oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Why is research on management accounting change not explicitly evolutionary?: Taking the next step in the conceptualisation of management accounting change
Örebro University, Swedish Business School at Örebro University. (CEROC)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3922-578X
School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
2009 (English)In: Management Accounting Research, ISSN 1044-5005, E-ISSN 1096-1224, Vol. 20, no 2, p. 146-162Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this article we discuss the evolutionary foundation of the OIE-guided management accounting change research building on the framework of [Scapens R.W. 1994. Never mind the gap: towards an institutional perspective on management accounting practice. Management Accounting Research, 5, 301–321.] and [Burns, J. and Scapens, R.W., 2000. Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional framework. Management Accounting Research, 11, 3–25.]. We argue that research on management accounting change should be based on evolutionary theory, but that the full potential of evolutionary theory has not yet been described or used in management accounting research. The conceptualisation and understanding of management accounting change can be improved and expanded if the evolutionary approach is developed beyond the general belief that it describes only small and gradual, often slow, changes. In this article we show that an evolutionary perspective on management accounting change implies that management accounting’s development is explained as the interaction between the evolutionary sub processes of retention (inheritance), variation and selection. Thus, both continuity and change are seen as evolutionary outcomes. These processes follow the cumulative causality that Charles Darwin proposed and Thorstein Veblen applied to the social sciences. Such a comprehensive theory, here labelled Universal Darwinism, must, however, be given substance with supporting details.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2009. Vol. 20, no 2, p. 146-162
Keywords [en]
Evolutionary theory, Institutions, Routines, Evolutionary economics, Retentions, Variation, Selection
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-6132DOI: 10.1016/j.mar.2008.12.001ISI: 000266147700005Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-64749114289OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-6132DiVA, id: diva2:209753
Available from: 2009-03-27 Created: 2009-03-27 Last updated: 2017-12-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Johansson, Tobias

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Johansson, Tobias
By organisation
Swedish Business School at Örebro University
In the same journal
Management Accounting Research
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 359 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf