..

Is "Accounting and Business Research" a Journal, Conference or Book Series?

Accounting and Business Research is a journal published by Routledge.

What is the scope of Accounting and Business Research?

For detailed scope of Accounting and Business Research, check the official website of this journal.

What is the ISSN of Accounting and Business Research?

The International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) of Accounting and Business Research is/are as follows: 21594260, 00014788.

What is the best quartile for Accounting and Business Research?

The best quartile for Accounting and Business Research is Q1.

What is the coverage history of Accounting and Business Research?

The coverage history of Accounting and Business Research is as follows 1970-2022.

Credits and Sources

• Accounting and Business Research Official Website
• Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR), https://www.scimagojr.com/
• Journal Impact Factor, https://clarivate.com/
• Issn.org, https://www.issn.org/
• Scopus, https://www.scopus.com/

Note: The impact score shown here is equivalent to the average number of times documents published in a journal/conference in the past two years have been cited in the current year (i.e., Cites / Doc. (2 years)). It is based on Scopus data and can be a little higher or different compared to the impact factor (IF) produced by Journal Citation Report. Please refer to the Web of Science data source to check the exact journal impact factor ™ (Thomson Reuters) metric.

Impact Score, SJR, h-Index, and Other Important metrics of These Journals, Conferences, and Book Series

Check complete list

Accounting and Business Research Impact Score (IS) Trend

Top Journals/Conferences in Accounting

Top journals/conferences in finance.

• Editage One platform for all researcher needs
• Paperpal AI-powered academic writing assistant
• R Discovery Your #1 AI companion for literature search
• Mind the Graph AI tool for graphics, illustrations, and artwork
• [email protected]
• Request a callback

Researcher.Life is built on Editage's in-depth understanding of what researchers need during publication and beyond, accumulated over 20 years.

Accounting and Business Research : Impact Factor & More

Check your submission readiness.

Find out how your manuscript stacks up against 24 technical compliance and 6 language quality checks.

Accounting and Business Research Key Metrics

Topics covered on accounting and business research, accounting and business research journal specifications.

Submissions Pack

One subscription packed with expert publication services and AI tools to get you published

Journal Selection Service

Benefit from our experts' recommendations of 3-5 best-suited journals, accompanied by a detailed Journal Selection report explaining the choices. Make informed decisions.

Journal Submission Service

Streamline your submission process with meticulous manuscript formatting to meet journal guidelines, crafting a tailored cover letter for the editor, and hassle-free account creation and submission

Bundle of AI tools for your research needs

Journal Finder, Paperpal, R Discovery, MindTheGraph and more

Buy now for a special Launch price!

Planning to publish in Accounting and Business Research ?

Upload your Manuscript to get

• Degree of match
• Common matching concepts
• Additional journal recommendations

Recently Published Papers in Accounting and Business Research

• 22 Aug 2024
• Accounting and Business Research
• 15 Aug 2024
• 27 Jul 2024
• 26 Jul 2024

Compare Similar Journals with Accounting and Business Research

Journal of accounting in emerging economies, accounting, organizations and society, sustainability, contemporary accounting research, journal of applied accounting research, review of accounting studies, accounting in europe.

SJR Ranking, Topics covered, Indexing Database, Publication Review Time, Publication Type, Article Processing Charges & Recently Published papers

Get detailed Journal comparison report on your email by signing up

Check if your research matches the topics covered in Accounting and Business Research?

Accounting and business research scite analysis.

2.2K articles received 42K citations see all

• 2,101 Supporting
• 36,636 Mentioning
• 329 Contrasting

Accounting and Business Research Editorial notices

• 0 Retractions
• 0 Withdrawals
• 5 Corrections
• 0 Expression of Concern

FAQs on Accounting and Business Research

How long has accounting and business research been actively publishing.

Accounting and Business Research has been in operation since 1970 till date.

What is the publishing frequency of Accounting and Business Research?

Accounting and Business Research published with a Bi-monthly frequency.

How many articles did Accounting and Business Research publish last year?

In 2023, Accounting and Business Research publsihed 30 articles.

What is the eISSN & pISSN for Accounting and Business Research?

For Accounting and Business Research, eISSN is 2159-4260 and pISSN is 0001-4788.

What is Citescore for Accounting and Business Research?

Citescore for Accounting and Business Research is 4.4.

What is SNIP score for Accounting and Business Research?

SNIP score for Accounting and Business Research is 1.47.

What is the SJR for Accounting and Business Research?

SJR for Accounting and Business Research is Q1.

Who is the publisher of Accounting and Business Research?

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD is the publisher of Accounting and Business Research.

Copyright 2024 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.

Accounting And Business Research impact factor, indexing, ranking (2024)

Aim and Scope

The Accounting And Business Research is a research journal that publishes research related to Business, Management and Accounting; Economics, Econometrics and Finance . This journal is published by the Routledge. The ISSN of this journal is 21594260, 00014788 . Based on the Scopus data, the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) of accounting and business research is 0.841 .

Accounting And Business Research Ranking

The latest Impact Factor list (JCR) is released in June 2024.

The Impact Factor of Accounting And Business Research is 2.

The impact factor (IF) is a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year. It is used to measure the importance or rank of a journal by calculating the times its articles are cited.

The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in Philadelphia. Impact factors began to be calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson-Reuters spun off and sold ISI to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate , which is now the publisher of the JCR.

Important Metrics

accounting and business research Indexing

The accounting and business research is indexed in:

• Web of Science (SSCI)

An indexed journal means that the journal has gone through and passed a review process of certain requirements done by a journal indexer.

The Web of Science Core Collection includes the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).

Accounting And Business Research Impact Factor 2024

The latest impact factor of accounting and business research is 2 which is recently updated in June, 2024.

The impact factor (IF) is a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year. It is used to measure the importance or rank of a journal by calculating the times it's articles are cited.

Note: Every year, The Clarivate releases the Journal Citation Report (JCR). The JCR provides information about academic journals including impact factor. The latest JCR was released in June, 2023. The JCR 2024 will be released in the June 2024.

Accounting And Business Research Quartile

The latest Quartile of accounting and business research is Q1 .

Each subject category of journals is divided into four quartiles: Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4. Q1 is occupied by the top 25% of journals in the list; Q2 is occupied by journals in the 25 to 50% group; Q3 is occupied by journals in the 50 to 75% group and Q4 is occupied by journals in the 75 to 100% group.

Journal Publication Time

The publication time may vary depending on factors such as the complexity of the research and the current workload of the editorial team. Journals typically request reviewers to submit their reviews within 3-4 weeks. However, some journals lack mechanisms to enforce this deadline, making it difficult to predict the duration of the peer review process.

The review time also depends upon the quality of the research paper.

Call for Papers

Visit to the official website of the journal/ conference to check the details about call for papers.

How to publish in Accounting And Business Research?

If your research is related to Business, Management and Accounting; Economics, Econometrics and Finance, then visit the official website of accounting and business research and send your manuscript.

Tips for publishing in Accounting And Business Research:

• Selection of research problem.
• Presenting a solution.
• Designing the paper.
• Make your manuscript publication worthy.
• Write an effective results section.
• Mind your references.

Acceptance Rate

Final summary.

• The impact factor of accounting and business research is 2.
• The accounting and business research is a reputed research journal.
• It is published by Routledge .
• The journal is indexed in UGC CARE, Scopus, SSCI .
• The (SJR) SCImago Journal Rank is 0.841 .

SIMILIAR JOURNALS

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS

ACADEMY REVIEW

INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT

REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT AND VALUATION

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC AND MIDDLE EASTERN FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING RESEARCH

MANAGERIAL AUDITING JOURNAL

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT

TOP RESEARCH JOURNALS

• Agricultural & Biological Sciences
• Arts & Humanities
• Business, Management and Accounting
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences

Scientometrics

Citing bodies, accounting and business research, how influential is accounting and business research in terms of citations.

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Some searches may not work properly. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Taylor & Francis Journals

Accounting and business research.

• Publisher Info
• Serial Info

Corrections

Contact information of taylor & francis journals, serial information, impact factors.

• Simple ( last 10 years )
• Recursive ( 10 )
• Discounted ( 10 )
• Recursive discounted ( 10 )
• H-Index ( 10 )
• Euclid ( 10 )
• Aggregate ( 10 )
• By citations
• By downloads (last 12 months)

June 2024, Volume 54, Issue 4

April 2024, volume 54, issue 3, february 2024, volume 54, issue 2, january 2024, volume 54, issue 1, november 2023, volume 53, issue 7, september 2023, volume 53, issue 6, july 2023, volume 53, issue 5, june 2023, volume 53, issue 4, april 2023, volume 53, issue 3, february 2023, volume 53, issue 2, january 2023, volume 53, issue 1, november 2022, volume 52, issue 7, september 2022, volume 52, issue 6, july 2022, volume 52, issue 5, june 2022, volume 52, issue 4, april 2022, volume 52, issue 3, february 2022, volume 52, issue 2, january 2022, volume 52, issue 1, november 2021, volume 51, issue 6-7, july 2021, volume 51, issue 5, june 2021, volume 51, issue 4, april 2021, volume 51, issue 3, february 2021, volume 51, issue 2, january 2021, volume 51, issue 1, november 2020, volume 50, issue 7, september 2020, volume 50, issue 6, july 2020, volume 50, issue 5, june 2020, volume 50, issue 4, april 2020, volume 50, issue 3, february 2020, volume 50, issue 2, january 2020, volume 50, issue 1, november 2019, volume 49, issue 7, september 2019, volume 49, issue 6, july 2019, volume 49, issue 5, june 2019, volume 49, issue 4, april 2019, volume 49, issue 3, february 2019, volume 49, issue 2, more services and features.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Accounting Research Journal

• Submit your paper
• Author guidelines
• Editorial team
• Indexing & metrics
• Calls for papers & news

Before you start

For queries relating to the status of your paper pre decision, please contact the Editor or Journal Editorial Office. For queries post acceptance, please contact the Supplier Project Manager. These details can be found in the Editorial Team section.

Author responsibilities

Our goal is to provide you with a professional and courteous experience at each stage of the review and publication process. There are also some responsibilities that sit with you as the author. Our expectation is that you will:

• Respond swiftly to any queries during the publication process.
• Be accountable for all aspects of your work. This includes investigating and resolving any questions about accuracy or research integrity
• Treat communications between you and the journal editor as confidential until an editorial decision has been made.
• Include anyone who has made a substantial and meaningful contribution to the submission (anyone else involved in the paper should be listed in the acknowledgements).
• Exclude anyone who hasn’t contributed to the paper, or who has chosen not to be associated with the research.
• In accordance with COPE’s position statement on AI tools , Large Language Models cannot be credited with authorship as they are incapable of conceptualising a research design without human direction and cannot be accountable for the integrity, originality, and validity of the published work. The author(s) must describe the content created or modified as well as appropriately cite the name and version of the AI tool used; any additional works drawn on by the AI tool should also be appropriately cited and referenced. Standard tools that are used to improve spelling and grammar are not included within the parameters of this guidance. The Editor and Publisher reserve the right to determine whether the use of an AI tool is permissible. 
• If your article involves human participants, you must ensure you have considered whether or not you require ethical approval for your research, and include this information as part of your submission. Find out more about informed consent .

Generative AI usage key principles 

• Copywriting any part of an article using a generative AI tool/LLM would not be permissible, including the generation of the abstract or the literature review, for as per Emerald’s authorship criteria, the author(s) must be responsible for the work and accountable for its accuracy, integrity, and validity.  
• The generation or reporting of results using a generative AI tool/LLM is not permissible, for as per Emerald’s authorship criteria, the author(s) must be responsible for the creation and interpretation of their work and accountable for its accuracy, integrity, and validity.  
• The in-text reporting of statistics using a generative AI tool/LLM is not permissible due to concerns over the authenticity, integrity, and validity of the data produced, although the use of such a tool to aid in the analysis of the work would be permissible.  
• Copy-editing an article using a generative AI tool/LLM in order to improve its language and readability would be permissible as this mirrors standard tools already employed to improve spelling and grammar, and uses existing author-created material, rather than generating wholly new content, while the author(s) remains responsible for the original work. 
• The submission and publication of images created by AI tools or large-scale generative models is not permitted. 

Research and publishing ethics

Our editors and employees work hard to ensure the content we publish is ethically sound. To help us achieve that goal, we closely follow the advice laid out in the guidelines and flowcharts on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) website .

We have also developed our research and publishing ethics guidelines . If you haven’t already read these, we urge you to do so – they will help you avoid the most common publishing ethics issues.

A few key points:

• Any manuscript you submit to this journal should be original. That means it should not have been published before in its current, or similar, form. Exceptions to this rule are outlined in our pre-print and conference paper policies .  If any substantial element of your paper has been previously published, you need to declare this to the journal editor upon submission. Please note, the journal editor may use  Crossref Similarity Check  to check on the originality of submissions received. This service compares submissions against a database of 49 million works from 800 scholarly publishers.
• Your work should not have been submitted elsewhere and should not be under consideration by any other publication.
• If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it upon submission; this allows the editor to decide how they would like to proceed. Read about conflict of interest in our research and publishing ethics guidelines .
• By submitting your work to Emerald, you are guaranteeing that the work is not in infringement of any existing copyright.

Third party copyright permissions

Prior to article submission, you need to ensure you’ve applied for, and received, written permission to use any material in your manuscript that has been created by a third party. Please note, we are unable to publish any article that still has permissions pending. The rights we require are:

• Non-exclusive rights to reproduce the material in the article or book chapter.
• Print and electronic rights.
• Worldwide English-language rights.
• To use the material for the life of the work. That means there should be no time restrictions on its re-use e.g. a one-year licence.

We are a member of the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers (STM) and participate in the STM permissions guidelines , a reciprocal free exchange of material with other STM publishers.  In some cases, this may mean that you don’t need permission to re-use content. If so, please highlight this at the submission stage.

Please take a few moments to read our guide to publishing permissions  to ensure you have met all the requirements, so that we can process your submission without delay.

Open access submissions and information

All our journals currently offer two open access (OA) publishing paths; gold open access and green open access.

If you would like to, or are required to, make the branded publisher PDF (also known as the version of record) freely available immediately upon publication, you can select the gold open access route once your paper is accepted.

If you’ve chosen to publish gold open access, this is the point you will be asked to pay the APC (article processing charge) . This varies per journal and can be found on our APC price list or on the editorial system at the point of submission. Your article will be published with a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 user licence , which outlines how readers can reuse your work.

Alternatively, if you would like to, or are required to, publish open access but your funding doesn’t cover the cost of the APC, you can choose the green open access, or self-archiving, route. As soon as your article is published, you can make the author accepted manuscript (the version accepted for publication) openly available, free from payment and embargo periods.

You can find out more about our open access routes, our APCs and waivers and read our FAQs on our open research page. 

Find out about open

Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines

We are a signatory of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines , a framework that supports the reproducibility of research through the adoption of transparent research practices. That means we encourage you to:

• Cite and fully reference all data, program code, and other methods in your article.
• Include persistent identifiers, such as a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), in references for datasets and program codes. Persistent identifiers ensure future access to unique published digital objects, such as a piece of text or datasets. Persistent identifiers are assigned to datasets by digital archives, such as institutional repositories and partners in the Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences (Data-PASS).
• Follow appropriate international and national procedures with respect to data protection, rights to privacy and other ethical considerations, whenever you cite data. For further guidance please refer to our  research and publishing ethics guidelines . For an example on how to cite datasets, please refer to the references section below.

Prepare your submission

Manuscript support services.

We are pleased to partner with Editage, a platform that connects you with relevant experts in language support, translation, editing, visuals, consulting, and more. After you’ve agreed a fee, they will work with you to enhance your manuscript and get it submission-ready.

This is an optional service for authors who feel they need a little extra support. It does not guarantee your work will be accepted for review or publication.

Visit Editage

Manuscript requirements

Before you submit your manuscript, it’s important you read and follow the guidelines below. You will also find some useful tips in our structure your journal submission how-to guide.

Submit your manuscript

There are a number of key steps you should follow to ensure a smooth and trouble-free submission.

Double check your manuscript

Before submitting your work, it is your responsibility to check that the manuscript is complete, grammatically correct, and without spelling or typographical errors. A few other important points:

• Give the journal aims and scope a final read. Is your manuscript definitely a good fit? If it isn’t, the editor may decline it without peer review.
• Does your manuscript comply with our research and publishing ethics guidelines ?
• Have you cleared any necessary publishing permissions ?
• Have you followed all the formatting requirements laid out in these author guidelines?
• If you need to refer to your own work, use wording such as ‘previous research has demonstrated’ not ‘our previous research has demonstrated’.
• If you need to refer to your own, currently unpublished work, don’t include this work in the reference list.
• Any acknowledgments or author biographies should be uploaded as separate files.
• Carry out a final check to ensure that no author names appear anywhere in the manuscript. This includes in figures or captions.

You will find a helpful submission checklist on the website Think.Check.Submit .

The submission process

All manuscripts should be submitted through our editorial system by the corresponding author.

The only way to submit to the journal is through the journal’s ScholarOne site as accessed via the Emerald website, and not by email or through any third-party agent/company, journal representative, or website. Submissions should be done directly by the author(s) through the ScholarOne site and not via a third-party proxy on their behalf.

A separate author account is required for each journal you submit to. If this is your first time submitting to this journal, please choose the Create an account or Register now option in the editorial system. If you already have an Emerald login, you are welcome to reuse the existing username and password here.

Please note, the next time you log into the system, you will be asked for your username. This will be the email address you entered when you set up your account.

Don't forget to add your  ORCiD ID during the submission process. It will be embedded in your published article, along with a link to the ORCiD registry allowing others to easily match you with your work.

Don’t have one yet? It only takes a few moments to register for a free ORCiD identifier .

Visit the ScholarOne support centre  for further help and guidance.

What you can expect next

You will receive an automated email from the journal editor, confirming your successful submission. It will provide you with a manuscript number, which will be used in all future correspondence about your submission. If you have any reason to suspect the confirmation email you receive might be fraudulent, please contact our Rights team .

Post submission

Review and decision process.

Each submission is checked by the editor. At this stage, they may choose to decline or unsubmit your manuscript if it doesn’t fit the journal aims and scope, or they feel the language/manuscript quality is too low.

If they think it might be suitable for the publication, they will send it to at least two independent referees for double blind peer review.  Once these reviewers have provided their feedback, the editor may decide to accept your manuscript, request minor or major revisions, or decline your work.

This journal offers an article transfer service. If the editor decides to decline your manuscript, either before or after peer review, they may offer to transfer it to a more relevant Emerald journal in this field. If you accept, your ScholarOne author account, and the accounts of your co-authors, will automatically transfer to the new journal, along with your manuscript and any accompanying peer review reports. However, you will still need to log in to ScholarOne to complete the submission process using your existing username and password. While accepting a transfer does not guarantee the receiving journal will publish your work, an editor will only suggest a transfer if they feel your article is a good fit with the new title.

While all journals work to different timescales, the goal is that the editor will inform you of their first decision within 60 days.

During this period, we will send you automated updates on the progress of your manuscript via our submission system, or you can log in to check on the current status of your paper.  Each time we contact you, we will quote the manuscript number you were given at the point of submission. If you receive an email that does not match these criteria, it could be fraudulent and we recommend you email [email protected] .

If your submission is accepted

Open access.

Once your paper is accepted, you will have the opportunity to indicate whether you would like to publish your paper via the gold open access route.

If you’ve chosen to publish gold open access, this is the point you will be asked to pay the APC (article processing charge).  This varies per journal and can be found on our APC price list or on the editorial system at the point of submission. Your article will be published with a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 user licence , which outlines how readers can reuse your work.

All accepted authors are sent an email with a link to a licence form.  This should be checked for accuracy, for example whether contact and affiliation details are up to date and your name is spelled correctly, and then returned to us electronically. If there is a reason why you can’t assign copyright to us, you should discuss this with your journal content editor. You will find their contact details on the editorial team section above.

Proofing and typesetting

Two to three months before the scheduled print publication of an issue, we carry out editorial checks on your paper and a pre-typeset version appears in the Accepted Articles section of the journal’s online content. Your paper is then copyedited, typeset, and proofs are sent to you (if you are the corresponding author) for your review. You receive advance notification of this.  Please note, this is your opportunity to correct any typographical errors, grammatical errors or incorrect author details. We can’t accept requests to rewrite texts at this stage.

How to share your paper

Visit our author rights page  to find out how you can reuse and share your work.

To find tips on increasing the visibility of your published paper, read about  how to promote your work .

Correcting inaccuracies in your published paper

Sometimes errors are made during the research, writing and publishing processes. When these issues arise, we have the option of withdrawing the paper or introducing a correction notice. Find out more about our  article withdrawal and correction policies .

Need to make a change to the author list? See our frequently asked questions (FAQs) below.

Frequently asked questions

• Professor Reza Monem Griffith University, Griffith Business School, Australia - Australia [email protected]

Associate Editor

• Associate Professor Muhammad Jahangir Ali La Trobe University, La Trobe Business School, Australia - Australia [email protected]
• Dr Gurmeet Singh Bhabra Griffith University, Australia [email protected]
• Associate Professor Borhan Bhuiyan Massey University - New Zealand [email protected]
• Dr Pallab Biswas The University of Otago - New Zealand [email protected]
• Dr Lien Duong Curtin University , Australia [email protected]
• Associate Professor Omar Al Farooque University of New England, Australia [email protected]
• Dr Ru (Tina) Gao The University of Queensland - Australia [email protected]
• Associate Professor Noor Houqe Massey University - New Zealand [email protected]
• Dr Fang Hu Griffith University, The Department of Accounting, Finance, and Economics - Australia [email protected]
• Dr Awad Ibrahim University of Portsmouth, UK [email protected]
• Dr Haiyan Jiang Macquarie University, Australia [email protected]
• Dr Habib Zaman Khan University of Canberra - Australia [email protected]
• Dr Bronwyn McCreddie Queensland University of Technology - Australia [email protected]
• Prof. Tam Nguyen Nottingham Trent University - UK [email protected]
• Dr Natasja Steenkamp University of Canterbury, New Zealand [email protected]
• Dr Effie Aswadi Abdul Wahab Curtin University of Technology - Australia [email protected]
• Dr. Daifei Yao Queensland University of Technology Business School - Australia [email protected]

Editorial Assistant

• Liz Marsland Australia [email protected]

Commissioning Editor

• Sophie Reckless Emerald Publishing - UK [email protected]

Journal Editorial Office (For queries related to pre-acceptance)

• Lavanya Darvesh Emerald Publishing [email protected]

Supplier Project Manager (For queries related to post-acceptance)

• Aarti Kakade Emerald Publishing [email protected]

Editorial Advisory Board

• Associate Professor Ismail Adelopo Bristol Business School - UK
• Professor Jacqueline Birt University of Western Australia, Australia
• Professor Tim Brailsford Bond University - Australia
• Professor Rob Brown University of Melbourne - Australia
• Professor Steven Cahan University of Auckland, New Zealand
• Professor Keryn Chalmers Swinburne University of Technology - Australia
• Associate Professor Howard Chan University of Melbourne - Australia
• Professor Peter Clarkson University of Queensland - Australia
• Professor Greg Clinch University of Melbourne - Australia
• Professor Paul De Lange University of Tasmania - Australia
• Professor Robert Faff Bond University - Australia
• Professor Doug Foster University of Sydney - Australia
• Professor Elizabeth A Gordon Temple University - USA
• Professor Janice How Queensland University of Technology - Australia
• Associate Professor Bryan Howieson University of Adelaide - Australia
• Professor Wm. Dennis Huber Capella University - USA
• Associate Professor Andrew Jackson The University of New South Wales - Australia
• Professor Pam Kent Queensland University of Technology - Australia
• Associate Professor Dr Sidney Leung City University of Hong Kong - Hong Kong
• Professor Martina Linnenluecke University of Technology Sydney - Australia
• Professor Markus Milne University of Canterbury - New Zealand
• Professor Gary Monroe The University of New South Wales, Australia
• Professor Vic Naiker University of Melbourne - Australia
• Associate Professor John Nowland Illinois State University - USA
• Research Professor Lee D. Parker University of Glasgow - UK
• Associate Professor Brad Potter University of Melbourne - Australia
• Emeritus Professor Christine Ryan Queensland University of Technology - Australia
• Professor Kerrie Sadiq Queensland University of Technology - Australia
• Professor John Sands University of Southern Queensland - Australia
• Professor Divesh Sharma Kennesaw State University - USA
• Professor Baljit Sidhu Sydney University - Australia
• Professor Tom Smith Macquarie University - Australia
• Professor Ann Tarca University of Western Australia - Australia
• Professor Sirimon Treepongkaruna University of Western Australia, Australia
• Associate Professor Peter Verhoeven Queensland University of Technology - Australia
• Professor Carla Wilkin Monash University - Australia
• Professor Sue Wright University of Technology Sydney - Australia
• Professor Stephen A Zeff Rice University - USA

Citation metrics

CiteScore 2023

Further information

CiteScore is a simple way of measuring the citation impact of sources, such as journals.

Calculating the CiteScore is based on the number of citations to documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, book chapters, and data papers) by a journal over four years, divided by the number of the same document types indexed in Scopus and published in those same four years.

For more information and methodology visit the Scopus definition

CiteScore Tracker 2024

(updated monthly)

CiteScore Tracker is calculated in the same way as CiteScore, but for the current year rather than previous, complete years.

The CiteScore Tracker calculation is updated every month, as a current indication of a title's performance.

2023 Impact Factor

The Journal Impact Factor is published each year by Clarivate Analytics. It is a measure of the number of times an average paper in a particular journal is cited during the preceding two years.

For more information and methodology see Clarivate Analytics

5-year Impact Factor (2023)

A base of five years may be more appropriate for journals in certain fields because the body of citations may not be large enough to make reasonable comparisons, or it may take longer than two years to publish and distribute leading to a longer period before others cite the work.

Actual value is intentionally only displayed for the most recent year. Earlier values are available in the Journal Citation Reports from Clarivate Analytics .

Publication timeline

Time to first decision

Time to first decision , expressed in days, the "first decision" occurs when the journal’s editorial team reviews the peer reviewers’ comments and recommendations. Based on this feedback, they decide whether to accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript.

Data is taken from submissions between 1st June 2023 and 31st May 2024

Acceptance to publication

Acceptance to publication , expressed in days, is the average time between when the journal’s editorial team decide whether to accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript and the date of publication in the journal. 

Data is taken from the previous 12 months (Last updated July 2024)

Acceptance rate

The acceptance rate is a measurement of how many manuscripts a journal accepts for publication compared to the total number of manuscripts submitted expressed as a percentage %

Data is taken from submissions between 1st June 2023 and 31st May 2024 .

This figure is the total amount of downloads for all articles published early cite in the last 12 months

(Last updated: July 2024)

This journal is abstracted and indexed by

• Accounting & Tax Periodicals (ProQuest)
• Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre (EBSCO)
• The British Library
• Business Source Alumni Edition/ Business Source Complete/ Business Source Complete Government Edition/ Business Source Corporate Plus/ Business Source Elite/ Business Source Main Edition/ Business Source Premier (EBSCO)
• Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunites in Accounting
• MainFile (EBSCO)
• OCLC – Electronic Collections Online
• Professional ProQuest Central/ ProQuest Central (ProQuest)
• ReadCube Discover
• TOC Premier (EBSCO)
• The Association of Business Schools' (ABS) Academic Journal Guide 2015 (the Guide)
• Australian Business Deans Council
• Australian Research Council (ERA Journal List)
• Polish Scholarly Bibliography (PBN)
• VHB-JOURQUAL (Category C)

Reviewer information

Peer review process.

This journal engages in a double-anonymous peer review process, which strives to match the expertise of a reviewer with the submitted manuscript. Reviews are completed with evidence of thoughtful engagement with the manuscript, provide constructive feedback, and add value to the overall knowledge and information presented in the manuscript.

The mission of the peer review process is to achieve excellence and rigour in scholarly publications and research.

Our vision is to give voice to professionals in the subject area who contribute unique and diverse scholarly perspectives to the field.

The journal values diverse perspectives from the field and reviewers who provide critical, constructive, and respectful feedback to authors. Reviewers come from a variety of organizations, careers, and backgrounds from around the world.

All invitations to review, abstracts, manuscripts, and reviews should be kept confidential. Reviewers must not share their review or information about the review process with anyone without the agreement of the editors and authors involved, even after publication. This also applies to other reviewers’ “comments to author” which are shared with you on decision.

Resources to guide you through the review process

Discover practical tips and guidance on all aspects of peer review in our reviewers' section. See how being a reviewer could benefit your career, and discover what's involved in shaping a review.

More reviewer information

Thank you to the 2023 Reviewers

The publishing and editorial teams would like to thank the following, for their invaluable service as 2023 reviewers for this journal. We are very grateful for the contributions made. With their help, the journal has been able to publish such high...

Thank you to the 2022 Reviewers

The publishing and editorial teams would like to thank the following, for their invaluable service as 2022 reviewers for this journal. We are very grateful for the contributions made. With their help, the journal has been able to publish such high...

Thank you to the 2021 Reviewers

The publishing and editorial teams would like to thank the following, for their invaluable service as 2021 reviewers for this journal. We are very grateful for the contributions made. With their help, the journal has been able to publish such high...

Introducing the new editor of ARJ: Professor Reza Monem

Emerald is pleased to introduce the new Editor-in-Chief of the Accounting Research Journal, Professor Reza Monem of Griffith University. Professor Monem succeeds Professor Ellie Chapple, who stepped down as Edi...

Literati awards

Accounting Research Journal - Literati Award Winners 2022

We are pleased to announce our 2022 Literati Award winners. Outstanding Paper The relationship between CEOs’...

Accounting Research Journal - Literati Awards 2021

We are pleased to announce our 2021 Literati Award winners. Outstanding Paper The effect of integrated repor...

Accounting Research Journal - Literati Award Winners 2020

We are pleased to announce our 2020 Literati Award winners. Outstanding Paper Is CSR performance related to disclosure tone in ...

ARJ provides a forum for communicating impactful research between professionals and academics on emerging areas in contemporary accounting research and practice.

Aims and scope

The Accounting Research Journal embraces a range of methodological approaches in identifying and solving significant prioritised accounting issues. Submissions are encouraged across all areas on accounting, finance and cognate disciplines.

It is strongly recommended that authors specifically address how their research addresses the priority areas and how it impacts those who the research intends to affect.

Priority areas:

• Descriptive data and commentary that addresses the accounting standard setting agenda
• Descriptive data and commentary that addresses changes to laws and regulations that affect business
• Dealing with regulators
• Reporting for the future – climate change, sustainability, natural environment
• Accounting and finance research that addresses UN Sustainable development goals
• Auditing for the future
• Accounting education – needs and trends
• The future of the profession, including the academic profession and professional practitioners
• Taxation policy and outcomes
• Forensic Accounting
• Fraud – identification & detection
• Corporate and behavioural governance
• Technology affecting accounting
• Alternative reporting formats
• Integrated reporting
• Accounting and e-business
• Non-financial reporting
• Non-financial performance measurement and reporting
• Corporate Governance 
• Business Ethics and Corporate Culture
• Financial reporting quality

Latest articles

These are the latest articles published in this journal (Last updated: July 2024)

Intellectual Capital and Subscription Rate: An Empirical Investigation in the Indian Initial Public Offering Market

Dead reckoning: charting a new (metaphorical) course for accounting, chatgpt: reflections from the uk higher education institutions, accountancy bodies and big4s, top downloaded articles.

These are the most downloaded articles over the last 12 months for this journal (Last updated: July 2024)

Remote auditing and its impacts on auditors' work and work-life balance: auditors' perceptions and implications

Fighting through the flesch and fog: the readability of risk disclosures, leveraging information communication technology (ict) and artificial intelligence (ai) to enhance auditing practices.

These are the top cited articles for this journal, from the last 12 months according to Crossref (Last updated: July 2024)

Is audit committee busyness associated with earnings management? The moderating role of foreign ownership

Does auditor ethnicity matter in determining audit fees some empirical evidence from indonesia, do founder ceos and overconfidence affect firm risk.

This title is aligned with our responsible management goal

We aim to champion researchers, practitioners, policymakers and organisations who share our goals of contributing to a more ethical, responsible and sustainable way of working.

Related journals

This journal is part of our Accounting, finance & economics collection. Explore our Accounting, finance & economics subject area to find out more.  

See all related journals

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal (AAAJ) is an interdisciplinary accounting research journal publishing...

Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance

The Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance is situated at the intersection of academic research and the practice...

Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management

Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management is an international journal that publishes qualitative research...

Business Research

Subject Area and Category

• Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Springer International Publishing AG

Publication type

21982627, 21983402

Information

The set of journals have been ranked according to their SJR and divided into four equal groups, four quartiles. Q1 (green) comprises the quarter of the journals with the highest values, Q2 (yellow) the second highest values, Q3 (orange) the third highest values and Q4 (red) the lowest values.

The SJR is a size-independent prestige indicator that ranks journals by their 'average prestige per article'. It is based on the idea that 'all citations are not created equal'. SJR is a measure of scientific influence of journals that accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from It measures the scientific influence of the average article in a journal, it expresses how central to the global scientific discussion an average article of the journal is.

Evolution of the number of published documents. All types of documents are considered, including citable and non citable documents.

This indicator counts the number of citations received by documents from a journal and divides them by the total number of documents published in that journal. The chart shows the evolution of the average number of times documents published in a journal in the past two, three and four years have been cited in the current year. The two years line is equivalent to journal impact factor ™ (Thomson Reuters) metric.

Evolution of the total number of citations and journal's self-citations received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. Journal Self-citation is defined as the number of citation from a journal citing article to articles published by the same journal.

Evolution of the number of total citation per document and external citation per document (i.e. journal self-citations removed) received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. External citations are calculated by subtracting the number of self-citations from the total number of citations received by the journal’s documents.

International Collaboration accounts for the articles that have been produced by researchers from several countries. The chart shows the ratio of a journal's documents signed by researchers from more than one country; that is including more than one country address.

Not every article in a journal is considered primary research and therefore "citable", this chart shows the ratio of a journal's articles including substantial research (research articles, conference papers and reviews) in three year windows vs. those documents other than research articles, reviews and conference papers.

Ratio of a journal's items, grouped in three years windows, that have been cited at least once vs. those not cited during the following year.

Evolution of the percentage of female authors.

Evolution of the number of documents cited by public policy documents according to Overton database.

Evoution of the number of documents related to Sustainable Development Goals defined by United Nations. Available from 2018 onwards.

Leave a comment

Name * Required

Email (will not be published) * Required

* Required Cancel

The users of Scimago Journal & Country Rank have the possibility to dialogue through comments linked to a specific journal. The purpose is to have a forum in which general doubts about the processes of publication in the journal, experiences and other issues derived from the publication of papers are resolved. For topics on particular articles, maintain the dialogue through the usual channels with your editor.

Follow us on @ScimagoJR Scimago Lab , Copyright 2007-2024. Data Source: Scopus®

Cookie settings

Cookie Policy

Legal Notice

Privacy Policy

• Navbar Menu Top Right Search

Accounting Horizons

A quarterly journal of the american accounting association.

About the Journal

Accounting Horizons is one of three association-wide journals published by the American Accounting Association (AAA). The journal’s primary objective is to publish rigorous research that addresses practice issues and problems, drawing on the best theory and methods in the academy to solve problems of real consequence.

Aims & Scope

Accounting Horizons Accounting Horizons is one of three association-wide journals published by the American Accounting Association (AAA). The journal aims to bridge accounting academics and non-academics (e.g., practitioners, regulators, and students) by publishing rigorous academic research and thought-provoking perspectives that are pertinent to the accounting profession. This thought-leadership contributes to building a learned profession for the future by addressing emerging issues, facilitating dialogues, and embracing changes.

The scope of acceptable topics mirrors the breath of the accounting profession in both U.S. and international settings. These topics include, but are not limited to:

• Accounting ethics
• Accounting information systems
• Assurance services
• Corporate governance
• Data analytics and related emerging technologies
• Diversity, equity, and inclusion
• Enterprise risk management
• Financial reporting
• Impact of accounting on organizations and individuals
• Managerial accounting and control
• Regulation of the profession and related legal developments
• Sustainability

The journal welcomes submissions of original academic research as well as commentaries, thought pieces, debates, historical reviews, and editorials (all referred to as “perspectives”). An original research paper should address a single timely research question that is important to accounting practice and be written in clear, concise, and plain language that is comprehensible to a broad audience. Authors are encouraged to use graphical presentations for effective communication. Acceptable research methods include analytical, archival, experimental, and qualitative methods as well as literature reviews. A research paper accepted for publication will generally be within 20 pages of text (double-spaced, 12-point font, and normal margins) and 35 pages in total. The journal encourages author teams to involve non-academics in research production. The senior editor may commission original research and perspectives. Editors may be appointed to direct some of the commissioned efforts.

All submitted articles will be peer reviewed. Articles that address an especially timely topic will be evaluated on an expedited basis. The journal intends to distinguish itself from other academic accounting journals by its broad reach of audience, relevance to accounting practice, research rigor, and swift review process.

AAA Member Submission Fee

Submission to First Decision Time

4 Issues Per Year

Publishing Schedule

Acceptance to Publication Time

Senior Editor

Editorial office.

DANIEL AOBDIA, The Pennsylvania State University, Smeal College of Business, University Park, PA, USA.

LISA BAUDOT, HEC Paris, Dept. of Accounting and Management Control, Jouy-en-Josas, France

LORI SHEFCHIK BHASKAR, Indiana University Bloomington, Kelley School of Business, Bloomington, IN, USA

JOSEPH F. BRAZEL, North Carolina State University, Dept. of Accounting, Raleigh, NC, USA

JENNIFER L. BROWN, Arizona State University, School of Accountancy, Tempe, AZ, USA

HELEN BROWN-LIBURD, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Dept. of Accounting and Information Systems, Newark, NJ, USA

ANTHONY BUCARO, Case Western Reserve University, Dept. of Accountancy, Cleveland, OH, USA

JEFFREY J. BURKS, University of Notre Dame, Dept. of Accountancy, Notre Dame, IN, USA

STEFANO CASCINO, London School of Economics and Political Science, Dept. of Accounting, London, UK

MARGARET H. CHRIST, University of Georgia, J. M. Tull School of Accounting, Athens, GA, USA

PAUL J. CORAM, The University of Adelaide–North Terrace Campus, Business School, Adelaide, SA, Australia

LAUREN CUNNINGHAM, The University of Tennessee, Dept. of Accounting and Information Management, Knoxville, TN, USA

ALESSANDRO GHIO, ESCP Business School, Management Control Department, Paris, France

STEPHANIE M. GRANT, University of Washington, Dept. of Accounting, Seattle, WA, USA

MARCUS P. KIRK, University of Florida, Fisher School of Accounting, Gainesville, FL, USA

RANJANI KRISHNAN, Michigan State University, Broad College of Business, Dept. of Accounting and Information Systems, East Lansing, MI, USA

HENOCK LOUIS, The Pennsylvania State University, Dept. of Accounting, University Park, PA, USA

STEPHEN J. LUSCH, University of Kentucky, Von Allmen School of Accountancy, Lexington, KY, USA

LINDA A. MYERS, The University of Tennessee, Dept. of Accounting and Information Management, Knoxville, TN, USA

KAREN K. NELSON, Texas Christian University, Dept. of Accounting, Fort Worth, TX, USA

ANDREA ALSTON ROBERTS, University of Virginia, McIntire School of Commerce, Charlottesville, VA, USA

ANUP SRIVASTAVA, University of Calgary, Haskayne School of Business, Calgary, AB, Canada

ISABEL YANYAN WANG, Michigan State University, Dept. of Accounting and Information Systems, East Lansing, MI, USA

DAVID A. WOOD, Brigham Young University, School of Accountancy, Provo, UT, USA

AARON YOON, Northwestern University, Kellogg School of Management, Chicago, IL, USA

HENG YUE, Singapore Management University, School of Accountancy, Singapore

Ad Hoc Editors

GORD GRAHAM, Ernst & Young Canada, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

PAUL A. GRIFFIN, University of California, Davis, Dept. of Management, Winters, CA, USA

RAMU THIAGARAJAN, State Street Bank and Trust Company, Boston, MA, USA

WAYNE B. THOMAS, The University of Oklahoma, Dept. of Accounting, Norman, OK, USA

SENYO TSE, Texas A&M University, Dept. of Accounting, College Station, TX, USA

Guest Editors

JOHN BARRIOS, Washington University in St. Louis, Olin Business School, Dept. of Accounting, St. Louis, MO, USA

PAUL E. MADSEN, University of Florida, Fisher School of Accounting, Gainesville, FL, USA

Editorial Board

KRISTIAN D. ALLEE, University of Arkansas, William Dillard Dept. of Accounting, Fayetteville, AR, USA

KEVAL AMIN, Stony Brook University, College of Business, Stony Brook, NY, USA

LINDSAY M. ANDIOLA, Virginia Commonwealth University, Dept. of Accounting, Richmond, VA, USA

IONELA ANDREICOVICI, Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, Dept. of Accounting, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

DENIZ APPELBAUM, Montclair State University, Accounting and Finance, Montclair, NJ, USA

DIANE-LAURE ARJALIÈS, Western University, Ivey Business School, Dept. of Accounting, London, Ontario, Canada

MUSAIB ASHRAF, Michigan State University, Dept. of Accounting, East Lansing, MI, USA

ANN G. BACKOF, University of Virginia, McIntire School of Commerce, Charlottesville, VA, USA

PIETRO BIANCHI, Florida International University, Dept. of Accounting, Miami, FL, USA

BRIAN BRATTEN, University of Kentucky, Von Allmen School of Accountancy, Gatton College of Business & Economics, Lexington, KY, USA

JENNA BURKE, University of Colorado Denver, Business School, Denver, CO, USA

DONAL A. BYARD, Baruch College–CUNY, Dept. of Accounting, New York City, NY, USA

WEI CAI, Columbia University, Business School, Dept. of Accounting, New York City, NY, USA

THOMAS G. CANACE, Wake Forest University, School of Business, Dept. of Accountancy, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

JIAN CAO, Florida Atlantic University, School of Accounting, Boca Raton, FL, USA

YING CAO, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, School of Accountancy, Shatin, Hong Kong,

TINA D. CARPENTER, University of Georgia, J. M. Tull School of Accounting, Athens, GA, USA

CORY A. CASSELL, University of Arkansas, Accounting, Fayetteville, AR, USA

JEFF ZEYUN CHEN, Texas Christian University, Neeley School of Business, Fort Worth, TX, USA

JONGWOON (WILLIE) CHOI, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Dept. of Accounting and Information Systems, Madison, WI, USA

SUNHWA CHOI, Seoul National University, College of Business Administration, Dept. of Accounting, Seoul, South Korea

KIRSTEN A. COOK, Texas Tech University, Terry Lyons School of Accounting, Lubbock, TX, USA

MICHELLE DRAEGER, Colorado State University, Dept. of Accounting, Fort Collins, CO, USA

SCOTT DUELLMAN, Saint Louis University, Chaifetz School of Business, St. Louis, MO, USA

LUMINITA ENACHE, University of Calgary, Haskayne School of Business, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

SCOTT A. EMETT, Arizona State University, School of Accountancy, W. P. Carey School of Business, Tempe, AZ, USA

KURT GEE, The Ohio State University, Fisher College of Business, Dept. of Accounting & Management Information Systems, Columbus, OH, USA

CHRISTINE GIMBAR, DePaul University, Dept. of Accounting & MIS, Chicago, IL, USA

NATHAN C. GOLDMAN, North Carolina State University, Dept. of Accounting, Raleigh, NC, USA

EMILY GRIFFITH, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Dept. of Accounting & Information Systems, Wisconsin School of Business, Madison, WI, USA

ERIN L. HAMILTON, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Dept. of Accounting, Las Vegas, NV, USA

JOHN RUSS HAMILTON, Southern Methodist University, Dept. of Accounting, Dallas, TX, USA

NOEL HARDING, UNSW Sydney, School of Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Sydney, NSW, Australia

NANCY L. HARP, Clemson University, School of Accountancy, Clemson, SC, USA

CHRISTIE HAYNE, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Accountancy, Champaign, IL, USA

MOUNA HAZGUI, HEC Montréal, Dept. of Accounting, Montréal, Québec, Canada

DANA R. HERMANSON, Kennesaw State University, School of Accountancy, Kennesaw, GA, USA

MAX HEWITT, The University of Arizona, Dhaliwal-Reidy School of Accountancy, Tucson, AZ, USA

LISA A. HINSON, University of Florida, Fisher School of Accounting, Gainesville, FL, USA

LIKE JIANG, The University of Melbourne, Dept. of Accounting, Carlton, VIC, Australia

BRET A. JOHNSON, George Mason University, Dept. of Accounting, Centreville, VA, USA

MARTIN KAPONS, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Dept. of Accounting, Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands

CHRISTO KARUNA, Monash University, Dept. of Accounting, Clayton, VIC, Australia

TODD KRAVET, University of Connecticut, Dept. of Accounting, Storrs, CT, USA

ETHAN LAMOTHE, University of Central Florida, Kenneth G. Dixon School of Accounting, Orlando, FL, USA

PHILIPPE LASSOU, University of Guelph, Gordon S. Lang School of Business and Economics, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

LIAN FEN LEE, Boston College, Dept. of Accounting, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA

JACOB LEIDNER, Julius-Maximilians-Universitat Wurzburg, Dept. of Business Management, Würzburg, Bavaria, Germany

TING LUO, Tsinghua University School of Economics and Management, Dept. of Accounting, Beijing, China

DANIEL P. LYNCH, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Dept. of Accounting, Madison, WI, USA

TRACIE M. MAJORS, University of Southern California, Dept. of Accounting, Santa Monica, CA, USA

MARY MARSHALL, Portland State University, School of Business, Boring, OR, USA

MELISSA MARTIN, University of Illinois Chicago, Dept. of Accounting, Chicago, IL, USA

ADI MASLI, University of Kansas, Dept. of Accounting, Lawrence, KS, USA

STEPHANI MASON, DePaul University, School of Accountancy and MIS, Chicago, IL, USA

PAUL N. MICHAS, The University of Arizona, Eller College of Management, Dept. of Accounting, Tucson, AZ, USA

LASSE NIEMI, Aalto University, Dept. of Accounting, Espoo, Finland

JING PAN, The Pennsylvania State University, Smeal College of Business, Dept. of Accounting, University Park, PA, USA

LINDA M. PARSONS, The University of Alabama, Culverhouse School of Accountancy, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

MARIETTA PEYTCHEVA, Lehigh University, Dept. of Accounting, Bethlehem, PA, USA

JEFFREY PICKERD, Brigham Young University, School of Accountancy, Provo, UT, USA

ANDREA M. ROMI, Texas Tech University Jerry S Rawls College of Business Administration, Lyons School of Accounting, Lubbock, TX, USA

ANDREA ROZARIO, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Accountancy, Champaign, IL, USA

TAMMIE J. SCHAEFER, University of Missouri–Kansas City, Dept. of Accountancy, Kansas City, MO, USA

ROY SCHMARDEBECK, University of Tennessee, College of Business Administration, Dept. of Accounting and Information Management, Knoxville, TN, USA

JOSEPH H. SCHROEDER, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Bloomington, IN, USA

TIMOTHY A. SEIDEL, Brigham Young University, School of Accountancy, BYU Marriott School of Business, Provo, UT, USA

GUOMAN SHE, The University of Hong Kong, Law and Accounting, Pokfulam, NA, Hong Kong

ROSHAN SINHA, Indiana University Bloomington, Dept. of Accounting, Bloomington, IN, USA

CHAD M. STEFANIAK, University of South Carolina, School of Accounting, Columbia, SC, USA

DERRALD STICE, The University of Hong Kong, Accounting Area, Faculty of Business and Economics, Hong Kong,

OKTAY URCAN, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Accountancy, Champaign, IL, USA

SCOTT D. VANDERVELDE, University of South Carolina, School of Accounting, Columbia, SC, USA

ANN VANSTRAELEN, Universiteit Maastricht, Dept. of Accounting and Information Management, Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands

GNANAKUMAR VISVANATHAN, George Mason University, School of Business, Fairfax, VA, USA

KIMBERLY WALKER, Virginia Tech, Dept. of Business, Blacksburg, VA, USA

DANA WALLACE, University of Central Florida, Kenneth G. Dixon School of Accounting, Orlando, FL, USA

STEPHANIE WALTON, Louisiana State University, Dept. of Accounting, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

P. BARRETT WHEELER, Tulane University, Freeman School of Business, Dept. of Accounting, New Orleans, LA, USA

JENNIFER L. WINCHEL, University of Virginia, McIntire School of Commerce, Charlottesville, VA, USA

NICOLE S. WRIGHT, James Madison University, School of Accounting, Harrisonburg, VA, USA

XINNING XIAO, Monash University, Dept. of Accounting, Caulfield East, Victoria, Australia

RONG ZHAO, University of Calgary, Dept. of Accounting, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

QINLIN ZHONG, Fudan University, School of Management, Shanghai, China

FRANK (SHUANG) ZHOU, University of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Accounting, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Access Details

This journal can be accessed via the AAA's Digital Library . AAA Members receive full access as a benefit of their membership . Non-AAA Members can purchase articles for $25.

ISSN 0888-7993 / EISSN 1558-7975

Calls for papers, from students to professional accountants: the accounting profession pipeline.

Special Call of Accounting Horizons Deadline: December 31, 2024

2025 Haskayne and Fox Accounting Conference

Deadline: January 15, 2025

International Accounting Standards Board Research Forum 2025 in conjunction with Accounting Horizons

Deadline: March 31, 2025

Discerning interrelationships among management accounting systems, organizational variables, and managerial performance

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 27 August 2024
• Volume 4 , article number  102 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Elsa Pedroso   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3755-6822 1 , 2 &
• Carlos F. Gomes   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7071-8833 1  

151 Accesses

Explore all metrics

In today’s global market, information plays a determinant role in the competitiveness of business organizations. Information systems have become essential resources in daily management, strategy development, and implementation. In this context, management accounting systems (MAS) have undergone substantial changes to adapt to new technological and environmental realities and have become an increasingly valuable instrument to support managers’ decision-making processes. Nevertheless, managers may not effectively leverage the information provided by MAS to enhance the quality of their decisions and, consequently, their overall performance. Discrepancies in research outcomes suggest a potential oversight in analyzing other organizational variables through which MAS might impact managerial performance. Based on an extensive literature review, we identified a scarcity of recent research focusing on three variables that could potentially mediate the relationship between MAS and managerial performance. These variables are intricately linked to people-oriented aspects and include the accountants’ involvement in strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring, user satisfaction with the information supplied by MAS, and the decentralization of decision-making processes. To address this gap, we used the finite mixture - partial least squares (FIMIX-PLS) to discern the interrelationships among the variables in the research model. The results highlight how the interaction between firm characteristics can enhance the use of MAS in managers’ decision support and consequently improve their performance. This research provides relevant theoretical contributions to the debate about different organizational environments and their influence on MAS effectiveness. It also offers managerial implications for business organizations that need to design, implement, and use management accounting systems.

Similar content being viewed by others

Management Accounting and Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM): Some Illustrative Examples

The case of partial least squares (pls) path modeling in managerial accounting research.

Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

In today’s fierce competition, effective information management is a pivotal concern for organizations aiming to thrive in the global market. Managers of these organizations require consistently updated and trustworthy information regarding various facets of their company to adeptly strategize and oversee operational activities. Additionally, access to external information is crucial for swiftly adapting to market dynamics and aligning resources with the overarching corporate strategy (Latifah et al. 2021 ). As such, information systems are essential in daily management, strategy development, and implementation. In this context, organizations must adopt Management Accounting Systems (MAS), which encompasses information beyond productivity (Sharma et al. 2006 ). The development and implementation of MAS should prioritize the type and quality of information they deliver (Ghasemi et al. 2019 ). Achieving this goal is a complex undertaking, particularly considering the unique organizational dynamics of each firm (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ), along with the contemporary challenges associated with digital capabilities (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ) and environmental compliance (Solovida and Latan 2017 ).

The relationship between the use of MAS and performance has been extensively studied. However, the results are not consensual, whether because of how the dependent variable is measured (Hammad et al. 2013 ; Ismail et al. 2018 ), how the MAS is measured (Agbejule 2005 ; Ghasemi et al. 2019 ), or even because of the differences in study context (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Hammad et al. 2013 ). In addition, business organizations face new challenges relating to technological capabilities (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ) and environmental requirements (Solovida and Latan 2017 ).

Nevertheless, managers may not consistently harness the full potential of MAS, meaning they may not effectively leverage the information provided by MAS to enhance the quality of their decisions and, consequently, their overall performance. Discrepancies in research outcomes suggest a potential oversight in analyzing other organizational variables through which MAS might impact managerial performance.

Based on an extensive literature review, we identified a scarcity of recent research focusing on three variables that could potentially mediate the relationship between MAS and managerial performance that specifically pertain to issues associated with people-oriented aspects: (i) the accountants’ participation in strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring, (ii) the user satisfaction with information provided by MAS, and (iii) the decentralization of decision-making processes.

In today’s competitive environment, accountants have transcended their traditional role as mere information providers for managerial decision-making (Rieg 2018 ). Instead, they are actively engaged in formulating strategies, thereby enhancing the quality of information and augmenting their influence in the management of SMEs (ten Rouwelaar et al. 2021 ; Jackson et al. 2022 ).

The structure of the MAS and the characteristics of the information it provides influence user satisfaction, contributing to greater utilization in the decision-making process (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ) and consequently improving performance.

Regarding decision-making processes, firms have experienced substantial transformations to enhance their responsiveness to market competition. The growing digitization of processes has changed organizational structures, making it easier to decentralize decision-making and enhance employee autonomy (Knudsen 2020 ; Kretschmer and Khashabi 2020 ). Consequently, decentralizing decision-making has become a strategic tool for organizations to navigate market volatility effectively (Ghorbel 2019 ).

To address these research gaps, we intend to answer the following questions:

RQ1: How does the management accounting system contribute to managerial performance? RQ2: How organizational people-oriented aspects and firm characteristics influence the relationship between MAS and managerial performance.

Based on a comprehensive literature review, this study takes a contingency theory approach to analyze the relationships in the following research framework (Fig.  1 ).

Research framework

We will use the finite mixture - partial least squares (FIMIX-PLS) with a sample of two hundred and fifty-five Portuguese firms to discern the interrelationships among the variables in the research framework.

This study offers three significant contributions to management literature, particularly to management accounting systems subjects. First, this study combines four informational dimensions of management accounting systems (integration, aggregation, scope, and timeliness), generating theoretical evidence of how to use people-related organizational aspects to increase managerial performance, thus supporting the proposition of adjustment as a mediation of contingency theory.

Second, this study explores how firm characteristics constrain factors, shaping the framework for management accounting systems and influencing people’s effectiveness.

Third, the research model’s design and comprehensiveness enable the examination of previously unexplored mediating and moderating effects in the management literature. This contribution extends the discourse on diverse organizational environments, emphasizing their significance in implementing an effective management accounting system and their potential implications for supporting managers’ decision-making.

This study also offers significant practical implications to managers of business organizations, helping them design/redesign, and implement effective management accounting systems when they face significant challenges in adapting their processes to the requirements of sustainable development.

The following section presents the literature review and the research hypotheses. The third section presents the sample and data collection, measurement items, and analysis methods. The fourth section presents and discusses the results. The last section emphasizes the main findings, the implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.

Background and hypotheses development

The relationship between management accounting systems and managerial performance.

In the increasingly volatile economic environment, management accounting is one of the essential instruments managers use to support their decisions (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ; Oyewo et al. 2021 ). It plays a fundamental role by providing information to make more conscious and informed decisions and feedback on these decisions. Managers realized the importance of the information provided having multidimensional characteristics to ensure the competitiveness of their organizations (Maelah et al. 2021 ). These systems can significantly influence managerial and organizational performance (Hoozée and Mitchell 2018 ).

Management accounting systems can be described in terms of four essential information dimensions: (i) scope, (ii) timeliness, (iii) aggregation, and (iv) integration (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ). The information’s focus, quantification, and time horizon are associated with the scope dimension, which could be smaller or larger (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Hammad et al. 2013 ). External financial or non-financial information is associated with a more extensive scope dimension (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Sharma et al. 2006 ). Traditional accounting systems, which include internal, financial, and historical data, are related with smaller scope dimension (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Fong and Quaddus 2010 ).

The frequency and speed of reporting are correlated with the timeliness dimension (Fong and Quaddus 2010 ). It may also be associated with the availability of information upon request (Hammad et al. 2013 ) and the speed at which standardized or customized information is received (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ). According to Chenhall and Morris ( 1986 ), MAS can report current events and offer quick decision feedback with access to timely information.

The information systematization by period, functional areas, or formats compliant with formal decision models is associated with the aggregation dimension (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Hammad et al. 2013 ). Managers can get information about other departments using data compiled at the functional level (Fong and Quaddus 2010 ).

The ability to define specific goals for various activities and their interrelationships within the sub-units and the reporting of intra-sub-unit interactions are associated with the integration dimension (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ). According to Hammad et al. ( 2013 ), the integration assists multiple coordinate segments within a sub-unit and deals with data related to cross-functional boundaries.

Chenhall and Morris ( 1986 ) created a tool to test each of these dimensions to assess the informational characteristics of MAS, and several authors used it. Nonetheless, several researchers have used this tool in different ways. Some authors (e.g., Hariyati et al. 2019 ; Le et al. 2020 ; Liem and Hien 2020 ; Ngo 2020 ) chose to measure MAS using all four dimensions, while others (e.g., Chang et al. 2003 ; Heidmann et al. 2008 ; Ghorbel 2019 ) chose to use just a few or even just one (e.g., Naranjo-Gil and Hartmann 2007 ; Harrison 2009 ; Nguyen et al. 2017 ; Do et al. 2020 ) of the dimensions.

Several connections between MAS dimensions and other business factors have been researched since its creation. MAS information dimensions have been studied as independent variables (Chang et al. 2003 ; Agbejule 2005 ; Mollanazari and Abdolkarimi 2012 ), as dependent variables (Chenhall and Morris 1986 ; Bouwens and Abernethy 2000 ; Chiou 2011 ), and occasionally both dependent and independent variables (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Etemadi et al. 2009 ; Ghasemi et al. 2019 ). The results for the same relationships analyzed in different studies are not consensual. They seem to be influenced by the number of items used to measure each dimension and the internal and external circumstances.

Pedroso and Gomes ( 2020 ) recently proposed and validated Chenhall and Morris ( 1986 ) instrument using a multidimensional approach. In this new approach, MAS is measured with a second-order construct comprised of four first-order constructs: scope, timeliness, aggregation, and integration. This multidimensional instrument allows measuring MAS as a single system, which includes the four dimensions. It will also enable comparison results from different studies that use this multidimensional instrument (Pedroso and Gomes 2020 ).

Management accounting systems play a significant role in performance management and measurement. The available information often defines the performance measures that allow an effective performance measurement process (Chenhall and Smith 2011 ). This relationship also arises from the assumption that management accounting may influence managerial performance by providing information to improve decision-making processes (Chong 2004 ; Agbejule 2005 ; Sharma et al. 2006 ; Hall 2008 ; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Hammad et al. 2013 ).

In this context, the following hypothesis is formulated:

Hypothesis 1

The use of information provided by MAS positively influences managerial performance.

The role of accountant participation in strategic decisions

Global changes in the market and the utilization of Enterprise Resource Planning systems have required accountants to change the nature of the information they provide and their role in strategic decision-making (Caglio 2003 ; Phillips 2004 ; Oyewo 2021 ). Now, they are not limited to providing information for managers’ decisions but begin participating in strategic decision-making processes (Järvenpää 2007 ; Aver and Cadez 2009 ; Annuar and Ismail 2014 ; Thaller et al. 2024 ). As such, we should avoid simple labels for the functions of management accountants (Rieg 2018 ).

In the new digital organizational realities, accountants will be more prominent as intelligence agents, advising, communicating, and closely linking the company’s activities to strategic decision-making (Garanina et al. 2021 ).

According to the literature, firms with the highest participation of the accountant in the strategic decision-making process follow a more analytical and market-oriented strategy (Cadez and Guilding 2012 ), influencing strategic and operational decisions (ten Rouwelaar et al. 2018 ).

Accountants now assume roles other than only reporting financial information (Arora et al. 2021 ), extending their activity, and acting as strategic business partners (Hoyle 2012 ; ten Rouwelaar et al. 2021 ; Venkatesh et al. 2023 ). In competitive contexts, the activities carried out by accountants can be adjusted to promote innovation and help effectively implement companies’ strategies (Lee and Wang 2020 ).

Overall, it seems that management accountants now face the responsibility of multiple roles and need multiple skills (Rieg et al. 2023 ). These skills enable them to be more effective directly and indirectly through their ability to influence managerial performance (ten Rouwelaar et al. 2021 ). In this context, the following hypotheses are formulated:

Hypothesis 2

Accountant participation in strategic decisions directly and positively impacts managerial performance.

Hypothesis 3

Management accounting systems directly and positively impact accountant participation in strategic decisions.

The role of the user satisfaction with MAS information

User satisfaction can be defined as the users’ confidence level in using an information system to meet their information needs. These users assess several aspects based on their experience relating to their expectations, including system and information quality and utilization (Fleischman et al. 2010 ; Weli 2014 ; Gaardboe et al. 2017 ).

Regarding the effect of system quality on user satisfaction, we found a lack of consensus in the literature. While some authors supported this relationship (Hsu et al. 2015 ; Al-Okaily et al. 2021 ), others rejected it (Al-Mamary 2020 ; Davarpanah and Mohamed 2020 ). Concerning the influence of information quality on user satisfaction, the literature is consensual in supporting this relationship (Rai et al. 2002 ; Ghanem and Sulaiman 2016 ; Laumer et al. 2017 ). Concerning the influence of information system usage on user satisfaction, we also found a lack of consensus in the literature. While some authors found statistical significance for this effect (Weli 2014 ; Okour et al. 2019 ), others rejected it (Marjanovic et al. 2016 ; Ratna et al. 2020 ).

The information quality attributes include relevance, precision, reliability, understandability, accuracy, conciseness, completeness, currency, timeliness, and usability (Cohen and Kaimenaki 2011 ; Petter et al. 2013 ; Pavlatos and Kostakis 2021 ). Using information with positive values for these attributes increases user satisfaction and can improve the quality of decision processes, influencing managerial performance (Weli 2014 ; Gaardboe et al. 2017 ; Okour et al. 2019 ). However, we also found contradictory results for this effect (Al-Hattami 2021 ).

As a result of the above discussion, the following hypotheses are formulated:

Hypothesis 4

User satisfaction with management accounting information directly and positively impacts managerial performance.

Hypothesis 5

Management accounting systems directly and positively impact user satisfaction with the information they provide.

The role of decentralization of decision-making processes

The decentralization of decision-making power can be defined as the level of autonomy delegated to managers, giving them greater responsibility for planning and controlling activities (Waterhouse and Tiessen 1978 ), which can be seen as the empowerment process of these managers (Conger and Kanungo 1988 ).

Following a life-cycle approach, firms are more decentralized at the birth stage. As they enter the growth stage, this decentralization slightly decreases until it becomes moderate in maturity (Moores and Yuen 2001 ).

The management accounting literature has studied the relationship between the decentralization of decision-making and several variables related to performance and management accounting (Luft and Shields 2003 ; Herschung et al. 2018 ). Regarding the relationship between decentralization and performance, we can find a positive association with organizational performance (Hoque 2011 ). We also found that the decentralization of decision-making processes does not directly influence managers’ performance (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ).

Regarding the relationship between decentralization and management accounting, we can find a positive association with sophisticated management accounting practices (Abdel-Kader and Luther 2008 ; Al-Dhubaibi and Kamal 2014 ). This result suggests that firms with more decentralized structures may need more sophisticated information to support their decision-making processes.

Based on the literature review, it seems consensual that there is a positive relationship between decentralization and the implementation, sophistication, and availability of MAS information (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Fuadah et al. 2020 ; Ngo 2020 ; Nguyen et al. 2023 ). However, if it is true that the decentralization of decision-making processes influences MAS information, it is also possible the opposite causal direction (Luft and Shields 2003 ).

The decentralization of decision-making implies that lower-level managers have more information to improve their decisions. As such, management accounting systems that provide relevant information can drive the decentralization of decision-making processes. As a result of the above discussion, the following hypotheses are formulated:

Hypothesis 6

Decentralization of decision-making processes directly and positively impacts managerial performance.

Hypothesis 7

Management accounting systems directly and positively impact the decentralization of decision-making processes.

Methodology

Sample and data collection.

To select our sample, we sought assistance from the Portuguese representative of Dun & Bradstreet Worldwide Network. Specifically, we requested a random sample comprising 1500 organizations to represent the Portuguese enterprises’ population adequately. Each of these enterprises was contacted by phone to elucidate the research study’s objectives and acquire the name of their Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Despite multiple attempts, twelve enterprises did not respond to our calls. Additionally, ninety-three enterprises declined to participate in the research study, citing reasons such as cessation of operations and a lack of autonomy to respond to the questionnaire.

Consequently, we sent an email to 1407 CFOs of Portuguese SMEs, outlining the research’s purpose and providing a link to the online survey. To encourage participation, CFOs were offered an incentive in the form of a summary of the research findings.

We received 297 responses, 50 of which were incomplete (Table  1 ). The sample was adjusted due to the non-response pattern of some incomplete questionnaires and the option of responding “not applicable” to some items of “Managerial performance”.

Concerning the non-response pattern, we excluded all cases that did not present any response to any of the items of a variable (Hair et al. 2014 ).

Regarding the possibility of respondents answering “not applicable” to eight items in the questionnaire, we eliminated cases with more than 50% of “not applicable” responses (Evans et al. 2002 ). The remainder were treated as missing values (Gillespie 2005 ) and replaced by the average, per case, of the responses to the remaining items of “Managerial performance” (Salmon 2013 ).

After the procedures described above, we had 255 usable responses, representing a response rate of 18.12%. Even though the response rate was not too high, it is identical to similar studies (Cleary 2015 ; Martins et al. 2019 ). Table  2 shows the sample characteristics.

Instrument and variable measurement

The research questionnaire for measuring the variables in this study was drawn from a systematic literature review. Because the original questions were in English, we translated them into Portuguese and adapted the research instrument to the local business environment.

The final questionnaire includes thirty-eight items (presented in Table  3 ) used to measure the constructs of the research model. Each item represents an observed variable, measured with a 7-point Likert scale.

We use the multidimensional instrument proposed and validated by Pedroso and Gomes ( 2020 ) to measure MAS. The 14-item instrument measures the 4 MAS dimensions: scope, timeliness, aggregation, and integration. The participants were asked to evaluate how often they used information with specific characteristics in their daily decision-making activities (from 1 – Never to 7 – Always).

A construct developed by Mahoney et al. ( 1963 ) and adapted for several studies (e.g., Agbejule 2005 ; Sharma et al. 2006 ; Hall 2008 ) was used for evaluating managerial performance. Based on a 9-item instrument, the CFOs were asked to self-evaluate (from 1 – Unacceptable to 7 – Excellent) their overall performance and their performance in specific activities (planning, investigating, coordinating, evaluating, supervising, staffing, negotiating, and representing). The managers could answer “not applicable” for each item except for the overall performance.

User satisfaction with MAS information was measured through a construct developed by Doll and Torkzadeh ( 1988 ) and adapted by several authors (e.g., Rai et al. 2002 ; Fong and Quaddus 2010 ; Macinati and Anessi-Pessina 2014 ). A 5-item instrument was used to measure managers’ degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the information provided by MAS (from 1 – Completely dissatisfied to 7 – Completely satisfied).

To measure the decentralization of the decision-making process, we used the 5-item construct developed by Gordon and Narayanan ( 1984 ) and used by several authors (e.g., Abdel-Kader and Luther 2008 ; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ). It asked participants to assess the degree of decentralization of decision-making in different situations in their firm (from 1 – Very low to 7 – Very high).

To assess accountants’ participation in the decision-making process, we used the 5-item construct developed by Wooldridge and Floyd ( 1990 ), adopted in several research studies (e.g., Cadez and Guilding 2008 ; Cadez and Guilding 2012 ). Participants were asked to rate the degree of accountant participation in each item (from 1 – Very low to 7 – Very high).

The type of industry and size of the company were used as control variables. To measure the type of industry, participants were asked to indicate the 2-digit NACE of their activity. To measure the size of the company, participants were asked to indicate the approximate number of workers in the following ranges: less than 10, between 10 and 49, between 50 and 99, between 100 and 149, between 150 and 199, between 200 and 249 and more than 250.

Data analysis

Consistent with the study’s objectives, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was applied to test the research hypotheses. This statistical method was used due to the complexity of the research model (Hair et al. 2017 ; Usakli and Kucukergin 2018 ).

Data analysis comprised three phases. The measurement model was assessed for reliability and validity in the first phase. Constructs’ indicator reliability, internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity were examined. In the second phase, the results of the structural model were analyzed. The moderation effect of firm characteristics on the model relationship was analyzed in the third phase. The PLS-MGA method (Henseler et al. 2009 ) was used to examine whether a single or several latent firm characteristics moderate the structural relationships of the research model. The finite mixture PLS (FIMIX-PLS) was employed to capture and identify the unobserved heterogeneity of the sample. All the analyses were performed using the IBM-SPSS Statistics version 25 and SmartPLS 3.2.6 (Ringle et al. 2015 ).

Results and discussion

Measurement model.

The measurement model was initially evaluated concerning construct reliability. All the measurement items presented outer loadings above or close to 0.70 (Table  3 ), the recommended threshold (Hair et al. 2011 ). Moreover, the Cronbach’s alpha values and the Composite Reliability (CR) obtained for each construct exceed 0.7, indicating sufficient construct reliability. All the average variance extracted (AVE) values were higher than the recommended threshold of 0.5, suggesting that each construct’s measurement items share a significant amount of variance.

Concerning discriminant validity analysis, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations was used (Hair et al. 2017 ; Usakli and Kucukergin 2018 ). All HTMT values are below 0.90 (Table  4 ), establishing the discriminant validity of the constructs (Henseler et al. 2015 ).

As for the management accounting system construct, the loadings of the first-order constructs on the second-order construct indicate that the utilization of the management accounting system can be measured as a second-order construct reflecting the four MAS dimensions.

Regarding common method variance, we found no significant concerns about common method bias based on the results of Harman’s single-factor test and the Common Latent Factor approach (Podsakoff et al. 2003 ).

Structural model

The structural model results, using a bootstrapping procedure with 5.000 resamples, are presented in Table  5 .

The f 2 values consistently show a positive orientation, maintaining a uniform rank order of path coefficients. This pattern implies that paths with larger statistically significant coefficients are associated with larger effect sizes. The value of R 2 (0.34) is considered moderate to explain the improvement in managerial performance influenced by using MAS (Hair et al. 2013 ). Based on the results of the structural model, the direct effect of management accounting systems on the decentralization of decision-making processes was non-significant ( p  > 0.05), which means that H7 is not supported. All the remaining hypotheses are supported.

The effect of firm characteristics

To test the moderating effect of the company size, we analyzed two groups: small and medium-sized enterprises. We did not obtain any significant difference in the relationships of the research model. To test the industry’s moderating effect, we analyzed Manufacturing and Wholesale groups of enterprises. The results did not show any significant difference in the relationships of the research model.

Given the results, we decided to explore the possibility that companies’ intangible characteristics may be moderating the relationships of the research model. For this purpose, the FIMIX-PLS procedure was used to uncover latent segments of SMEs, following the systematic approach suggested by Hair et al. ( 2016 ). First, according to the results of this procedure, two groups of firms were found to be the most suitable solution (Table  6 ), confirming the heterogeneity of the sample.

Second, to explain the latent group structure, all the variables relating to firm characteristics were used to identify one or more that match the two-segment FIMIX-PLS partition. Therefore, cross-table analysis regarding these variables was used to assign group descriptors (Ringle et al. 2010 ). None of the firm characteristics was found to show a suitable fit with FIMIX-PLS segmentation results. However, we found small differences in some industries (manufacturing, construction, and retail) and the firms’ size (Table  7 ).

The three most represented industries in Group A are Manufacturing, Wholesale and retailing, and Construction; in Group B, they are Manufacturing, Wholesale and retailing, and Transportation and storage. Although only one of these three sectors differs between groups, the main differences are in the common sectors. Thus, there are more Wholesale and retailing firms in Group A, and in Group B, there are more Manufacturing firms.

In a more fine-tuned data analysis, we found that group A includes a predominance of firms using processes in which human intervention is more intense than group B.

We also found that group A includes more large firms (100 to 249 workers) and fewer small firms (10 to 99 workers) than group B.

Although we have not identified the exact causes for the existence of different groups, it is essential to verify whether firms of these two groups have different behaviors regarding the use of MAS and the consequent positive influence on managerial performance. As such, we used a multi-group analysis (MGA) to assess the moderating effect of firm characteristics on the relationships between MAS and managerial performance. The MICOM procedure was used to analyze the measurement invariance. Based on the results, the partial measurement invariance was verified, which is the requirement for comparing and interpreting the group-specific differences of MGA results (Henseler et al. 2016 ). The results lead us to believe that other variables not included in the questionnaire will be decisive in differentiating the two groups’ behavior.

The MGA results for the two groups of firms, using a bootstrapping procedure with a resampling of 5000, are presented in Table  8 .

Both models have predictive relevance according to the Q 2 results, which are all positive. The values of f 2 are all positive and follow a similar rank order of the path coefficients, which means that large significant path values correspond to large effect sizes (Hair et al. 2013 ). Finally, the value of SRMR = 0.079 shows that the model has a good fit.

The results of the multi-group analysis show differences between the two groups of firms. For group A, the effect of accounting participation on managerial performance was not significant, not supporting H2. The effect of decentralization on managerial performance was also not significant, not supporting H4. All the remaining hypotheses were supported. These results show that the effect of management accounting on managerial performance is partially mediated by user satisfaction with MAS information.

For Group B, the effect of user satisfaction on managerial performance was not significant, not supporting H6. All the remaining hypotheses were supported. The effect of MAS on managerial performance through accountant participation is significant. However, it cannot be considered a mediating effect as it has a VAF below the limit (Nitzl et al. 2016 ). Therefore, for the companies in Group B, only the decentralization of decisions mediates the relationship between MAS and managerial performance.

This study discerns the interrelationships among management accounting systems, organizational variables, and managerial performance. As such, we explore a group of variables that could help MAS improve managerial performance in SMEs. These variables are the accountant’s participation in strategic decisions, user satisfaction, and decentralization of decision-making processes. Although the literature on management accounting did not yet test the mediating effect of these variables on the relationship between MAS and managerial performance, we expected a significant result based on the findings of individual effect components presented by the literature in several organizational contexts, including SMEs.

Regarding the positive influence of MAS on managerial performance, our results confirm the findings of several studies for large companies (e.g., Chong 2004 ; Sharma et al. 2006 ; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Etemadi et al. 2009 ). On the other hand, Agbejule ( 2005 ) rejects it.

Concerning the influence of decentralization on managerial performance, our study did not find significance for this relationship, corroborating the results of Soobaroyen and Poorundersing ( 2008 ).

Also, in this research, two distinct groups of firms were pinpointed, each displaying unique features and perspectives regarding utilizing Management Accounting Systems (MAS) and its influence on managerial performance. These groups also exhibited distinguishing factors that serve as mediators in the relationship between the utilization of multifaceted MAS information and the enhancement of managerial performance. Consequently, it implies the presence of organizational variables related to people, through which the utilization of MAS information will increase managers’ performance.

After analyzing the results, we discerned a group of firms (Group A), primarily encompassing larger organizations with a significant human presence in operational processes. These firms are predominantly included in three key industries: Manufacturing, Wholesale and retail trade, and Construction. Notably, within these firms, users’ satisfaction with the information provided by management accounting systems emerged as a crucial mediating factor (Fig.  2 ). This mediation substantially contributes to refining the decision-making process, resulting in higher performance among managers.

Mediation effects in larger, labor-intensive business organizations

In firms characterized by intricate processes involving substantial human interaction, the importance of user satisfaction with MAS becomes more pronounced. In this context, the satisfaction derived from reliable, relevant, accurate, precise, and complete information is crucial in improving managerial performance.

Group B consists primarily of smaller firms with less pronounced human components in the operational processes, distributed predominantly across the Manufacturing, Wholesale and Retail Trade, and Transportation and Storage industries. Unlike the other group, the decentralization of decisions (Fig.  3 ) plays a mediating role, thus improving managers’ performance.

Mediation effects in smaller, less labor-intensive business organizations

In this scenario, utilizing management accounting information can enhance managerial performance by facilitating decentralized decision-making in critical domains, including product development, human resources management, investment management, budget allocation, and pricing decisions.

Both groups of firms exhibit a direct, positive, and statistically significant impact of Management Accounting Systems (MAS) on managerial performance. This impact is measured across multiple dimensions, encompassing planning, investigating, coordinating, evaluating, supervising, staffing, negotiating, and representing. Notably, these results underscore the acknowledged importance of leveraging management accounting information for decision support, a notion well-documented in the literature (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing 2008 ; Rasid et al. 2014 ; Liem and Hien 2020 ; Ngo 2020 ). Furthermore, they elucidate that this impact emanates from the broad and multidimensional characteristics inherent in MAS.

The results also show that MAS positively influences all three people-related organizational variables in both groups, which means that MAS provides reliable information for people working in these firms. However, using that information by accountants who participate in strategic decisions is not a significant mediator in improving managerial performance.

Overall, the results of this study suggest that firms, regardless of their activity, should be concerned with users’ satisfaction with MAS information. This satisfaction could be the only way they will continue to use MAS information to improve their performance and, consequently, could increase organizational performance (Weli 2014 ).

In the current competitive environment, managers of business organizations need reliable information to support them, both in daily operational decisions and in developing corporate strategy (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu 2018 ; Oyewo et al. 2021 ). For this purpose, MAS has a preponderant role in helping them improve organizational performance (Hoozée and Mitchell 2018 ; Bui et al. 2023 ). As such, business organizations should also pay special attention to involving accountants in strategic management processes, as their skills and knowledge can contribute to organizational performance (Janin 2017 ; Venkatesh et al. 2023 ; Thaller et al. 2024 ).

Conclusions and implications

Business organizations face fierce competition to sell on global markets. In order to continue to compete in these markets, companies need management accounting systems that analyze, integrate, and provide financial and non-financial information to help them overcome the major challenges they face. These systems allow it to collect internal information and provide external information at all organizational levels, thus bringing departmental managers closer to customers’ needs.

Based on a comprehensive review of the literature on management accounting, we found that MAS does not always significantly influence managerial performance. To fill this gap, we analyzed the effect of MAS on managerial performance, exploring the role of people-related variables and organizational characteristics. The results of this study offer the following main theoretical and practical contributions and suggestions for future research.

Theoretical contributions

First, our findings suggest that although MAS directly affects managerial performance, using some people-related organizational resources can mediate it. This finding means that they contribute to explaining the relationship between the effective use of MAS and increased managerial performance. As far as we know, based on the literature reviewed, these relationships have not yet been studied. Although several studies have called for more research into the relationship between MAS and performance, the empirical evidence of this relationship is limited and does not even exist when measured in a systemic approach. Therefore, delving into these novel relationships represents a substantial shift in our comprehension of MAS effectiveness within organizational contexts. This approach involves reshaping the causal maps that underlie contingency theory, offering a revised and more nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics influencing MAS outcomes.

Secondly, our findings enhance the comprehension of these causal maps by confirming that company characteristics can influence the nature of the mediation exerted by the variables under investigation on the relationship between MAS effectiveness and managerial performance. The data analysis revealed that user satisfaction with MAS information significantly enhances managerial performance in larger, labor-intensive companies. Conversely, MAS enhances managerial performance in smaller, less labor-intensive companies by fostering the decentralization of decision-making processes. This latter revelation may signify a paradigm shift in the decision-making processes of business organizations.

Thirdly, the design and scope of the research model allow for the examination of mediating and moderating effects previously unexplored in the management literature. These findings support the contingency theory proposition of fit as mediation. In light of this theory, our study shows that companies with a more effective MAS can achieve significantly higher manager performance if they attach more value to decentralizing decisions and user satisfaction. As such, they extend previous research that only identified the individual relationships of these variables with MAS without testing the mediating effect.

Practical contributions

Organizations require both internal and external information across all functional departments. The ability of these companies to endure recent crises positions them as winners, and their attributes emerge as critical factors in competitiveness.

Our empirical study provides valuable insights into the interaction dynamics between management accounting systems (MAS) and organizational variables related to people. Notably, our findings carry various implications for enhancing the performance of company managers.

First and foremost, in decision-making, managers must move away from traditional centralization approaches and initiate decentralization processes. Our findings emphasize that employing Management Accounting Systems (MAS) information to facilitate decentralization correlates with enhancing managerial performance. Through this approach, departmental managers gain access to current market information, empowering them to respond efficiently to customer requests and foresee competitors by innovating in tune with customer needs.

Secondly, our research highlights the significance of ensuring user satisfaction with the information delivered by the MAS. These findings bear implications for managers, emphasizing the necessity to promote adequate user training. Through this training initiative, users can actively contribute to updating information within the MAS, ultimately boosting their contentment with its functionalities.

Finally, our research reveals that while the management accounting systems encourage accountants’ involvement in the strategic process, this participation does not necessarily translate into enhanced managerial performance. This finding holds important implications for accountants, suggesting a need to shift their role within companies from mere information organizers to active corporate strategy and operations contributors. Improving the quality of the information provided to managers becomes pivotal. Moreover, these results carry implications for managers, urging them to enhance communication with accountants by actively involving them in decision-making processes.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

Like any research endeavor, this study has its limitations. Despite being comparable to similar studies, the sample size constrained a more comprehensive analysis, limiting the examination of control variables, including the industry’s impact on management accounting system utilization. It is important to acknowledge that the sample employed in this study is specific to Portuguese companies, warranting caution in generalizing the results. Additionally, the research methodology adopted in this study hinders an in-depth analysis of each company’s specific organizational characteristics and their correlation with MAS.

Future research could employ alternative methods, such as case studies and qualitative research approaches, to scrutinize critical variables influencing MAS effectiveness, such as MAS types, accountant profiles and tasks, manager profiles and tasks, and organizational structure. Furthermore, future research endeavors should prioritize analyzing how MAS can impact organizational performance. This includes delving into the potential mediating effects of managerial performance and exploring the moderating influences of internal variables like the degree of digitalization within companies and external variables such as perceived environmental uncertainty. Such investigations would contribute valuable insights to understanding the intricate relationships between MAS, managerial effectiveness, and broader organizational outcomes.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Abdel-Kader M, Luther R (2008) The impact of firm characteristics on management accounting practices: A UK-based empirical analysis. Br Account Rev 40(1):2–27. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0890838907000911

Agbejule A (2005) The relationship between management accounting systems and perceived environmental uncertainty on managerial performance: a research note. Acc Bus Res 35(4):295–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2005.9729996

Article   Google Scholar  

Al-Dhubaibi AAS, Kamal I (2014) Contingencies influencing management accounting practice: a Yemen-based empirical study. Asia-Pacific Manage Acc J 9(2):69–84

Google Scholar  

Al-Hattami HM (2021) Validation of the D&M IS success model in the context of accounting information system of the banking sector in the least developed countries. Journal of Management Control (0123456789). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-020-00310-3

Al-Mamary YHS (2020) Using structural equation modeling approach to investigate the impact of technological factors on user satisfaction. Qual-Access Success 21(178):90–95

Al-Okaily A, Al-Okaily M, Ping A, Al-Mawali T, H. and, Zaidan H (2021) An empirical investigation of enterprise system user satisfaction antecedents in Jordanian commercial banks. Cogent Bus Manage 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1918847

Annuar HA, Ismail Y (2014) The involvement of accountants in corporate strategy in Malaysia: a stewardship theory perspective. Corp Ownersh Control 11(3):130–143. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv11i3p10

Arora MP, Lodhia S, Stone G (2021) Enablers and barriers to the involvement of accountants in integrated reporting. Meditari Account Res. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2020-1102

Aver B, Cadez S (2009) Management accountants’ participation in strategic management processes: a cross-industry comparison. J East Eur Manage Stud 14(3):310–322. https://doi.org/10.5771/0949-6181-2009-3-310

Bouwens J, Abernethy MA (2000) The consequences of customization on management accounting system design. Acc Organ Soc 25(3):221–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00043-4

Bui HQ, Hoai TT, Tran HA, Nguyen NP (2023) Performance implications of the interaction between the accountants’ participation in strategic decision-making and accounting capacity. J Asian Bus Economic Stud 30(1):67–81. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABES-04-2022-0087

Cadez S, Guilding C (2008) An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency model of strategic management accounting. Account Org Soc 33(7–8):836–863. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0361368208000044 [Accessed: 28 March 2014]

Cadez S, Guilding C (2012) Strategy, strategic management accounting and performance: a configurational analysis. Industrial Manage Data Syst 112(3):484–501. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02635571211210086 Available at: [Accessed: 31 March 2014]

Caglio A (2003) Enterprise Resource Planning systems and accountants: towards hybridization? Eur Acc Rev 12(1):123–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963818031000087853

Chang RD, Chang YW, Paper D (2003) The effect of task uncertainty, decentralization and AIS characteristics on the performance of AIS: an empirical case in Taiwan. Inform Manage 40(7):691–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00097-6

Chenhall R, Morris D (1986) The impact of structure, Environment, and interdependence on the Perceived usefulness of Management Accounting systems. Acc Rev LXI (1):16–35

Chenhall R, Smith D (2011) A review of Australian management accounting research: 1980–2009. Accounting & Finance 51(1), 173–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2010.00371.x

Chiou B (2011) Which types of management accounting system information can be used to respond adequately to environmental uncertainty? The effects of user participation and tolerance of ambiguity. Afr J Bus Manage 5(34):13293–13301. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM11.2207

Chong VK (2004) Job-relevant information and its role with task uncertainty and management accounting systems on managerial performance. Pac Account Rev 16(2):1–22. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01140580410818496

Cleary P (2015) An empirical investigation of the impact of management accounting on structural capital and business performance. J Intellect Capital 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2014-0114

Cohen S, Kaimenaki E (2011) Cost accounting systems structure and information quality properties: an empirical analysis. J Appl Account Res 12(1):5–25. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09675421111130586 [Accessed: 22 April 2014]

Conger JA, Kanungo RN (1988) The empowerment process: integrating theory and practice. Acad Manage Rev 13(3):471–482. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1988.4306983

Davarpanah A, Mohamed N (2020) Human resources information systems implementation and influences in higher education: evidence from Malaysia. Int J Asian Bus Inform Manage 11(3):65–84. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJABIM.2020070105

Do TH, Le HM, Luong DTT, Tran QT (2020) Relationship between the management accounting information usage, market orientation and performance: evidence from vietnamese tourism firms. J Asian Finance Econ Bus 7(10):707–716. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.707

Doll WJ, Torkzadeh G (1988) The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS Q 12(June):259–273

Etemadi H, Dilami ZD, Bazaz MS, Parameswaran R (2009) Culture, management accounting and managerial performance: Focus Iran. Advances in Accounting 25(2), 216–225. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0882611009000327 [Accessed: 29 March 2014]

Evans KR, Schlacter JL, Schultz RJ, Gremler DD, Pass MW, Wolfe WG (2002) Salesperson and sales manager perceptions of salesperson job characteristics and job outcomes: A perceptual congruence approach. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 10(4), 30–44. http://www.gremler.net/personal/research/2002_Saleserson_Perceptual_Congruence_JMTP.pdf

Fleischman G, Walker K, Johnson E (2010) A field study of user versus provider perceptions of management accounting system services. Int J Acc Inform Manage 18(3):252–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/18347641011068992

Fong SCC, Quaddus M (2010) Intranet use in Hong Kong public hospitals. Int J Account Inf Manag 18(2):156–181. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/18347641011048138 [Accessed: 5 May 2014]

Fuadah LL, Safitri RH, Yuliani Y, Arisman A (2020) Determinant factors’ impact on managerial performance through management accounting systems in Indonesia. J Asian Finance Econ Bus 7(10):109–117. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.109

Gaardboe R, Sandalgaard N, Nyvang T (2017) An assessment of business intelligence in public hospitals. Int J Inform Syst Project Manage 5(4):5–18. https://doi.org/10.12821/ijispm050401

Garanina T, Ranta M, Dumay J (2021) Blockchain in accounting research: current trends and emerging topics. Accounting, auditing and accountability Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2020-4991

Ghanem NB, Sulaiman S (2016) Management accounting system, information quality and organizational performance: evidence from Libya. Asia Pasific Manage Acc J 11(2):1–24

Ghasemi R, Habibi HR, Ghasemlo M, Karami M (2019) The effectiveness of management accounting systems: evidence from financial organizations in Iran. J Acc Emerg Economies 9(2):182–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-02-2017-0013

Ghorbel J (2019) A study of contingency factors of accounting information system design in Tunisian SMIs. J Knowl Econ 10(1):74–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-016-0439-8

Gillespie TL (2005) Internationalizing 360-degree feedback: are subordinate ratings comparable? J Bus Psychol 19(3):361–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-004-2233-z

Gordon La, Narayanan VK (1984) Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and organization structure: an empirical investigation. Acc Organ Soc 9(1):33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(84)90028-X

Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2011) PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J Mark Theory Pract 19(2):139–151. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202

Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2013) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). First edit. SAGE, Thousand Oaks

Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2014) Multivariate data analysis. Seventh ed. Pearson Education Limited, Harlow

Hair JF, Sarstedt M, Matthews LM, Ringle CM (2016) Identifying and treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: part II – a case study. Eur Bus Rev 28(1):63–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-09-2015-0094

Hair JF, Hollingsworth CL, Randolph AB, Chong AYL (2017) An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Industrial Manage Data Syst 117(3):442–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-04-2016-0130

Hall M (2008) The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society 33(2–3), 141–163. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0361368207000244 [Accessed: 24 March 2014]

Hammad SA, Jusoh R, Ghozali I (2013) Decentralization, perceived environmental uncertainty, managerial performance and management accounting system information in Egyptian hospitals. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management 21(4), 314–330. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/ https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-02-2012-0005 [Accessed: 5 December 2014]

Hariyati H, Tjahjadi B, Soewarno N (2019) The mediating effect of intellectual capital, management accounting information systems, internal process performance, and customer performance. Int J Productivity Perform Manage 68(7):1250–1271. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2018-0049

Harrison JL (2009) Untangling the value of information scope: an investigation in retail pharmacies. J Manage Organ 15(4):470–485. https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.15.4.470

Heidmann M, Schäffer U, Strahringer S (2008) Exploring the role of management accounting systems in strategic sensemaking. Information Systems Management 25(3):244–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530802151194%5Cn http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=32964978&site=ehost-live

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Adv Int Mark 20:277–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(92)90003-4

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci 43(1):115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Henseler J, Hubona G, Ray PA (2016) Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial Manage Data Syst 116(1):2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382

Herschung F, Mahlendorf MD, Weber J (2018) Mapping quantitative management accounting research 2002–2012. J Manag Account Res 30(1):73–141. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-51745

Hoozée S, Mitchell F (2018) Who influences the design of management accounting systems? An exploratory study. Australian Acc Rev 28(3):374–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12193

Hoque Z (2011) The relations among competition, delegation, management accounting systems change and performance: A path model. Advances in Accounting 27(2):266–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2011.05.006 [Accessed: 29 March 2014]

Hoyle R (2012) Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling. First edit. The Guilford Press. https://books.google.pt/books?id=4s7SAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA269&lpg=PA269&dq=how+to+deal+with+%22not+applicable%22+scale+%22structural+equation%22&source=bl&ots=1hOXEg8Ukx&sig=q7usEugqJX3DTUIuVARrfjKXloo&hl=pt-PT&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwippL-ko8jJAhUD0xQKHaZuAKQQ6AEIWzAI #

Hsu PF, Yen HJR, Chung JC (2015) Assessing ERP post-implementation success at the individual level: Revisiting the role of service quality. Information and Management 52(8), 925–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.06.009

Ismail K, Isa CR, Mia L (2018) Evidence on the usefulness of management accounting systems in integrated manufacturing environment. Pacific Accounting Review 30(1):2–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-04-2015-0010

Jackson D, Michelson G, Munir R (2022) New technology and desired skills of early career accountants. Pac Acc Rev. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-04-2021-0045

Janin F (2017) When being a partner means more: The external role of football club management accountants. Management Accounting Research 35, 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2016.05.002

Järvenpää M (2007) Making business partners: a case study on how management accounting culture was changed. Eur Acc Rev 16(1):99–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180701265903

Knudsen DR (2020) Elusive boundaries, power relations, and knowledge production: A systematic review of the literature on digitalization in accounting. Int J Account Inf Syst 36:100441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2019.100441

Kretschmer T, Khashabi P (2020) Digital transformation and organization design: an integrated approach. Calif Manag Rev 62(4):86–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620940296

Latifah L, Setiawan D, Aryani YA, Rahmawati R (2021) Business strategy – MSMEs’ performance relationship: innovation and accounting information system as mediators. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 28(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-04-2019-0116

Laumer S, Maier C, Weitzel T (2017) Information quality, user satisfaction, and the manifestation of workarounds: a qualitative and quantitative study of enterprise content management system users. Eur J Inform Syst 26(4):333–360. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41303-016-0029-7

Le HM, Nguyen TT, Hoang TC (2020) Organizational culture, management accounting information, innovation capability and firm performance. Cogent Business and Management 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1857594

Lee CL, Wang WY (2020) Strategy, accountants’ activities and new product development performance. Adv Acc 50:100487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2020.100487

Liem VT, Hien NN (2020) Exploring the impact of dynamic environment and CEO’s psychology characteristics on using management accounting system. Cogent Business and Management 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1712768

Luft J, Shields MD (2003) Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research. Acc Organ Soc 28:169–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1751-3243(06)01002-9

Macinati MS, Anessi-Pessina E (2014) Management accounting use and financial performance in public health-care organisations: Evidence from the Italian National Health Service. Health Policy. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0168851014000840 [Accessed: 22 April 2014]

Maelah R, Al Lami MFF, Ghassan G (2021) Usefulness of management accounting information in decision making among SMEs: the moderating role of cloud computing. Asia-Pacific Manage Acc J 16(1):59–92. https://doi.org/10.24191/apmaj.v16i1-04

Mahoney TA, Jerdee TH, Caroll SJ (1963) Development of managerial performance: a research approach. South-Western, Cincinnati, OH

Marjanovic U, Delić M, Lalic B (2016) Developing a model to assess the success of e-learning systems: evidence from a manufacturing company in transitional economy. IseB 14(2):253–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-015-0282-7

Martins R, Oliveira T, Thomas M, Tomás S (2019) Firms’ continuance intention on SaaS use – an empirical study. Inform Technol People 32(1):189–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-2018-0027

Mollanazari M, Abdolkarimi E (2012) The effects of task, organization and accounting information systems characteristics on the accounting information systems performance in Tehran stock exchange. Int J Innov Manage Technol 3(4):443–448. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIFE.2010.5609459

Moores K, Yuen S (2001) Management accounting systems and organizational configuration: a life-cycle perspective. Acc Organ Soc 26(4–5):351–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(00)00040-4

Naranjo-Gil D, Hartmann F (2007) Management accounting systems, top management team heterogeneity and strategic change. Acc Organ Soc 32(7–8):735–756

Ngo Q-H (2020) Effectiveness of management accounting system in public healthcare sector: an empirical investigation in Vietnam. Asian J Bus Acc 13(2):147–179. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajba.vol13no2.6

Nguyen TT, Mia L, Winata L, Chong VK (2017) Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance. Journal of Business Research 70:202–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.018

Nguyen TH, Nguyen DT, Nguyen TA, Nguyen CD (2023) Impacts of contingency factors on the application of strategic management accounting in Vietnamese manufacturing enterprises. Cogent Business & Management 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2218173

Nitzl C, Roldan JL, Cepeda G (2016) Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modelling, helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Manage Data Syst 116(9):1849–1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302

Okour MK, Chong CW, Asmawi A (2019) Antecedents and consequences of knowledge management systems usage in Jordanian banking sector. Knowl Process Manage 26(1):10–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1586

Oyewo BM (2021) Outcomes of interaction between organizational characteristics and management accounting practice on corporate sustainability: the global management accounting principles (GMAP) approach. J Sustainable Finance Invest 11(4):351–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2020.1738141

Oyewo B, Vo XV, Akinsanmi T (2021) Strategy-related factors moderating the fit between management accounting practice sophistication and organisational effectiveness: the Global Management Accounting Principles (GMAP) perspective. Revista Espanola de Financiacion y Contabilidad 50(2):1–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02102412.2020.1774857

Pavlatos O, Kostakis H (2021) Exploring the relationship between target costing functionality and product innovation: the role of Information systems. Australian Acc Rev (July):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12349

Pedroso E, Gomes CF (2020) The effectiveness of management accounting systems in SMEs: a multidimensional measurement approach. J Appl Acc Res 21(3):497–515

Petter S, Delone W, McLean ER (2013) Information systems success: the quest for the independent variables. J Manage Inform Syst 29(4):7–62. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290401

Phillips PA (2004) E-business planning and accountants: the balance with performance. Int J Bus Perform Manage 6(1):43–55. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2004.004116

Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903

Rai A, Lang SS, Welker RB (2002) Assessing the validity of IS success models: an empirical test and theoretical analysis. Inform Syst Res 13(1):50–69. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96

Rasid SZA, Isa CR, Ismail WKW (2014) Management accounting systems, enterprise risk management and organizational performance in financial institutions. Asian Rev Acc 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-03-2013-0022

Ratna S, Utami HN, Astuti ES, Wilopo, Muflih M (2020) The technology tasks fit, its impact on the use of information system, performance and users’ satisfaction. VINE J Inform Knowl Manage Syst 50(3):369–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-10-2018-0092

Rieg R (2018) Tasks, interaction and role perception of management accountants: evidence from Germany. J Manag Control 29(2):183–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-018-0266-0

Rieg R, Meier JH, Finckh C (2023) Beware of the watchdog! Role communication in job advertisements for management accountants. J Appl Acc Res 24(5):889–909. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-07-2022-0188

Rikhardsson P, Yigitbasioglu O (2018) Business intelligence & analytics in management accounting research: status and future focus. Int J Acc Inform Syst 29(April):37–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2018.03.001

Ringle CM, Sarstedt M, Mooi EA (2010) Response-based segmentation using finite mixture partial least squares. In: Stahlbock R, Crone SF, Lessmann S (eds) Data Mining: Special Issue in annals of Information systems. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp 19–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1280-0_2 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Ringle CM, Wende S, Becker (2015) J.-M. SmartPLS 3.

Salmon S (2013) Role ambiguity as a mediator of the effect of integrative management information on managerial performance: an empirical study in Australia. Int J Manage 30(1):175–193

Sharma R, Jones S, Ratnatunga J (2006) The relationships among broad scope MAS, managerial control, performance, and job relevant information: a concomitant analysis. Rev Acc Finance 5(3):228–250. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/14757700610686435 Available at: [Accessed: 30 April 2014]

Solovida GT, Latan H (2017) Linking environmental strategy to environmental performance: mediation role of environmental management accounting. Sustain Acc Manage Policy J 8(5):595–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-08-2016-0046

Soobaroyen T, Poorundersing B (2008) The effectiveness of management accounting systems: Evidence from functional managers in a developing country. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02686900810839866 [Accessed: 6 April 2014]

ten Rouwelaar H, Bots J, De Loo I (2018) The influence of management accountants on managerial decisions. J Appl Acc Res 19(4):442–464. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-10-2016-0101

ten Rouwelaar H, Schaepkens F, Widener SK (2021) Skills, influence, and effectiveness of management accountants. J Manag Account Res 33(2):211–235. https://doi.org/10.2308/JMAR-18-048

Thaller J, Duller C, Feldbauer-Durstmüller B, Gärtner B (2024) Career development in management accounting: empirical evidence. J Appl Acc Res 25(1):42–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-03-2022-0062

Usakli A, Kucukergin KG (2018) Using partial least squares structural equation modeling in hospitality and tourism: do researchers follow practical guidelines? Int J Contemp Hospitality Manage 30(11):3462–3512. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230910978511

Venkatesh R, Riley J, Eldridge S, Lawson RA, Church KS (2023) Management accounting—A rising star in the curriculum for a globally integrated, technology-driven business age. Issues Acc Educ 38(4):109–129. https://doi.org/10.2308/ISSUES-2021-058

Waterhouse JH, Tiessen P (1978) A contingency framework for management accounting systems research. Acc Organ Soc 21(4):65–76

Weli W (2014) Manager satisfaction in using the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system and managerial performance. Australasian J Inform Syst 18(3):119–135

Wooldridge B, Floyd SW (1990) The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strateg Manag J 11(3):231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(90)90349-9

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This work has been funded by national funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, IP, through project UIDB/05037/2020 with DOI https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/05037/2020 .

Open access funding provided by FCT|FCCN (b-on).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Economics, Univ Coimbra, CeBER, Av Dias da Silva 165, Coimbra, 3004-512, Portugal

Elsa Pedroso & Carlos F. Gomes

Polytechnic University of Coimbra, Coimbra Business School|ISCAC, Bencanta, Coimbra, 3045-601, Portugal

Elsa Pedroso

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Data collection was performed by Elsa Pedroso, and analysis was performed by Elsa Pedroso and Carlos F. Gomes. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Carlos F. Gomes, and all authors commented on previous versions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elsa Pedroso .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

This study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

All respondents were over the age of 18 and provided informed consent to participate in the study.

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non−financial interests to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Pedroso, E., Gomes, C.F. Discerning interrelationships among management accounting systems, organizational variables, and managerial performance. SN Bus Econ 4 , 102 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-024-00702-w

Download citation

Received : 11 April 2023

Accepted : 08 August 2024

Published : 27 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43546-024-00702-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Management accounting systems
• Decision-making
• Managerial performance
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research