Introduction to Management Control Research

This course is a general introduction to management accounting and control research. It will start with a general overview of the "controlling" research tradition in Germany and a discussion about the state-of-the-art research on management accounting and control. The main focus of the course, however, is on the academic journey of the doctoral students. Therefore, the course will address general questions such as how to write a paper and how to deal with reviewers' feedback. Special emphasis will be put on the ethical dimension of conducting rigorous and relevant research.

Messner, M., Becker, A., Schäffer, U., & Binder, C. (2008). Legitimacy and Identity in Germanic Management Accounting Research. European Accounting Review, 17, 129-159. Schäffer, U. (2012). Management Accounting Research in Germany – From Splendid Isolation to Being Part of the International Community. Journal of Management Control, 23, 291-309.Loft, A. (2004). “Nice work”: Writing a Ph.D. Thesis in Accounting, in: Humphrey, C. & Lee, B. (2004): The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research – A Behind the Scenes View of Using Qualitative Research Methods, 95-117.Grover, V. (2001). 10 Mistakes Doctoral Students Make in Managing their Program. Decision Line, May 2001, 11-13.Grover, V., & Thatcher, J. (2010). The 10 Mistakes Students Make in Their Doctoral Program Revisited: The Student Response (Part One). Decision Line, March 2010, 15-19.Grover, V., & Thatcher, J. (2010). The 10 Mistakes Students Make in Their Doctoral Program Revisited: The Student Response (Part Two). Decision Line, May 2010, 15-18.Colquitt, J., & George, G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ - Part 1: Topic Choice. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 432-435.Bono, J., & McNamarra, G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ - Part 2: Research Design. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 657-660.Grant, A. & Pollock, T. (2011). Publishing in AMJ - Part 3: Setting the Hook. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 873-879.Sparrowe, R. T., & Mayer, K. J. (2011). Publishing in AMJ – Part 4: Grounding Hypotheses. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 1098-1102.Zhang, Y., & Shaw, J. D.(2012). Publishing in AMJ – Part 5: Crafting the Methods and Results. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 8-12.Gelektkanycz, M., & Teppper, B. J. (2012). Publishing in AMJ – Part 6: Discussing the Implications. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 256-260.Evans, J. H., Feng, M., Hoffman, V. B., Moser, D. V., & Van der Stede, W. (2015). Points to Consider When Self-Assessing Your Empirical Accounting Research. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32, 1162-1192.Agarwal, R. et al. (2006). Reap Rewards: Maximizing Benefits from Reviewer Comments. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 191–196.Colquitt, J. (2012). Plagiarism Policies and Screening at AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 749-751.Colquitt, J. (2013). Data Overlap Policies at AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 331-333.O’Boyle, E. H., Banks, G. C., & Gonzalez-Mulé, E. (2017). The Chrysalis Effect: How Ugly Initial Results Metamorphosize Into Beautiful Articles. Journal of Management, 43, 376-399.DFG (1998), (2012): Proposals for Safegarding Good Scientific Practice – Recommendations of the Comission on Professional Self Regulation in Science.Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control systems as a package – Opportunities, Challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19, 287-300. Grabner, I., & Moers, F. (2013). Management control as a system or a package? Conceptual and empirical issues. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38, 407-419. Bedford, D. S., Malmi, T., & Sandelin, M. (2016). Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 51, 12-28.

The participants of this course will intensely discuss the papers from the list below. Since the papers will not be pre-assigned, participants must be prepared to present the key insights of each paper in a 5-10 minutes presentation to the group. Therefore, it is essential and key to success that all participants read all papers very thoroughly.

Presentations and discussion

90