|
MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING WEB |
|
Caplan, E. H. 1966. Behavioral assumptions of management accounting. The Accounting Review (July): 496-509. (JSTOR link). Summary by James R. Martin |
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the differences between the underlying assumptions of traditional management accounting and modern (1966) organizational theory. The following table provides a brief comparison between the concepts underlying the two theories. Follow the McGregor link for a summary of theory X and theory Y.
COMPARISON OF TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT
ACCOUNTING AND MODERN ORGANIZATIONAL THEORIES
|
|
TRADITIONAL |
MODERN |
|
Objective of organization: |
Maximize profit. Assumes that sub-goals are divisible and additive (responsibility accounting). |
The dominant members have goals, the organization cannot. Survival of the dominant members is the main goal and satisficing* is second. Sub-goals are not divisible and additive and may conflict. |
|
Human behavior: |
Lazy man theory X. |
Motivation factors include psychological, social and economic factors. Mixed theory X and Y. |
|
Management behavior: |
Must control employees with close supervision to maximize profits. |
Make decisions to balance the contributions from participants with organizational inducements. Control through assigning and obtaining acceptance of authority. |
|
Management accounting: |
Used to aid in maximizing profit with emphasis on bureaucratic control, but accounting is neutral. |
Used to provide information for planning and controlling to balance contributions. |
* Satisficing is a term coined in the economics literature and refers to achieving satisfactory results rather that maximizing.
| Behavioral Issues Main Page | Controllership Main Page | Theories Main Page |