Accounting and Business Research

AbstractThis paper provides a conceptual comparison between the 'mainstream strategic management accounting' literature, the 'accounting and strategising' literature and 'strategic management accounting (SMA) in close inter-organisational relationships'. It concludes that 'SMA in close inter-organisational relationships' shares some important characteristics with the 'accounting and strategising' literature. Important differences were found, too, though. These mainly concerned the need to understand individuals working for close partners as preparers of strategic information; the need for disaggregated accounting information about unique connections to close partners and about the role of indirect benefits that follow from close connections and the need for the company to not only collect information but also disperse diverse information within close inter-organisational relationships. Through an intensive case study of a global robot manufacturer, Robotics, this paper also provides novel empirical evidence on 'SMA in close inter-organisational relationships'. For instance, SMA practices included indirect benefits, something mainly neglected in the existing literature on SMA. These indirect benefits involved a close customer's willingness to invest time and effort in Robotics' technological development, thereby contributing to Robotics' ability to attain revenue gains in its interactions with other customers. Our findings also have important implications for the 'inter-organisational accounting' literature, for instance, by highlighting the need to link more explicitly strategic decision-making with the current interest in the role of accounting in inter-organisational dynamics.Keywords: strategic management accountingclose inter-organisational relationshipsstrategystrategisinginter-organisational accounting AcknowledgementsThe authors gratefully acknowledge helpful comments from John Burns, Lars Frimanson, Trevor Hopper, Kari Lukka, Martin Messner, Sven Modell, Jodie Moll, Bill Nixon, Bob Scapens, two anonymous reviewers and Ola Svanström, ABB Robotics. Financial assistance was provided from the Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems, the Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation, and Lars Erik Lundbergs Foundation.

Martin Carlsson-Wall

Kalle Kraus

Johnny Lind

Strategic management accounting in close inter-organisational relationships

紧密组织间关系中的战略管理会计

Mark Clatworthy

Juan Manuel García Lara

Edward Lee

Introduction to the 2024 <i>Accounting and Business Research</i> International Accounting Policy Forum

2024年《会计与商业研究》国际会计政策论坛导言

Menachem (Meni) Abudy

Eli Amir

Efrat Shust

Are family firms less audit-risky? Analysing audit fees, hours and rates

家族企业审计风险较低吗？分析审计费用、工时和费率

Pawel Bilinski

Beyond the street EPS surprise – when ‘other surprises’ matter in explaining earnings announcement returns

超越街头EPS意外——当“其他意外”在解释盈利公告回报中起作用时

Joana Cardoso Fontes

Argyro Panaretou

Catherine Shakespeare

The evolution of fair value measurement

公允价值计量的演变

This paper provides extensive empirical evidence of varied international practice in accounting for exploration and evaluation (E&E) costs under the permissive standard IFRS 6. We distinguish 10 different E&E policy methods in the reports of 307 firms from 11 countries. We compare the methods used (as assessed from firms' detailed notes) with any policy labels assigned by firms (such as successful efforts or full cost). These labels are not defined in IFRS 6, and the labels assigned by firms are often inconsistent with the definitions in non-IFRS accounting requirements. We then analyse the determinants of E&E policy choice. We find that policy methods differ between countries, that mining firms use more conservative policies than oil & gas firms, that (for mining firms) more conservative policies are used by producing firms than by firms whose only activity is E&E, and that the US version of the successful efforts method is more likely to be used by oil & gas firms and by firms with a US listing. We also show that an analysis based on labels can generate biased samples and misleading results because many firms do not assign a policy label.

Christian Stadler

Christopher Nobes

Varied international practice in accounting for extractive activities

采掘活动会计处理的国际实践多样性

acBWQ6	Account. Bus. Res.
Journal Impact	2.00
mbqgSu	BUSINESS, FINANCE(Q2)
xGGr6y	SCI Q3中科院 4 区

ISSN	0001-4788, 2159-4260
h-index	69
hQoIdU	管理学(4区)管理学商业财政与金融(4区)

u9zg3I	经济业务会计财务管理计算机科学政治学数学法学
+5d/bs	e+/GRg: Routledge，uzYam8: ，dxwaWB: journal，8x2mMQ: TY4X7V
ak9yM6	A7IHrH: 1970，sQJ/D8: 100.00%，sE9og+:0.00%， wzlKC/: 37.25%

Accounting and Business Research

uM3Gfz

sZFHBm

sZFHBm

sZFHBm

sZFHBm

Hi2Sc4

e7MLUV

XjnQ+b

Kq5Kd6

LB2xFn

XmiM++

Strategic management accounting in close inter-organisational relationships

Introduction to the 2024 Accounting and Business Research International Accounting Policy Forum

Are family firms less audit-risky? Analysing audit fees, hours and rates

Beyond the street EPS surprise – when ‘other surprises’ matter in explaining earnings announcement returns

The evolution of fair value measurement

Are family firms less audit-risky? Analysing audit fees, hours and rates

Introduction to the 2024 Accounting and Business Research International Accounting Policy Forum

Beyond the street EPS surprise – when ‘other surprises’ matter in explaining earnings announcement returns

The evolution of fair value measurement

Varied international practice in accounting for extractive activities