e-journal
Contending legitimations Performance measurement coupling and decoupling in two Finnish cities
Purpose – “Contending legitimations” (Meyer and Scott) in cities – and especially multiple
conflicting institutional pressures on decision makers – have not received sufficient accounting study.
Therefore this paper aims to analyse the multiple institutional pressures on the performance
measurement (PM) practices of two Finnish cities and answer why the developments and the coupling
of budget or PM rules and routines were different in these relatively similar case cities.
Design/methodology/approach – In this interpretive study, a comparative case setting (e.g.
including several semi-structured interviews) was used.
Findings – Contending legitimations affect the coupling of city budgeting and PM rules and routines.
It was found that a city is likely to experience decoupling of formal PM rules and routines if there are
conflicting normative institutional pressures among decision makers (especially among City Board
members).
Research limitations/implications – As case studies cannot be generalized, further research on
the institutional pressures on accounting PM in cities is encouraged.
Practical implications – Noting the contending legitimations may facilitate the management of
projects for accounting change in cities.
Originality/value – The paper contributes to accounting literature by illustrating the multiple
institutional pressures and their effects on PM developments and on PM coupling in the case cities. As
a refinement to the works by Abernethy and Chua, Granlund, and Ribeiro and Scapens contending
legitimations can explain some complexities of PM related decision making as well as the will of key
actors to promote or postpone changes.
Keywords Performance measures, Organizational analysis, Public sector organizations, Cities, Finland,
Accounting
Tidak ada salinan data
Tidak tersedia versi lain