Artikel 1

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 53 (2024) 100678
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Accounting

Information Systems
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/accinf
Disentangling the effects of top management on management

accounting systems utilization☆
Elsa Pedroso a, b, *, Carlos F. Gomes a
a
Univ Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Av Dias da Silva 165, 3004-512 Coimbra, Portugal
b
Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, Coimbra Business School, Quinta Agrícola - Bencanta, 3045-231 Coimbra, Portugal
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Top managers have a decisive role in managing business organizations, including linking the
Management accounting systems effective use of their organizational resources with the corporate strategy. This study aims to
Decision-making analyze the influence of top management support on the utilization of management accounting
MAS users
systems (MAS) in SMEs. For this purpose, we explored the mediating role of four variables related
Top management support
SMEs
to organizational decision-making orientation and user issues and concerns. The findings of our
study suggest that top management can use these variables to improve the utilization of the in
formation provided by MAS in the SMEs’ decision processes. They also show the decisive role of
user satisfaction and training in improving MAS utilization. We discuss these findings and present
theoretical and practical contributions to the management accounting literature.
1. Introduction
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) significantly contribute to world economic growth, representing 99,8 % of all busi
nesses in European countries, including Portugal (Gorgels et al., 2022). During past economic crises, SMEs showed high resilience and
the ability to transform themselves and adapt to the global market’s needs. With fewer financial and human resources than large
companies, SMEs resort to innovative organizational solutions, making them less formal, more agile, and consequently more
competitive. These characteristics were decisive in overcoming their most significant challenges during the pandemic COVID crisis
when they were forced to change their processes and rapidly integrate digital technology (Perdana et al., 2022) while increasing
competitiveness.
In this competitive context, information management is a central issue for managers of SMEs who want to compete in the global
marketplace. These managers need frequently updated and reliable information about their company’s functional areas to plan and
control operational activities effectively. They also need external information to quickly respond to market changes and align their
resources with their corporate strategy (Latifah et al., 2021).
Therefore, SMEs should have management accounting systems (MAS) that include information with these characteristics and are
not restricted only to productivity and costs (Sharma et al., 2006). The MAS development and utilization also need to be focused on the
type and quality of the information they should provide (Ghasemi et al., 2019). Given the specific organizational nature of each SME
and the recent challenges relating to digital capabilities (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu, 2018) and environmental requirements
☆
This work has been funded by national funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., Project UIDB/05037/2020.
* Corresponding author at: Univ Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Av Dias da Silva 165, 3004-512 Coimbra, Portugal.
E-mail address: [email protected] (E. Pedroso).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2024.100678
Received 26 February 2022; Received in revised form 9 December 2023; Accepted 27 February 2024
Available online 3 March 2024
1467-0895/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
E. Pedroso and C.F. Gomes International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 53 (2024) 100678
(Solovida and Latan, 2017), this is not an easy task.

In this context, management accounting systems (MAS) have undergone substantial changes to adapt to new technological and
environmental realities (Chenhall and Moers, 2015) and have become an increasingly valuable instrument to support the managers’
decision-making processes (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008).
Several organizational factors can improve MAS and, consequently, the quality of decision processes. The top managers’ support
(TMS) for their implementation and use is one of the most relevant contributions to achieving high effectiveness levels of MAS (Firk
et al., 2019). In a highly competitive context where continuous improvement of resources and processes is essential, TMS plays a
critical role in reducing barriers to change (Chanegrih, 2008). It can contribute to the development and use of the MAS through
technological innovation (Clohessy and Acton, 2019). It also can play a decisive role in integrating and using environmental infor
mation, which is one of the most important competitive factors today (Wang et al., 2019b).
However, TMS does not always extract the same levels of effectiveness from MAS or even achieve the planned objectives. These
differences in the research results may indicate the lack of analysis of other organizational variables through which top managers
influence the increasing use of information MAS provides.
Based on a comprehensive literature review, we found a lack of recent research on four variables that could mediate the rela
tionship between TMS and MAS. These variables relate to decision-making orientation and MAS users’ issues and concerns.
From the perspective of decision-making orientation, SMEs have undergone significant organizational changes to respond more
effectively to market competition. The increasing digitalization of processes has changed the organizational design, facilitating the
decentralization of decision-making and increasing employees’ autonomy (Knudsen, 2020; Kretschmer and Khashabi, 2020). In the
case of SMEs, the decentralization of decisions, which was mostly studied in the context of large organizations (e.g., Chenhall and
Morris, 1986; Hammad et al., 2013; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008), became an instrument for SMEs to respond to market
volatility (Ghorbel, 2019). In the current competitive context, accountants are no longer mere information providers for managers’
decision-making process, becoming actively involved in strategy formulation (Rieg, 2018). This way, they improve the information
quality and increase their influence in managing SMEs (Jackson et al., 2022; ten Rouwelaar et al., 2021).
From the perspective of MAS users, SMEs face increasing challenges. They need to provide technical training for the design and
implementation of the MAS and how to update and use the information related to the most recent competitive issues, including new
environmental innovation practices (Gomez-Conde et al., 2019) and ethical challenges (van der Kolk, 2019). We also verified that the
satisfaction of MAS users could increase the use of the information provided by these systems and consequently increase the quality of
decisions (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu, 2018).
Despite a solid body of research on the relationship between TMS and various organizational resources and processes, studies are
scarcer when we focus more specifically on SMEs. Therefore, additional empirical evidence is needed to disentangle the relationship
between TMS and the use of MAS, specifically in the context of SMEs. For this purpose, we will explore the mediation role of these two
groups of variables.
Our study takes a contingency theory approach to analyze the relationships in the following research framework (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1. Research framework.
2
The data used to analyze this framework came from a sampling of 255 Portuguese small and medium enterprises.
This paper is structured as follows. Section two presents the literature review and the development of hypotheses. Section three
provides the research methodology, while section four presents and discusses the results. Finally, section five presents the conclusions,
implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.
2. Literature review and hypotheses development
2.1. Management accounting systems
Management accounting systems (MAS) are essential resources to provide managers with information for their decision-making
processes (Hoozée and Mitchell, 2018). These systems have shifted their focus from traditional financial reporting to embracing a
broader scope of information (Chenhall, 2003). It means including internal and external variables to increase the performance of
companies (Appelbaum et al., 2017). Thus, it seems that SME managers have realized that the multidimensional characteristics of the
information provided by MAS can significantly contribute to the competitiveness of their business organizations (Maelah et al., 2021).
According to Chenhall & Morris (1986), multidimensional management accounting systems should be defined by four key di
mensions of information characteristics: i) scope, ii) timeliness, iii) aggregation, and iv) integration.
The scope characteristic is related to the information’s focus, quantification, and time horizon (Chenhall and Morris, 1986;
Hammad et al., 2013). The smaller or larger scope depends on whether the information is internal or external, financial or non-
financial, historical or future-oriented (Hammad et al., 2013; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008). The smaller scope has been
associated with traditional accounting systems that provide internal, financial, and historical information (Chenhall and Morris,
1986). The more extensive information scope is related to the external environment and may be financial or non-financial (Chenhall
and Morris, 1986; Sharma et al., 2006).
The timeliness characteristic is related to the frequency and the speed of the information reporting (Fong and Quaddus, 2010). It can
also be related to the readiness for information upon request (Hammad et al., 2013) and the slow or rapid response to requests for
standardized or personalized information (Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008). Timely information increases MAS’s ability to
report recent events and provide faster feedback on decisions (Chenhall and Morris, 1986).
The level of aggregation is related to the systematization of information by period, functional areas, or even formats consistent with
formal decision models (Chenhall and Morris, 1986; Hammad et al., 2013). Information aggregated at the functional area level
provides managers with information on the results of other departments (Fong and Quaddus, 2010).
The level of information integration includes the precise definition of goals for the various activities and their interrelationships
within the sub-units, as well as reporting on intra-sub-unit interactions (Chenhall and Morris, 1986; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing,
2008). The level of information integration deals with data that cross functional boundaries and help to coordinate multiple segments
within a sub-unit (Hammad et al., 2013).
To evaluate the informational characteristics of MAS, Chenhall & Morris (1986) developed an instrument to measure each of these
dimensions, which several authors have used. However, it has been applied differently in various studies. While some researchers used
the four dimensions (e.g., Hariyati et al., 2019; Le et al., 2020; Liem and Hien, 2020; Ngo, 2020), others used just a few (e.g., Chang
et al., 2003; Ghorbel, 2019; Heidmann et al., 2008), or even just one (e.g., Do et al., 2020; Harrison, 2009; Naranjo-Gil and Hartmann,
2007; Nguyen et al., 2017).
Several relationships between MAS information dimensions and other business variables have been studied. They have been
analyzed as dependent variables (Bouwens and Abernethy, 2000; Chenhall and Morris, 1986; Chiou, 2011), independent variables
(Agbejule, 2005; Chang et al., 2003; Mollanazari and Abdolkarimi, 2012), and sometimes as mediating variables (Etemadi et al., 2009;
Ghasemi et al., 2019; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008). The results for the same relationships analyzed in different studies are not
consensual. They seem to be contingent on the internal and external circumstances, the MAS dimensions used, and the number of items
used to measure each of these dimensions.
Pedroso and Gomes (2020) recently proposed and validated a MAS multidimensional approach. In this approach, MAS is measured
with a second-order construct comprised of the four first-order constructs identified by Chenhall and Morris (1986). This new in
strument enables analysis of the relationship between contingent variables and MAS in a comprehensive and systemic approach. As
such, this new MAS approach will be used as the dependent variable in our research study.
2.2. Top management support
Top management support (TMS) is widely used in management and business literature, especially in organizational change con
texts. It can be defined as the degree of aid senior-level managers give to developing, implementing, and using new organizational
techniques, methods, processes, and systems (Foster and Swenson, 1997; Krumwiede, 1998; Shields, 1995). TMS should be imple
mented through an open and active promotion by these managers in financial or spiritual terms (Fong and Quaddus, 2010).
When top managers support the adoption, implementation, or use of a particular technology, system, technique, or method, they
communicate to the whole organization their commitment to maintaining it as a priority (Mukred et al., 2021). This support will
encourage employees to be more cooperative and accept the changes, as they will be assumed to be strategic for the organization
(Martins et al., 2019).
Top management support is essential when SMEs compete with large companies to sell their products and services in the global
market. For this purpose, SMEs must continuously improve their processes through innovation, ensuring reliable and updated
3
information to managers at all hierarchical levels. In this context, the top management has a crucial role in overcoming resistance to
change and providing technical support and training to facilitate organizational change (Munir et al., 2013). Given the specific
characteristics of SMEs, the top management team includes a few elements in which the CEO and CFO stand out (Naranjo-Gil, 2009).
Most recent literature has demonstrated the positive influence of TMS in the development, implementation, and use of resources,
techniques, and methods in management accounting, especially in the context of ongoing digitization processes. In a context of
increasing complexity and diversity of information, TMS is decisive in adopting solutions that involve the storage and use of this
information in the cloud (AlBar and Hoque, 2019; Wang et al., 2019a), which can become a competitive advantage for SMEs. TMS is
crucial for information technology (IT) innovation, as with blockchain, which quickly spread across several sectors and increased the
effectiveness of supply chain management (Clohessy and Acton, 2019). It can also influence digital reporting in small business or
ganizations (Alkhatib et al., 2019) and the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques (Siew et al., 2020).
In addition to top management support for tangible assets, its positive effect on intangible assets, such as knowledge management
systems, has also been verified (Okour et al., 2019).
Despite the important role of TMS in supporting the use and innovation of SME resources, limited studies have been carried out in
the field of MAS.
As a result of the above discussion, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 1: Top management support positively influences MAS utilization.
2.3. Decision-making orientation
Top management and accountants are the two main actors in the management of SMEs (Alcalde-Heras et al., 2019; Bi et al., 2019;
De Bruyckere et al., 2020; Weigel and Hiebl, 2023). Given the specific characteristics of SMEs, the accountant could be internal or
external to these companies. However, their role is no longer to provide only performance reports. They need to have a broader view of
the business and be able to link financial information to the strategic development of the business (Scapens and Jazayeri, 2003), being
now more involved in participating in business decisions (Enslin et al., 2023). This paradigm shift in the accountant’s role has been
supported by top management (Järvenpää, 2007).
Participation in the strategic decision-making process is not a recent role of accountants. It can be defined by their degree of
involvement in formulating and implementing the company’s strategy (Wooldridge and Floyd, 1990). Their participation in strategic
decisions can improve the use of a management accounting system (Cadez and Guilding, 2008). Business organizations with greater
accountant participation in strategic decisions follow a more analytical strategy, have a greater propensity to look for new products or
market opportunities, and are more focused on the domestic market (Cadez and Guilding, 2012).
It seems that the role of accountants in organizations has evolved from its traditional profile to a more strategic one (Boulianne,
2007; Joseph, 2006; Robalo and Moreira, 2020). As such, accountants are not limited to providing information for managers’ decisions
but have begun to participate in strategic decision-making processes (Aver and Cadez, 2009). They are now influencing strategic and
operational decisions (ten Rouwelaar et al., 2018), and can also influence MAS design (Hoozée and Mitchell, 2018). As such,
attributing simple labels to their roles should be avoided (Rieg, 2018).
In this context, accountants working in SMEs, in addition to traditional internal controls over costs and financial reporting, need to
know customers, human resources, and strategy processes (Berthelot and Morrill, 2016). The availability of new analysis techniques
and large amounts of data allows management accountants to help management design an appropriate strategy (Appelbaum et al.,
2017).
In the literature review, we did not find studies that analyzed the mediation effect of the accountant’s participation in strategic
decisions on the relationship between top management support and MAS. Even so, TMS can positively influence the accountants’
participation in strategic decisions, which in turn influences MAS utilization. Based on this premise, the following hypothesis is
formulated:
Hypothesis 2a: Accountant participation in strategic decisions mediates the relationship between top management support and
MAS utilization.
Decentralization, commonly used as a response to environmental uncertainties, can be defined as the degree of autonomy delegated
to lower-level managers, giving them greater responsibility for planning and controlling activities and greater access to information
usually unavailable (Waterhouse and Tiessen, 1978). It can be seen as empowering these managers (Conger and Kanungo, 1988).
The literature shows how decentralizing decision-making relates to various aspects of management accounting (Chenhall, 2003). It
may increase management accounting sophistication (Abdel-Kader and Luther, 2008; Al-Dhubaibi and Kamal, 2014), but it can also
influence innovative management accounting practices (Souza and Gasparetto, 2020). These findings suggest that business organi
zations with more decentralized structures may need more relevant information to support their decision-making processes.
For a long time, decentralization had a decisive influence on the information characteristics of the MAS, especially in integration
and aggregation dimensions (Chenhall and Morris, 1986). The decentralization of decisions by the company’s various departments
leads to the need to use information with specific characteristics. Thus, it needs integrated information that includes the precise
objectives for the multiple sub-units and their interpellations and systematization by functional areas. There is also a need for
aggregated information at the department level to provide information to managers about the results of other departments.
With increasing competitiveness in the global market, SMEs need more diversified information, including financial and non-
financial, and internal and external indicators to support their decisions. They also need a greater frequency and speed of report
ing. Therefore, it seems decentralization also positively influences the MAS’s timeliness and scope dimensions (Ngo, 2020; Soobaroyen
4
and Poorundersing, 2008).

Research on decentralization initially resulted from studying internal organizational factors in large companies. However, SMEs
that wanted to survive in the global market had to evolve organizationally. Thus, due to organizational characteristics and the dynamic
competitive environments SMEs face, decentralization has recently become particularly relevant, requiring broad-scope information
(Alves and Lourenço, 2022).
Decentralization in SMEs influences the need to increase budget information (Sandalgaard and Nielsen, 2018). Therefore, a high
degree of decentralization requires a high capacity for information processing, as more managers demand more sophisticated infor
mation in decision-making (Ghorbel, 2019).
More recently, SMEs have benefited from the cost reduction of technologies that can help them compete with large companies. The
digitalization of processes can increase their decentralization of decision-making (Kretschmer and Khashabi, 2020).
Based on the literature review, we did not find research studies that analyzed the mediating effect of the decentralization of de
cisions on the relationship between top management support and MAS. However, we assume the need for top management support in
decentralization processes, which in turn positively influences MAS utilization.
Hypothesis 2b: The decentralization of decisions mediates the relationship between top management support and MAS
utilization.
2.4. MAS user issues and concerns
People working in business organizations are influenced daily by their level of satisfaction and the level of training they get to use
the organizational resources. These variables influence operational and strategic decisions, which are the main drivers of organiza
tional effectiveness, and business competitiveness.
Satisfaction is the sum of the feelings and attitudes relative to factors that affect a specific situation (Bailey and Pearson, 1983).
Users’ satisfaction with the information a system provides can be defined by the extent to which users believe it offers them all the
information they need (Ives et al., 1983). As such, the satisfaction of information users is related to their affective attitude towards this
system (Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988). If users are unsatisfied with the information provided by MAS, they will not use it (Mia and Patiar,
2001).
The quality of information is crucial to increasing the satisfaction levels of MAS users, which will lead to an increase in its use and
consequent improvement in the decision-making process (Fleischman et al., 2010). The greater the satisfaction with the information
provided by those systems, the greater the use will be made of that information (Al-Hattami, 2021; Macinati and Anessi-Pessina, 2014).
In this context, the quality of MAS and the information they provide are essential to improving organizational performance.
The influence of top management support on users’ satisfaction has been studied in different contexts and has presented some
contradictory findings. We found significant positive results for this relationship (Ghobakhloo et al., 2015; Sabherwal et al., 2006;
Wang and Song, 2017), but we also found literature that does not support it (Rouibah et al., 2009; Vatanasakdakul et al., 2017).
In our study, we intend to assess user satisfaction with multiple characteristics of the information provided by MAS, including
reliability, relevance, accuracy, precision, and completeness.
Based on the literature review, we found a lack of empirical studies analyzing the relationship between the above variables and
MAS in the SME context. As such, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 2c: User satisfaction with MAS information mediates the relationship between top management support and MAS
utilization.
Training is the process by which an organization transfers job-relevant knowledge and skills to employees (Donnelly et al., 2021).
The user training could provide courses in the work context and other guidelines to assist in implementing and using systems sup
porting management accounting (Fong and Quaddus, 2010). They could also be external and on different subjects, namely the ethical
implications of using management accounting instruments (van der Kolk, 2019).
The training can help understand how MAS can assist managers and provide knowledge about the information needed to analyze
operational activities and their performance measures (Chenhall and Langfield-Smith, 1999). It can be a critical success factor for MAS
implementation (Bradley, 2008) and positively influence its utilization (Ruivo et al., 2014).
Training is crucial in improving the decision-making processes by implementing new management accounting techniques and
practices (Nassar et al., 2013). It involves understanding the source and structure of data and how it can be analyzed and used to
improve the quality of management decisions (Bhimani, 2012). Innovation in management accounting requires continuous training for
MAS users (Halbouni and Nour, 2014).
Given that training provides information on MAS utilization and helps users understand what information they need for man
agement, it is also expected that more training would positively affect the utilization and quality of MAS information. However, this
relationship is not always verified (Fong and Quaddus, 2012; Krumwiede et al., 2008).
As such, recent literature calls for more research on user training to better understand the implementation of accounting infor
mation systems (Kocsis, 2019).
Hypothesis 2d: User training mediates the relationship between top management support and MAS utilization.
5
3. Methodology
3.1. Sample and data collection
For the survey, we asked the Portuguese representative of Dun & Bradstreet Worldwide Network to provide a random sample of
1500 companies representing the Portuguese population of SMEs, following the European criteria (The Commission of the European
Communities, 2003)1, excluding microenterprises due to their small organizational structure2.
In Portugal, like in other European countries, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) significantly contribute to world eco
nomic growth, representing 99,8% of all businesses (Gorgels et al., 2022).
To increase the response rate, we contacted all companies by telephone to explain the purpose of the study and request the chief
financial officer’s (CFO) name and mail address. We chose CFOs as respondents because they are part of the top management team of
SMEs (Munir et al., 2023). As such, they know the organizational context very well and have strong technical knowledge of MAS
utilization.
During that process, 93 SMEs declined to participate in the survey. Therefore, we invited CFOs of 1407 Portuguese SMEs to fill out
the questionnaire, from which we obtained 255 usable responses. This response rate represents 18.12 percent, which is identical to
similar studies (Hall, 2008; Martins et al., 2019). Table 1 shows the sample characteristics.
Companies whose parameters are outside the SME criteria were kept in the empirical analysis as they are considered borderlines.
They may have a few workers contextually above the required dimension but maintain SMEs’ characteristics.
3.2. Instrument and variable measurement
The measurement items included in the research instrument (Appendix A) were selected based on a comprehensive literature
review. As these items were originally written in English, they were initially translated into Portuguese and later from Portuguese back
into English by two different specialists with knowledge of both languages. Establishing the comparison between the two versions in
English, it was verified that they did not present relevant differences.
To validate the questionnaire content, a panel of experts in the management accounting field, including professors, researchers, and
professionals, was asked to verify if the questions’ terminology was consistent with the respondent’s level of understanding (Forza,
2002). After the validation process, the final questionnaire version was considered adequate for the Portuguese SMEs context.
The management accounting system was conceptualized through four informational dimensions (scope, timeliness, aggregation,
and integration). The multidimensional scale created and validated by Pedroso and Gomes (2020) was used to measure MAS utili
zation. For this purpose, respondents were asked to indicate each construct item’s utilization level in daily decision-making activities
through a seven-point Likert scale (1 – Never to 7 – Every time).
For measuring top management support, an instrument developed by Shields (1995) and used in other studies (e.g., Krumwiede,
1998; Schäfer et al., 2022; Tung et al., 2011) was adapted. Respondents were asked about their level of agreement relating to each
construct item, using a seven-point Likert scale (1 – Strongly disagree to 7 – Strongly agree), assuming that the scope of top man
agement is the board of directors or, informally, a top management team.
The decentralization of decisions was measured through a construct developed by Gordon and Narayanan (1984) and used by other
authors (e.g., Abdel-Kader and Luther, 2008; Sandalgaard and Nielsen, 2018; Soobaroyen and Poorundersing, 2008). Respondents
were asked to tick the option that best describes the extent of decentralization of their organization for each construct item through a
seven-point Likert scale (1 – Very low to 7 – Very high).
For assessing the accountant’s participation in strategic decisions, an instrument developed by Wooldridge and Floyd (1990) and
adapted for other research studies (Cadez and Guilding, 2012; 2008) was used. Respondents were asked to tick the option that best
describes the extent of the accountant’s participation for each item related to the strategic management aspects through a seven-point
Likert scale (1 – Very low to 7 – Very high).
User satisfaction with MAS information was measured through a construct developed by Doll and Torkzadeh (1988) and used by
other authors (e.g., Macinati and Anessi-Pessina, 2014; Pillai et al., 2021; Rai et al., 2002). Respondents were asked about their level of
satisfaction relating to each construct item through a seven-point Likert scale (1 – Completely dissatisfied to 7 – Completely satisfied).
A construct developed by Shields (1995) and adapted for other studies (Krumwiede, 1998; Krumwiede et al., 2008) was used to
assess MAS users’ training. Respondents were asked about their level of agreement relating to each construct item through a seven-
point Likert scale (1 – Strongly disagree to 7 – Strongly agree).
Appendix A presents all the items used in the research model and the corresponding descriptive statistics
1
“The category of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is made up of enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and which
have an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 50 million, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding EUR 43 million.” in article 2, number 1
of the Recomendation concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (The Commission of the European Communities, 2003),
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:124:0036:0041:en:PDF.
2
“Within the SME category, a microenterprise is defined as an enterprise which employs fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover and/
or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million.” in article 2, number 3 of the Recomendation concerning the definition of micro, small and
medium-sized enterprises (The Commission of the European Communities, 2003), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:
2003:124:0036:0041:en:PDF.
6
Table 1
Sample profile.
Item Frequency Percentage
Number of employees
Less than 10 1 0.39 %
From 10 to 49 57 22.35 %
From 50 to 99 67 26.27 %
From 100 to 149 49 19.22 %
From 150 to 199 35 13.73 %
From 200 to 249 21 8.24 %
More than 250 20 7.84 %
No response 5 1.96 %
Total: 255 100.00 %
Industry section classification*

C -Manufacturing 105 41.2 %
G - Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 73 28.6 %
F - Construction 19 7.5 %
H - Transportation and storage 13 5.1 %
J - Information and communication 11 4.3 %
M - Professional, scientific and technical activities 8 3.1 %
K - Financial and insurance activities 4 1.6 %
N - Administrative and support service activities 4 1.6 %
I - Accommodation and food service activities 3 1.2 %
- Miscellaneous (with less than three occurrences in each section) 10 5.1 %
- No response 5 0.8 %
Total: 255 100.0 %
*NACE Rev. 2 - Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community.
3.3. Data analysis
Consistent with the study’s objectives, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was applied to test the research
hypotheses. For this purpose, the software SmartPLS 3.2.6 was used (Ringle et al., 2015). This statistical method was used due to the
complexity and exploratory nature of the research model (Hair et al., 2017; Usakli and Kucukergin, 2018). Also, it responds to Nitzl’s
(2016) call to increase the use of PLS in management accounting research.
Data analysis comprised three phases. The measurement model was assessed for reliability and validity in the first phase. For this
purpose, we analyzed the construct indicator reliability, internal consistency reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity.
In the second phase, the structural model’s results were analyzed. We used the Bootstrapping procedure to test the statistical
significance of various PLS-SEM results, such as path coefficients, Cronbach’s alpha, HTMT, and R2 values, creating subsamples with
observations randomly drawn (with replacement) from the original data set. To ensure the stability of the results, we used 5.000
resamples (Hair et al., 2013). To assess the quality of the results, we used the R2 values, the significant paths, their f2 effect sizes, and
the predictive relevance (Q2). In addition, we used the SRMR indicator to assess the model fit (Henseler et al., 2016).
The mediation roles of information users’ issues and decision-making variables between TMS and MAS were tested in the third
phase. For this purpose, we used a step-by-step process to analyze the mediation effects of all four variables of the research model
(Fig. 1). In step 1, only the relationship between TMS and MAS was analyzed (Hypothesis 1). In step 2, each mediator was separately
introduced in the model (Hypotheses 2a to 2d). In step 3, all the combinations of two and three mediators were tested. This PLS-SEM
mediator analysis process followed the best practices recommended by the literature (Baron and Kenny, 1986; Nitzl et al., 2016;
Preacher and Hayes, 2008).
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Measurement model
The measurement model was initially evaluated for construct reliability. All measurement items presented outer loadings above
0.70 (Table 2), the recommended threshold (Hair et al., 2011). Moreover, the values for Cronbach’s alpha and Composite Reliability
(CR) obtained for each construct exceed 0.7, indicating sufficient construct reliability (Table 2). All 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, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations was used (Hair et al., 2017). All HTMT
values are below 0.90 (Table 3), establishing the discriminant validity of the constructs (Henseler et al., 2015).
Regarding the management accounting system construct, the loadings of first-order constructs on the second-order construct
(Table 4) confirm the results of Pedroso and Gomes (2020). These results mean that utilizing a management accounting system can be
measured as a second-order construct, reflecting the four MAS dimensions offered by Chenhall and Morris (1986).
7
Table 2
Validity and reliability of constructs.
Construct items Loading CR AVE Alpha
Scope 0.898 0.748 0.825

SCO01 0.930
SCO02 0.912
SCO03 0.740
Timeliness 0.896 0.742 0.825

TIM01 0.799
TIM02 0.880
TIM03 0.902
Aggregation 0.896 0.632 0.854

AGG01 0.820
AGG02 0.803
AGG03 0.795
AGG04 0.830
AGG05 0.723
Integration 0.936 0.829 0.897

INT01 0.890
INT02 0.929
INT03 0.912
User Satisfaction 0.947 0.782 0.930

USA01 0.889
USA02 0.897
USA03 0.863
USA04 0.886
USA05 0.886
User training 0.967 0.908 0.949

UTR01 0.956
UTR02 0.961
UTR03 0.941
Top management support 0.928 0.810 0.883

TMS01 0.920
TMS02 0.894
TMS03 0.886
Decentralization of decisions 0.913 0.677 0.880

DEC01 0.770
DEC02 0.799
DEC03 0.865
DEC04 0.870
DEC05 0.805
Accountant participation in strategic decisions 0.971 0.869 0.926

APD01 0.940
APD02 0.950
APD03 0.948
APD04 0.947
APD05 0.875
No significant concerns about common method bias were found based on the results of Harman’s single-factor test and common
latent factor approach (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
4.2. Structural model
Using a bootstrapping procedure with 5.000 resamples, the results of the structural model are presented in Table 5.
Three of the relations studied were found not significant: the accountants’ influence on MAS, the top managers’ influence on MAS,
and the control variable SMES’ Dimension, measured by the number of employees. The result of the control variable means that the
dimension of the companies does not influence the utilization of the information provided by MAS. It means that being a small or
8
Table 3
Discriminant validity.
Apa Agg Dec Int Sco Tim Tms Use Utr
Accountant participation (Apa) ——

Aggregation (Agg) 0.256
Decentralization of decisions (Dec) 0.381 0.396
Integration (Int) 0.280 0.858 0.444
Scope (Sco) 0.246 0.715 0.397 0.596
Timeliness (Tim) 0.144 0.806 0.253 0.708 0.653
Top Management Support (Tms) 0.374 0.350 0.372 0.276 0.245 0.263
User satisfaction (Use) 0.274 0.373 0.270 0.288 0.305 0.390 0.541
User training (Utr) 0.328 0.357 0.336 0.320 0.375 0.367 0.532 0.597 ——
Note: None of the correspondent bootstrap confidence intervals includes the value 1.
Table 4
Loadings of the first-order constructs on the second-order MAS construct.
Second-order construct First-order construct Coefficient
Management accounting system (MAS) Aggregation 0.936***

Integration 0.850***
Scope 0.821***
Timeliness 0.801***
***p < 0,001, **p < 0,01, *p < 0,05.
Table 5
Structural model results.
Path relationship Path coefficient f2
Accountant participation -> MAS 0.055 0.003

Decentralization of decisions -> MAS 0.285*** 0.089
Top Management Support -> Accountant participation 0.347*** 0.137
Top Management Support -> Decentralization of decisions 0.335*** 0.127
Top Management Support -> MAS 0.029 0.001
Top Management Support -> User satisfaction 0.496*** 0.327
Top Management Support -> User training 0.487*** 0.312
User satisfaction -> MAS 0.155* 0.020
User training -> MAS 0.173* 0.024
SMEs Dimension -> MAS 0.057 0.004
Construct Q2 R2
Accountant participation 0.100 0.120

Decentralization of decisions 0.071 0.113
Management accounting system (MAS) 0.127 0.251
User satisfaction 0.189 0.247
***p < 0,001, **p < 0,01, *p < 0,05.
medium-sized company does not imply using less or more MAS information.
The most robust relations are between top managers and information user satisfaction and training. The research model has
predictive relevance according to Q2 values, which are all positive. The values of f2 are all positive and follow a similar rank order of
path coefficients, which means that large significant path values correspond to large effect sizes. The values of R2 are considered
moderate to explain MAS utilization (Hair et al., 2013). Finally, we mention that SRMR = 0.077, implying that the model has a good fit
Fig. 2. Results of the structural model without mediating variables
9
(Henseler et al., 2016).
4.3. Mediation analysis
In the first step of the mediation analysis, we tested the relationship between top management support and the effective use of
management accounting systems without the mediating variables (Fig. 2). We found that this relationship is significant, meaning that
TMS directly affects MAS utilization without any mediating variable. As such, the lack of significance for this effect in the structural
model results (Table 5) is justified by the full mediation exerted by one or more mediating variables.
We then tested each variable’s independent mediation in the second step. Based on the results, hypothesis 2a was rejected because
the positive relationship between the accountant’s participation in strategic decisions and MAS use was not significant at the 5 percent
level. The indirect effect between TMS and MAS through decentralization of decisions was found to be significant (1 percent level),
supporting hypothesis 2b. The indirect effect between TMS and MAS through user satisfaction was found to be significant (5 percent
level), which supports hypothesis 2c. The indirect effect between TMS and MAS through user training was found to be significant (1
percent level), which supports hypothesis 2d. Since the direct effect of TMS on MAS maintained the significance in each of these three
models, none of these variables is individually sufficient for the full mediation found in the structural model results (Nitzl et al., 2016).
In the third step, following the methodology presented in section three, we tested all possible combinations of two or more
mediating variables. After analyzing all the results, we found that the join mediation effect of users’ training and satisfaction exerts a
full mediation in the relationship between TMS and MAS. The remaining two combinations of two variables only exert partial
mediation. As such, it seems that two groups of variables behave differently as mediating variables of the relationship between TMS
and MAS. For these reasons, we divided our initial model into two models and discussed their findings in the next section.
4.4. Discussion
This study disentangles the relationship between top management support and management accounting systems. As such, we
explore the role of two groups of variables that could help top managers increase the effective utilization of MAS and consequently
improve the quality of the decision-making processes in SMEs.
The first group of mediating variables tested, representing the organizational decision-making orientation, includes the accoun
tants’ participation in strategic decisions and the decentralization of decisions (Fig. 3). Although the mediating effect of these variables
on the relationship between TMS and MAS has not been tested before in management accounting literature, we expected a significant
result based on the findings of individual effect components presented by the literature in several organizational contexts, including
SMEs.
The positive results on the impact of TMS on accountant participants in the SME organizational context can be justified by the
increasing involvement of accountants in participating in SME’s business decisions (Enslin et al., 2023). The top management team in
SMEs sees accountants as important business consultants and realizes their importance in promoting the implementation and use of the
Fig. 3. Results of the structural model for organizational decision-making orientation
10
MAS. Concerning the impact of accountant participation in strategic decisions on MAS, we only found positive effects in large or
ganizations (Cadez and Guilding, 2008; Nguyen, 2018). However, since SMEs are now fighting with large companies for market share
in the global context (Malesev and Cherry, 2021), it was expected that greater accountant involvement in the strategy formulation and
implementation would improve the use of a management accounting system, which was not confirmed by our results. As such, it seems
that although accountants in SMEs are finding support from top managers to participate in the corporate strategic processes, they may
not know how to get the necessary information to enable MAS to monitor these processes. This result can be justified by the lack of a
formal strategic management process that prevents accountants from identifying what information is needed or by the difficulty in
analyzing non-financial information and integrating it with financial information. It can also be because SMEs do not want to pay for
updated external information needed to respond to market changes and align their resources with their corporate strategy (Latifah
et al., 2021). In this context, big data and the new analysis instruments can present a unique opportunity for management accountants
to play a more active role in decision support (Rikhardsson and Yigitbasioglu, 2018).
In the same group of variables, representing the organizational decision-making orientation, the results of our study show that the
utilization of MAS in SMEs could be improved by top management support through decentralizing the decision-making processes. As
such, we found that they are consistent with the positive effect of TMS on decentralization in SME organizational contexts. Our results
are also consistent with the positive impact of decentralization on MAS for several organizational dimensions in healthcare envi
ronments (Fuadah et al., 2020; Ngo, 2020) and other industries (Lee and Han, 2000; Souza and Gasparetto, 2020). However, no
specific evidence was found for SMEs in management accounting literature.
Decentralization usually increases the number of decision-makers, meaning departmental decision-makers have more specialized
knowledge about their department but less from the other departments. When they make autonomous decisions, they need infor
mation from different fields besides theirs, available in MAS. As such, our results point to a paradigm shift in the decentralization of
decisions in SMEs, becoming an instrument to respond to market volatility, which was almost exclusive to large companies (Ghorbel,
2019). Despite appearing to have been influenced by large companies, decentralized decision-making processes in SMEs may also
occur because of their flexible and agile structures (Meier, 2023). Another reason for the decentralization could be the influence of the
availability of lower-cost information technologies, which means less formal and procedural decentralization and more agile infor
mation management due to the digitization of processes (Dutta et al., 2021).
The second group of mediating variables analyzed includes user satisfaction and training variables (Fig. 4). Like in the first group
(Fig. 3), although the mediating effect of these variables has not been tested before in management accounting literature, we expected
a significant result based on the findings of individual effect components presented by the literature in several organizational contexts,
including SMEs.
The results show that the utilization of MAS could be improved by top management support through user satisfaction, which is
consistent with other authors’ findings relating to the influence of top managers on user satisfaction in several organizational contexts,
including SMEs (Azizah, 2018; Ghobakhloo et al., 2015; Wang and Song, 2017). They are also consistent with management accounting
literature that confirms the positive influence of user satisfaction on the use of MAS in healthcare environments (Fong and Quaddus,
2012; 2010) and banking organizational environments (Al-Hattami, 2021).
Fig. 4. Results of the structural model for MAS user issues and concerns
11
In the same group of variables, representing the user issues and concerns, the results of our study show that the utilization of MAS
could be improved by top management support through user training. They are consistent with literature confirming top management
support’s positive influence on user training (Ha and Ahn, 2014; Krumwiede et al., 2008). They are also consistent with literature that
found a significant influence of user training on MAS in SME organizational contexts (Ruivo et al., 2014) and with recent digitalization
trends in SMEs. The digitalization of processes will increase the predictive possibilities of data analysis available in SMEs, also
increasing the need for training of MAS users (Al-Htaybat and von Alberti-Alhtaybat, 2017), which will have to be continuously
supported by top managers.
Overall, our study found three significant mediating effects on the relationship between TMS and MAS, not previously analyzed by
the management accounting literature, contributing this way to literature through the evidence of new theoretical paths (Whetten,
1989).
5. Conclusions and implications
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) increasingly need to compete globally with their counterparts, including large com
panies. For this purpose, they need management accounting systems that analyze, integrate, and make internal, external, financial, and
non-financial information available throughout their organizational structure. These systems will enable all departmental managers to
make higher-quality decisions and respond faster to customers and changes in the competitive market forces.
Based on an extensive literature review on management accounting, we found that top management support does not always show
a significant positive influence on MAS utilization. To fill this gap, we analyzed top management support’s effect on MAS utilization in
SMEs, exploring the mediation role of organizational decision-making orientation and user issues and concerns research variables.
5.1. Theoretical contributions
This study offers several theoretical contributions to management accounting research and accounting information systems (AIS)
literature. First, our findings suggest that although TMS has a positive direct effect on MAS, utilizing some organizational resources
exerts a full mediation. This means they thoroughly explain the relationship between top management support and effective MAS
utilization. They reveal that three variables significantly mediate the relationship between TMS and MAS: decentralization, training of
MAS users, and satisfaction with the information provided by the MAS. As far as we know, based on the literature reviewed, these
relationships have not yet been studied. Although several studies have called for further research on the relationship between TMS and
various tangible and intangible resources in several organizations, including SMEs (e.g., Kheybari et al., 2020; Rouibah et al., 2020;
Skafi et al., 2020), empirical evidence regarding MAS is limited, not even exist when measured in a systemic approach. Therefore,
studying these new relationships significantly alters our understanding of MAS effectiveness in SMEs organizational contexts, reor
ganizing the causal maps underlying the contingency theory.
Second, our findings contribute to understanding these causal maps by disentangling the relationships between TMS and MAS,
examining the individual and group mediating effects, and enabling us to assess the degree of mediation relative to these new re
lationships. In the analysis process, we found that the combined effect of user satisfaction and training can fully mediate the rela
tionship between TMS and MAS. This finding illustrates the relevance of these organizational instruments that the top management
team can use to increase the effectiveness of the MAS. We also found the significative mediation effect of the decentralization of
decisions, which can represent a paradigm shift for SMEs’ organizational decision processes.
These findings support the fit-as-mediation proposition of the contingency theory (Venkatraman, 1989). In light of this theory, our
study shows that SMEs with a higher TMS can achieve significantly higher MAS effectiveness if they place more value on decentralizing
decisions, MAS user training, and user satisfaction. As such, it extends previous research that only identified the individual re
lationships of these variables with MAS without testing the mediating effect (e.g., Al-Hattami, 2021; Ngo, 2020; Ruivo et al., 2014).
Third, our study confirms that MAS should be viewed in a systemic approach, of which its dimensions are part, avoiding segmented
MAS research models and allowing future comparability of research findings. Previous research has used these segmented MAS ap
proaches, causing a lack of comparability in results (Pedroso and Gomes, 2020).
5.2. Managerial contributions
SMEs increasingly need internal and external information in all their departments. For many years, they were characterized by a
lack of organization and resources and by centralized power decisions. The resilience they showed in surviving the most recent crises
leads us to look at these organizations as winners and their characteristics as factors of competitiveness.
Our empirical research offers insights into the interaction processes between MAS, their users, and decision orientation. In
particular, our results have several implications for top managers who influence and support change processes and management
accountants.
First, from a decision-making perspective, top managers should abandon traditional centralization approaches and implement
decentralization processes. According to our results, regardless of SMEs’ size, decentralization will lead to an increase in the use of
MAS information. This way, departmental managers will access up-to-date market information and react effectively to customer re
quests or anticipate competitors through innovations aligned with customers’ needs.
Second, from the MAS users’ perspective, our study reinforces the need for training and alerts top managers to the need for users to
be satisfied with the information provided by the MAS. These results have implications for top managers as they should promote
12
adequate training of users not only in the use of the MAS but also in its design and implementation. Through this training, users can be
more involved in updating MAS information and thus increase their satisfaction with its characteristics.
Finally, we found that although top managers support management accountants to participate in strategic decisions, this support is
not reflected in the greater use of the MAS. This result has implications for accountants, who should consider changing their role in
SMEs from just organizers of information to active participants in corporate and operations strategy by improving the quality of the
information used in the decision processes.
5.3. Limitations and future research
Like any other study, this one has some limitations. Although comparable to similar studies, the sample size prevented further
analysis, for instance, testing some control variables, including the industry effect on MAS utilization. It is worth noting that the sample
used in this study is specific to Portuguese SMEs. Any generalization of the results should be made with caution.
The survey method approach used in this study also prevents analyzing specific organization characteristics of each SME and how
they influence the utilization of MAS. Future research should use other methods, like case studies and qualitative research approaches,
to analyze important variables influencing MAS use, such as the type of MAS, accountant profiles and tasks, CFO profiles and tasks, and
organizational structure.
Future survey research should focus on analyzing how MAS can influence organizational performance, including the mediation
effects of managerial performance and moderating effects of internal variables, such as the level of SMEs’ digitalization, and external
variables, such as perceived environmental uncertainty.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Appendix
Table A1. Descriptive statistics of the survey answers.
Code Construct Items Mean SD. Skew. Kurt.
Management accounting system

Scope
SCO01 Information which relates to possible future events 4.38 1.45 0.193 − 0.680
SCO02 Quantification of the likelihood of futures events occurring 4.39 1.46 0.104 − 0.814
SCO03 Non-economic information 3.72 1.46 0.347 − 0.394
Timeliness
TIM01 Requested information to arrive immediately upon request 4.67 1.36 0.069 − 0.487
TIM02 Reports are provided frequently on a systematic, regular basis 5.11 1.43 − 0.162 − 1.037
TIM03 There is no delay between an event occurring and relevant information being reported to you 4.54 1.37 0.055 − 0.806
Aggregation
AGG01 Information provided on the different sections or functional areas in your organization 4.82 1.42 − 0.152 − 0.636
AGG02 Information on the effect of events on particular time periods 4.73 1.31 − 0.015 − 0.662
AGG03 Information which has been processed to show the influence of events on different functions 4.11 1.37 0.142 − 0.437
AGG04 Information on the effect of different sections’ activities on summary reports for your particular sections and 4.48 1.37 0.101 − 0.671
for the overall organization
AGG05 Information in formats suitable for input into decision models 4.49 1.57 0.023 − 0.886
Integration
INT01 Information on the impact that your decision will have throughout your department, and the influence of other 4.50 1.53 − 0.024 − 0.814
individuals’ decisions on your area of responsibility
INT02 Precise targets for the activities of all sections within your department 4.96 1.48 − 0.435 − 0.400
INT03 Information that relates to the impact that your decisions have on the performance of your department 5.00 1.41 − 0.341 − 0.603
User satisfaction
USA01 Reliability of output information 5.50 1.00 − 1.370 2.000
USA02 Relevancy of output information to intended function 5.53 0.97 − 1.253 1.899
USA03 Accuracy of output information 5.14 1.12 − 0.667 − 0.182
USA04 Precision of output information 5.24 1.06 − 0.772 0.325
USA05 Completeness of the output information 5.20 0.99 − 0.975 0.870
(continued on next page)
13
(continued )
Code Construct Items Mean SD. Skew. Kurt.
User training
UTR01 Users received adequate training in designing of our management accounting system 4.91 1.37 − 0.799 − 0.224
UTR02 Adequate training was (is) provided for implementing the management accounting system 4.92 1.34 − 0.913 0.210
UTR03 Users have had adequate training in how to use the information provided management accounting system 5.00 1.33 − 0.970 0.357
Decentralizations of decisions
DEC01 Development of new products or services 4.11 1.66 − 0.244 − 0.790
DEC02 The hiring and firing of managerial personnel 3.63 1.69 − 0.055 − 0.988
DEC03 Major investments decisions 3.63 1.83 0.069 − 1.004
DEC04 Budget allocation 4.25 1.60 − 0.276 − 0.534
DEC05 Pricing decisions 4.13 1.67 − 0.249 − 0.736
Accountant participation in strategic decisions
APD01 Identifying problems and proposing objectives 4.29 1.52 − 0.379 − 0.474
APD02 Generating strategic options 4.20 1.58 − 0.412 − 0.501
APD03 Evaluating strategic options 4.21 1.64 − 0.440 − 0.576
APD04 Developing details about strategic options 4.30 1.59 − 0.428 − 0.491
APD05 Taking the necessary actions to put changes into place 4.51 1.48 − 0.463 − 0.312
Top management support

TMS01 The management accounting system receives strong active support from top management 5.64 1.16 − 1.136 1.211
TMS02 Upper management has provided adequate resources to implement/maintain the management accounting 5.38 1.14 − 1.012 1.093
system
TMS03 The management accounting system is closely tied to the competitive strategies of our business 5.60 1.16 − 1.164 1.538
Notes: SD – Standard deviation; Skew. – Skewness; Kurt. – Kurtosis.
References
Abdel-Kader, M., Luther, R., 2008. The impact of firm characteristics on management accounting practices: A UK-based empirical analysis. Br. Account. Rev. 40, 2–27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2007.11.003.
Agbejule, A., 2005. The relationship between management accounting systems and perceived environmental uncertainty on managerial performance: A research note.
Account. Bus. Res. 35, 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2005.9729996.
AlBar, A.M., Hoque, M.R., 2019. Factors affecting cloud ERP adoption in Saudi Arabia: An empirical study. Inf. Dev. 35, 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0266666917735677.
Alcalde-Heras, H., Iturrioz-Landart, C., Aragon-Amonarriz, C., 2019. SME ambidexterity during economic recessions: the role of managerial external capabilities.
Manag. Decis. 57, 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2016-0170.
Al-Dhubaibi, A.A.S., Kamal, I., 2014. Contingencies influencing management accounting practice: A Yemen-based empirical study. Asia-Pacific Manag. Account. J. 9,
69–84.
Al-Hattami, H.M., 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. J. Manag. Control. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-020-00310-3.
Al-Htaybat, K., von Alberti-Alhtaybat, L., 2017. Big data and corporate reporting: impacts and paradoxes. Account. Audit. Account. J. 30, 850–873. https://doi.org/
10.1108/AAAJ-07-2015-2139.
Alkhatib, E., Ojala, H., Collis, J., 2019. Determinants of the voluntary adoption of digital reporting by small private companies to companies house: Evidence from the
UK. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 34, 100421 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2019.06.004.
Alves, I., Lourenço, S., 2022. The use of non-financial performance measures for managerial compensation: Evidence from SMEs. J. Manag. Control. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00187-022-00337-8.
Appelbaum, D., Kogan, A., Vasarhelyi, M., Yan, Z., 2017. Impact of business analytics and enterprise systems on managerial accounting. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 25,
29–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2017.03.003.
Aver, B., Cadez, S., 2009. Management accountants’ participation in strategic management processes: A cross-industry comparison. J. East Eur. Manag. Stud. 14,
310–322. https://doi.org/10.5771/0949-6181-2009-3-310.
Azizah, S.N., 2018. Analysis of Factors Affecting Application of Computer-Based Accounting Information System on Banking Sector, in: Advances in Social Science,
Education and Humanities Research. pp. 382–385. https://doi.org/10.2991/amca-18.2018.105.
Bailey, J.E., Pearson, S.W., 1983. Development of a tool for measuring and analysing computer user satisfaction. Manage. Sci. 29, 530–545.
Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
Berthelot, S., Morrill, J., 2016. Management control systems and the presence of a full-time accountant: An empirical study of small - and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs). Adv. Manag. Account. 27, 207–242. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-787120160000027006.
Bhimani, A., 2012. Management accounting system implementation success: Is reporting useful information sufficient? Int. J. Accounting Audit. Perform. Eval. 8,
115–136. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJAAPE.2012.046612.
Bi, R., Davison, R., Smyrnios, K., 2019. The role of top management participation and IT capability in developing SMEs’ competitive process capabilities. J. Small Bus.
Manag. 57, 1008–1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12380.
Boulianne, E., 2007. Revisiting fit between AIS design and performance with the analyzer strategic-type. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
accinf.2006.12.001.
Bouwens, J., Abernethy, M.A., 2000. The consequences of customization on management accounting system design. Account. Organ. Soc. 25, 221–241. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00043-4.
Bradley, J., 2008. Management based critical success factors in the implementation of Enterprise resource planning systems. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 9, 175–200.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2008.04.001.
Cadez, S., Guilding, C., 2008. An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency model of strategic management accounting. Account. Organ. Soc. 33,
836–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.01.003.
14
Cadez, S., Guilding, C., 2012. Strategy, strategic management accounting and performance: A configurational analysis. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 112, 484–501. https://
doi.org/10.1108/02635571211210086.
Chanegrih, T., 2008. Applying a typology of management accounting change: A research note. Manag. Account. Res. 19, 278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
mar.2008.06.005.
Chang, R.D., Chang, Y.W., Paper, D., 2003. The effect of task uncertainty, decentralization and AIS characteristics on the performance of AIS: An empirical case in
Taiwan. Inf. Manag. 40, 691–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00097-6.
Chenhall, R., 2003. Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future.
Account. Organ. Soc. 28, 127–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00027-7.
Chenhall, R., Langfield-Smith, K., 1999. The implementation of innovative management accounting systems. Aust. Account. Rev. 9, 37–46.
Chenhall, R., Moers, F., 2015. The role of innovation in the evolution of management accounting and its integration into management control. Account. Organ. Soc.
47, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2015.10.002.
Chenhall, R., Morris, D., 1986. The impact of structure, environment, and interdependence on the perceived usefulness of management accounting systems. Account.
Rev. LXI 16–35.
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. African J. Bus. Manag. 5, 13293–13301. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM11.2207.
Clohessy, T., Acton, T., 2019. Investigating the influence of organizational factors on blockchain adoption: An innovation theory perspective. Ind. Manag. Data Syst.
119, 1457–1491. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2018-0365.
Conger, J.A., Kanungo, R.N., 1988. The empowerment process: integrating theory and practice. Acad. Manag. Rev. 13, 471–482. https://doi.org/10.5465/
AMR.1988.4306983.
De Bruyckere, S., Verplancke, F., Everaert, P., Sarens, G., Coppens, C., 2020. The importance of mutual understanding between external accountants and owner-
managers of SMEs. Aust. Account. Rev. 30, 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12251.
Do, T.H., Le, H.M., Luong, D.T.T., Tran, Q.T., 2020. Relationship between the management accounting information usage, market orientation and performance:
Evidence from Vietnamese tourism firms. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 7, 707–716. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.707.
Doll, W.J., Torkzadeh, G., 1988. The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS q. 12, 259–273.
Donnelly, A.M., Kennedy, F.A., Widener, S.K., 2021. Management controls and intrinsic motivation: Insights from a lean organizational setting. J. Manag. Account.
Res. 33, 29–53. https://doi.org/10.2308/JMAR-19-078.
Dutta, G., Kumar, R., Sindhwani, R., Singh, R.K., 2021. Digitalization priorities of quality control processes for SMEs: A conceptual study in perspective of Industry 4.0
adoption. J. Intell. Manuf. 32, 1679–1698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-021-01783-2.
Enslin, Z., Hall, J.H., Du Toit, E., 2023. How pervasive is the business decision-making involvement of management accountants and what factors influence this
involvement? Adv. Manag. Account. 34, 117–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-787120220000034005.
Etemadi, H., Dilami, Z.D., Bazaz, M.S., Parameswaran, R., 2009. Culture, management accounting and managerial performance: Focus Iran. Adv. Account. 25,
216–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2009.08.005.
Firk, S., Schmidt, T., Wolff, M., 2019. CFO emphasis on value-based management: Performance implications and the challenge of CFO succession. Manag. Account.
Res. 44, 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2018.11.001.
Fleischman, G., Walker, K., Johnson, E., 2010. A field study of user versus provider perceptions of management accounting system services. Int. J. Account. Inf.
Manag. 18, 252–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/18347641011068992.
Fong, S.C.C., Quaddus, M., 2010. Intranet use in Hong Kong public hospitals. Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag. 18, 156–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/
18347641011048138.
Fong, S.C.C., Quaddus, M., 2012. A pseudo-longitudinal study of intranet use in hospitals. Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag. 20, 189–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/
18347641211218489.
Forza, C., 2002. Survey research in operations management: a process-based. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 22, 152–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210414310.
Foster, G., Swenson, D.W., 1997. Measuring the success of activity-based cost management and its determinants. J. Manag. Account. Res. 9, 109–141. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01933928108411685.
Fuadah, L.L., Safitri, R.H., Yuliani, Y., Arisman, A., 2020. Determinant factors’ impact on managerial performance through management accounting systems in
Indonesia. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 7, 109–117. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.109.
Ghasemi, R., Habibi, H.R., Ghasemlo, M., Karami, M., 2019. The effectiveness of management accounting systems: Evidence from financial organizations in Iran.
J. Account. Emerg. Econ. 9, 182–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-02-2017-0013.
Ghobakhloo, M., Hong, T.S., Standing, C., 2015. B2B E-commerce success among small and medium-sized enterprises. J. Organ. End User Comput. 27, 1–32. https://
doi.org/10.4018/joeuc.2015010101.
Ghorbel, J., 2019. A study of contingency factors of accounting information system design in Tunisian SMIs. J. Knowl. Econ. 10, 74–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s13132-016-0439-8.
Gomez-Conde, J., Lunkes, R.J., Rosa, F.S., 2019. Environmental innovation practices and operational performance: The joint effects of management accounting and
control systems and environmental training. Account. Audit. Account. J. 32, 1325–1357. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2018-3327.
Gordon, L.A., Narayanan, V.K., 1984. Management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and organization structure: An empirical investigation.
Account. Organ. Soc. 9, 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(84)90028-X.
Gorgels, S., Priem, M., Blagoeva, T., Martinelle, A., Milanesi, G., 2022. Annual Report on European SMEs - SMEs and environmental sustainability - Background
document.
Ha, Y.M., Ahn, H.J., 2014. Factors affecting the performance of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems in the post-implementation stage. Behav. Inf. Technol. 33,
1065–1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2013.799229.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 19, 139–151. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2013. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), first ed. SAGE Publications,
Thousand Oaks.
Hair, J.F., Hollingsworth, C.L., Randolph, A.B., Chong, A.Y.L., 2017. An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Ind. Manag.
Data Syst. 117, 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-04-2016-0130.
Halbouni, S.S., Nour, M.A., 2014. An empirical study of the drivers of management accounting innovation: A UAE perspective. Int. J. Manag. Financ. Account. 6,
60–86. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMFA.2014.060512.
Hall, M., 2008. The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance. Account.
Organ. Soc. 33, 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.02.004.
Hammad, S.A., Jusoh, R., Ghozali, I., 2013. Decentralization, perceived environmental uncertainty, managerial performance and management accounting system
information in Egyptian hospitals. Int. J. Account. Inf. Manag. 21, 314–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-02-2012-0005.
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. Product. Perform. Manag. 68, 1250–1271. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-02-2018-0049.
Harrison, J.L., 2009. Untangling the value of information scope: An investigation in retail pharmacies. J. Manag. Organ. 15, 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. Inf. Syst. Manag. 25, 244–257.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530802151194.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.
43, 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
15
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., Ray, P.A., 2016. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 116, 2–20. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382.
Hoozée, S., Mitchell, F., 2018. Who influences the design of management accounting systems? An exploratory study. Aust. Account. Rev. 28, 374–390. https://doi.
org/10.1111/auar.12193.
Ives, B., Olson, M.H., Baroudi, J.J., 1983. The measurement of user information satisfaction. Commun. ACM 785–793.
Jackson, D., Michelson, G., Munir, R., 2022. New technology and desired skills of early career accountants. Pacific Account. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-04-
2021-0045.
Järvenpää, M., 2007. Making business partners: A case study on how management accounting culture was changed. Eur. Account. Rev. 16, 99–142. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09638180701265903.
Joseph, G., 2006. Understanding developments in the management information value chain from a structuration theory framework. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 7,
Kheybari, S., Rezaie, F.M., Naji, S.A., Javdanmehr, M., Rezaei, J., 2020. Evaluation of factors contributing to the failure of information systems in public universities:
The case of Iran. Inf. Syst. 92, 101534 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2020.101534.
Knudsen, D.R., 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.
Kocsis, D., 2019. A conceptual foundation of design and implementation research in accounting information systems. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 34, 100420 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.accinf.2019.06.003.
Kretschmer, T., Khashabi, P., 2020. Digital transformation and organization design: an integrated approach. Calif. Manage. Rev. 62, 86–104. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0008125620940296.
Krumwiede, K.R., 1998. The implementation stages of activity-based costing and the impact of contextual and organizational factors. J. Manag. Account. Res. 10,
239–277.
Krumwiede, K.R., Suessmair, A., MacDonald, J., 2008. An exploratory study of the factors affecting the implementation success of German cost accounting methods.
In: AAA 2008 MAS Meeting Paper.
Latifah, L., Setiawan, D., Aryani, Y.A., Rahmawati, R., 2021. Business strategy – MSMEs’ performance relationship: Innovation and accounting information system as
mediators. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 28, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-04-2019-0116.
Le, H.M., Nguyen, T.T., Hoang, T.C., 2020. Organizational culture, management accounting information, innovation capability and firm performance. Cogent Bus.
Manag. 7 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1857594.
Lee, S., Han, I., 2000. The impact of organizational contexts on EDI controls. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 1, 153–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1467-0895(00)00008-7.
Liem, V.T., Hien, N.N., 2020. Exploring the impact of dynamic environment and CEO’s psychology characteristics on using management accounting system. Cogent
Bus. Manag. 7 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1712768.
Macinati, M.S., Anessi-Pessina, E., 2014. Management accounting use and financial performance in public health-care organisations: Evidence from the Italian
National Health Service. Health Policy (New York). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.03.011.
Maelah, R., Al Lami, M.F.F., Ghassan, G., 2021. Usefulness of management accounting information in decision making among SMEs: The moderating role of cloud
computing. Asia-Pacific Manag. Account. J. 16, 59–92. https://doi.org/10.24191/apmaj.v16i1-04.
Malesev, S., Cherry, M., 2021. Digital and social media marketing-growing market share for construction smes. Constr. Econ. Build. 21, 65–82. https://doi.org/
10.5130/AJCEB.v21i1.7521.
Martins, R., Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Tomás, S., 2019. Firms’ continuance intention on SaaS use – an empirical study. Inf. Technol. People 32, 189–216. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ITP-01-2018-0027.
Meier, A., 2023. Impacts of digitalization on small- and medium-sized enterprises - framework development based on a systematic review of the literature from two
decades. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Manag. 20, 2230004.
Mia, L., Patiar, A., 2001. The use of management accounting systems in hotels: an exploratory study. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 20, 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0278-4319(00)00033-5.
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. Manag. Technol. 3, 443–448. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIFE.2010.5609459.
Mukred, M., Yusof, Z.M., Asma’, Mokhtar, U., Sadiq, A.S., Hawash, B., Ahmed, W.A., 2021. Improving the decision-making process in the higher learning institutions
via electronic records management system adoption. KSII Trans. Internet Inf. Syst. 15, 90–113. https://doi.org/10.3837/TIIS.2021.01.006.
Munir, S., Abdul Rasid, S.Z., Aamir, M., Jamil, F., Ahmed, I., 2023. Big data analytics capabilities and innovation effect of dynamic capabilities, organizational culture
and role of management accountants. Foresight 25, 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-08-2021-0161.
Munir, R., Baird, K., Perera, S., 2013. Performance measurement system change in an emerging economy bank. Account. Audit. Account. J. 26, 196–233. https://doi.
org/10.1108/09513571311303710.
Naranjo-Gil, D., 2009. Management information systems and strategic performances: The role of top team composition. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 29, 104–110. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2008.05.009.
Naranjo-Gil, D., Hartmann, F., 2007. Management accounting systems, top management team heterogeneity and strategic change. Account. Organ. Soc. 32, 735–756.
Nassar, M., Al-Khadash, H.A., Sangster, A., Mah’D, O., 2013. Factors that catalyse, facilitate and motivate the decision to implement activity-based costing in
Jordanian industrial companies. J. Appl. Account. Res. 14, 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/09675421311282522.
Ngo, Q.-H., 2020. Effectiveness of management accounting system in public healthcare sector: An empirical investigation in Vietnam. Asian J. Bus. Account. 13,
147–179. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajba.vol13no2.6.
Nguyen, N.P., 2018. Performance implication of market orientation and use of management accounting systems. J. Asian Bus. Econ. Stud. 25, 33–49. https://doi.org/
10.1108/jabes-04-2018-0005.
Nguyen, T.T., Mia, L., Winata, L., Chong, V.K., 2017. Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance. J. Bus.
Res. 70, 202–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.018.
Nitzl, C., 2016. The use of partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) in management accounting research: Directions for future theory
development. J. Account. Lit. 37, 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acclit.2016.09.003.
Nitzl, C., Roldan, J.L., Cepeda, G., 2016. Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modelling, helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Ind.
Manag. Data Syst. 116, 1849–1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302.
Okour, M.K., Chong, C.W., Asmawi, A., 2019. Antecedents and consequences of knowledge management systems usage in Jordanian banking sector. Knowl. Process
Manag. 26, 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1586.
Pedroso, E., Gomes, C.F., 2020. The effectiveness of management accounting systems in SMEs: A multidimensional measurement approach. J. Appl. Account. Res. 21,
497–515.
Perdana, A., Lee, H.H., Koh, S.K., Arisandi, D., 2022. Data analytics in small and mid-size enterprises: Enablers and inhibitors for business value and firm performance.
Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 44, 100547 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2021.100547.
Pillai, K.R., Upadhyaya, P., Prakash, A.V., Ramaprasad, B.S., Mukesh, H.V., Pai, Y., 2021. End-user satisfaction of technology-enabled assessment in higher education:
A coping theory perspective. Educ. Inf. Technol. 26, 3677–3698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10401-2.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and
recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903.
Preacher, K.J., Hayes, A.F., 2008. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods
40, 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.
Rai, A., Lang, S.S., Welker, R.B., 2002. Assessing the validity of IS success models: An empirical test and theoretical analysis. Inf. Syst. Res. 13, 50–69. https://doi.org/
10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96.
16
Rieg, R., 2018. Tasks, interaction and role perception of management accountants: Evidence from Germany. J. Manag. Control 29, 183–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00187-018-0266-0.
Rikhardsson, P., Yigitbasioglu, O., 2018. Business intelligence & analytics in management accounting research: Status and future focus. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 29,
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Becker, J.-M., 2015. SmartPLS 3.
Robalo, R.C., Moreira, J.A., 2020. The influence of power strategies in AIS implementation processes. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 39, 100487 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
accinf.2020.100487.
Rouibah, K., Hamdy, H.I., Al-Enezi, M.Z., 2009. Effect of management support, training, and user involvement on system usage and satisfaction in Kuwait. Ind. Manag.
Data Syst. 109, 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570910939371.
Rouibah, K., Dihani, A., Al-Qirim, N., 2020. Critical success factors affecting information system satisfaction in public sector organizations: A perspective on the
mediating role of information quality. J. Glob. Inf. Manag. 28, 77–98. https://doi.org/10.4018/JGIM.2020070105.
Ruivo, P., Oliveira, T., Neto, M., 2014. Examine ERP post-implementation stages of use and value: Empirical evidence from Portuguese SMEs. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst.
15, 166–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2014.01.002.
Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., Chowa, C., 2006. Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants. Manage. Sci. 52, 1849–1864. https://doi.org/
10.1287/mnsc.1060.0583.
Sandalgaard, N., Nielsen, C., 2018. Budget emphasis in small and medium-sized enterprises: Evidence from Denmark. J. Appl. Account. Res. 19, 351–364. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JAAR-08-2016-0087.
Scapens, R.W., Jazayeri, M., 2003. ERP systems and management accounting change: opportunities or impacts? A research note. Eur. Account. Rev. 12, 201–233.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0963818031000087907.
Schäfer, F.S., Hirsch, B., Nitzl, C., 2022. Stakeholder pressure as a driver of risk management practices in public administrations. J. Account. Organ. Chang. 18, 33–56.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-11-2020-0188.
Sharma, R., Jones, S., Ratnatunga, J., 2006. The relationships among broad scope MAS, managerial control, performance, and job relevant information: A concomitant
analysis. Rev. Account. Financ. 5, 228–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/14757700610686435.
Shields, M.D., 1995. An empirical analysis of firms’ implementation experiences with activity-based costing. J. Manag. Account. Res. 7, 148–166.
Siew, E.G., Rosli, K., Yeow, P.H.P., 2020. Organizational and environmental influences in the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques (CAATTs) by
audit firms in Malaysia. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 36, 100445 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2019.100445.
Skafi, M., Yunis, M.M., Zekri, A., 2020. Factors influencing SMEs’ adoption of cloud computing services in Lebanon: An empirical analysis using TOE and contextual
theory. IEEE Access 8, 79169–79181. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2987331.
Solovida, G.T., Latan, H., 2017. Linking environmental strategy to environmental performance: Mediation role of environmental management accounting. Sustain.
Account. Manag. Policy J. 8, 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.
Managerial Audit. J. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900810839866.
Souza, F.F., Gasparetto, V., 2020. Innovative organization dimensions and the adoption of modern management accounting practices. Rev. Gestão Tecnol. 20,
145–166. https://doi.org/10.20397/2177-6652/2020.v20i3.1957.
ten Rouwelaar, H., Bots, J., De Loo, I., 2018. The influence of management accountants on managerial decisions. J. Appl. Account. Res. 19, 442–464. https://doi.org/
10.1108/JAAR-10-2016-0101.
ten Rouwelaar, H., Schaepkens, F., Widener, S.K., 2021. Skills, influence, and effectiveness of management accountants. J. Manag. Account. Res. 33, 211–235. https://
doi.org/10.2308/JMAR-18-048.
The Commission of the European Communities, 2003. Recomendation concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. Off. J. Eur. Union.
Tung, A., Baird, K., Schoch, H.P., 2011. Factors influencing the effectiveness of performance measurement systems. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 31, 1287–1310.
Usakli, A., Kucukergin, K.G., 2018. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling in hospitality and tourism: Do researchers follow practical guidelines? Int.
J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 30, 3462–3512. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230910978511.
van der Kolk, B., 2019. Ethics matters: the integration of ethical considerations in management accounting textbooks. Account. Educ. 28, 426–443. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09639284.2018.1543602.
Vatanasakdakul, S., Aoun, C., Chen, Y. (Nicole)., 2017. Chasing success: An empirical model for IT governance frameworks adoption in Australia. Sci. Technol. Soc.
22, 182–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971721817702278.
Venkatraman, N., 1989. The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 423–444. https://doi.org/
10.5465/AMR.1989.4279078.
Wang, N., Liang, H., Ge, S., Xue, Y., Ma, J., 2019a. Enablers and inhibitors of cloud computing assimilation: an empirical study. Internet Res. 29, 1344–1369. https://
doi.org/10.1108/INTR-03-2018-0126.
Wang, G., Song, J., 2017. The relation of perceived benefits and organizational supports to user satisfaction with building information model (BIM). Comput. Human
Behav. 68, 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.002.
Wang, S., Wang, H., Wang, J., 2019b. Exploring the effects of institutional pressures on the implementation of environmental management accounting: Do top
management support and perceived benefit work? Bus. Strateg. Environ. 28, 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2252.
Waterhouse, J.H., Tiessen, P., 1978. A contingency framework for management accounting systems research. Account. Organ. Soc. 21, 65–76.
Weigel, C., Hiebl, M.R.W., 2023. Accountants and small businesses: toward a resource-based view. J. Account. Organ. Chang. 19, 642–666. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JAOC-03-2022-0044.
Whetten, D.A., 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 490–495. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1989.4308371.
Wooldridge, B., Floyd, S.W., 1990. The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 11, 231–241. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(90)90349-9.
17

Artikel 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artikel 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artikel 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 53 (2024) 100678

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Accounting

Disentangling the effects of top management on management

(Solovida and Latan, 2017), this is not an easy task.

Fig. 1. Research framework.

2. Literature review and hypotheses development

2.1. Management accounting systems

2.2. Top management support

2.3. Decision-making orientation

and Poorundersing, 2008).

2.4. MAS user issues and concerns

3.1. Sample and data collection

3.2. Instrument and variable measurement

Industry section classification*

*NACE Rev. 2 - Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community.

3.3. Data analysis

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Measurement model

Scope 0.898 0.748 0.825

Timeliness 0.896 0.742 0.825

Aggregation 0.896 0.632 0.854

Integration 0.936 0.829 0.897

User Satisfaction 0.947 0.782 0.930

User training 0.967 0.908 0.949

Top management support 0.928 0.810 0.883

Decentralization of decisions 0.913 0.677 0.880

Accountant participation in strategic decisions 0.971 0.869 0.926

4.2. Structural model

Accountant participation (Apa) ——

Management accounting system (MAS) Aggregation 0.936***

***p < 0,001, **p < 0,01, *p < 0,05.

Accountant participation -> MAS 0.055 0.003

Accountant participation 0.100 0.120

***p < 0,001, **p < 0,01, *p < 0,05.

Fig. 2. Results of the structural model without mediating variables

(Henseler et al., 2016).

4.3. Mediation analysis

Fig. 3. Results of the structural model for organizational decision-making orientation

5. Conclusions and implications

5.1. Theoretical contributions

5.2. Managerial contributions

5.3. Limitations and future research

Declaration of competing interest

Data will be made available on request.

Table A1. Descriptive statistics of the survey answers.

Code Construct Items Mean SD. Skew. Kurt.

Management accounting system

Top management support

Notes: SD – Standard deviation; Skew. – Skewness; Kurt. – Kurtosis.

You might also like

p < 0,001, p < 0,01, p < 0,05.

p < 0,001, p < 0,01, p < 0,05.