The influence of institutional isomorphism on budget acceptance mediated by the purposes of planning and dialogue
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-6486.rco.2021.174004Keywords:
Budget purposes, Budget Acceptance, Institutional Theory, Institutional IsomorphismAbstract
This study seeks to examine the influence of institutional isomorphism on budget acceptance, mediated by the artifact’s purposes. We conducted a survey of company managers in the pharmaceutical sector linked to the Pharmacy Guide with a sample of 147 valid responses. We used structured equation modeling for partial least squares to analyze the data and test the hypotheses. The results indicate that coercive, imitative and normative factors of the environment lead to greater use of the artifact within the studied context. They also indicate a significant positive relationship between planning purposes and the strategic acceptance response. Institutional isomorphism also presented a significant positive influence on the budget’s acceptance. There was also partial mediation of the budget’s purposes in relation to institutional isomorphism and the strategic acceptance response. It may be inferred that greater acceptance is relevant, in addition to using the artifact to respond to institutional pressure, to making the budget’s purposes useful in the company’s everyday activities. As a contribution to theory, this study reinforces the complementarity between the proposals of institutional isomorphism of DiMaggio and Powell (1983) and the strategic response model proposed by Oliver (1991), applying this model to the budget literature. It also includes budget purposes as a mediating variable in the relationship between institutional isomorphism and budget acceptance.
Downloads
References
Amans, P., Mazars-Chapelon, A., & Villesèque-Dubus, F. (2015). Budgeting in institutional complexity: The case of performing arts organizations. Management Accounting Research, 27, 47-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2015.03.001
Arnold, M. C., & Gillenkirch, R. M. (2015). Using negotiated budgets for planning and performance evaluation: an experimental study. Accounting, organizations and society, 43, 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2015.02.002
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Brandau, M., Endenich, C., Trapp, R., & Hoffjan, A. (2013). Institutional drivers of conformity–Evidence for management accounting from Brazil and Germany. International Business Review, 22(2), 466-479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2012.07.001
Brandau, M., Hoffjan, A., & Wömpener, A. (2014). The globalisation of a profession: comparative management accounting in emerging and developed countries. European Journal of International Management 6, 8(1), 73-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2014.058485
Covaleski, M., Evans III, J. H., Luft, J., & Shields, M. D. (2003). Budgeting research: three theoretical perspectives and criteria for selective integration. Handbooks of management accounting research, 2, 587-624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar.2003.15.1.3
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160.
Ekholm, B. G., & Wallin, J. (2011). The impact of uncertainty and strategy on the perceived usefulness of fixed and flexible budgets. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 38(1‐2), 145-164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.2010.02228.x
Fávero, L.P. (2017). Análise de Dados: Técnicas multivariadas exploratórias com SPSS e Stata. Elsevier Brasil.
Frezatti, F., Braga de Aguiar, A., & José Rezende, A. (2007). Strategic responses to institutional pressures, and success in achieving budget targets: A survey at a multinational company. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 15(2), 50-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/18347640710837353
Gomes, R. D. P., Pimentel, V. P., Cardoso, M. L., & Pieroni, J. P. (2014). O novo cenário de concorrência na indústria farmacêutica brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social.
Guerreiro, M. S., Rodrigues, L. L., & Craig, R. (2012). Voluntary adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards by large unlisted companies in Portugal–Institutional logics and strategic responses. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(7), 482-499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2012.05.003
Guerreiro, R., Pereira, C. A., Rezende, A. J., & Aguiar, A. B. D. (2010). Fatores determinantes do processo de institucionalização de uma mudança na programação orçamentária: uma pesquisa ação em uma organização brasileira. Revista de contabilidade do mestrado em ciências contábeis da UERJ, 10(1).
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Hansen, S. C., Otley, D. T., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2003). Practice developments in budgeting: an overview and research perspective. Journal of management accounting research, 15(1), 95-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar.2003.15.1.95
Hansen, S. C., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2004). Multiple facets of budgeting: an exploratory analysis. Management accounting research, 15(4), 415-439. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2004.08.001
Judge, W., Li, S., & Pinsker, R. (2010). National adoption of international accounting standards: An institutional perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 161-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2010.00798.x
Kihn, L. A. (2011). How do controllers and managers interpret budget targets?. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 7(3), 212-236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/18325911111164187
Libby, T., & Lindsay, R. M. (2010). Beyond budgeting or budgeting reconsidered? A survey of North-American budgeting practice. Management accounting research, 21(1), 56-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2009.10.003
Martins, G. D. A., & Theóphilo, C. R. (2009). Metodologia da investigação cientifica. São Paulo: Atlas.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
Mucci, D.M., Frezatti, F., & Dieng, M. (2016). As múltiplas funções do orçamento empresarial. RAC-Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 20(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2016140121
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of management review, 16(1), 145-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279002
Otley, D. (1999). Performance management: a framework for management control systems research. Management accounting research, 10(4), 363-382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1999.0115
Oyadomari, J. C., de Mendonça Neto, O. R., Cardoso, R. L., & Lima, M. P. (2008b). Fatores que influenciam a adoção de artefatos de controle gerencial nas empresas brasileiras: um estudo exploratório sob a ótica da teoria institucional. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 2(2), 55-70.
Ozdil, E., & Hoque, Z. (2017). Budgetary change at a university: A narrative inquiry. The British Accounting Review, 49(3), 316-328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2016.09.004
Pereira, A. J. P., & Gomes, J. S. (2017). Um estudo das estratégias de internacionalização das indústria farmacêutica brasileiras. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 11(29), 68-79.
Piccoli, M. R., Warken, I. L. M., Lavarda, C. E. F., Mazzioni, S., & da Silva Carpes, A. M. (2014). Os múltiplos usos do orçamento em empresas catarinenses. Unoesc & Ciência-ACSA, 5(2), 195-206.
PWC. (2018) O Setor farmacêutico no Brasil. PDF. São Paulo.
Ringle, C. M., Da Silva, D., & Bido, D. D. S. (2014). Modelagem de equações estruturais com utilização do SmartPLS. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(2), 56-73. DOI: 10.5585/remark.v13i2.2717
Russo, P. T., Parisi, C., & Pereira, C. A. (2016). Evidências das forças causais críticas dos processos de institucionalização e desinstitucionalização em artefatos da contabilidade gerencial. Revista Contemporânea de Contabilidade, 13(30), 2.
Santos, M. B., Scherer, F. L., Piveta, M. N., Moura Carpes, A., & Oliveira, M. C. S. F. (2017). Respostas estratégicas às pressões institucionais para sustentabilidade no setor moveleiro. Revista eletrônica de estratégia & negócios, 10(2), 100-124. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19177/reen.v10e22017100-124
Sindusfarma (2018). Perfil da indústria e aspectos relevantes do setor. PDF. São Paulo.
Sivabalan, P., Booth, P., Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2009). An exploratory study of operational reasons to budget. Accounting & Finance, 49(4), 849-871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2009.00305.x
Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1999). The institutionalization of institutional theory. Studying Organization. Theory & Method. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, 169-184.
Wijethilake, C., Munir, R., & Appuhami, R. (2017). Strategic responses to institutional pressures for sustainability: The role of management control systems. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(8), 1677-1710.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The RCO adopts the Free Open Access policy, under the standard Creative Commons agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The agreement provides that:
- Submission of text authorizes its publication and implies commitment that the same material is not being submitted to another journal. The original is considered definitive.
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with necessary recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their personal page) before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase the impact and citation of published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
- The journal does not pay copyright to the authors of the published texts.
- The journal's copyright holder, except those already agreed in the Free Open Access Agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), is the Accounting Department of the Faculty of Economics, Administration and Accounting of Ribeirão Preto of the University of São Paulo.
No submission or publication fees are charged.
Up to 4 authors per article are accepted. Exceptionally duly justified cases may be reviewed by the Executive Committee of the RCO. Exceptional cases are considered as: multi-institutional projects; manuscripts resulting from the collaboration of research groups; or involving large teams for evidence collection, construction of primary data, and comparative experiments.
It is recommended that the authorship be ordered by contribution of each of the individuals listed as authors, especially in the design and planning of the research project, in obtaining or analyzing and interpreting data, and writing. Authors must declare the actual contributions of each author, filling the letter to the editor, at the beginning of the submission, taking responsibility for the information given.
Authors are allowed to change throughout the evaluation process and prior to the publication of the manuscript. The Authors should indicate the composition and final order of authorship in the document signed by all those involved when accepted for publication. If the composition and authoring order is different than previously reported in the system, all previously listed authors should be in agreement.
In the case of identification of authorship without merit or contribution (ghost, guest or gift authorship), the RCO follows the procedure recommended by COPE.
