Senior Manager: “To implement one new aspect into our management control system every second year should not be too much for people in the departments and sections”. Section Manager: “Oh no, not another new method once again!“ The two managers are from the same company, and they disagree about the suitable rate in which the control system should be changed, i.e. improved (according to the senior manager). This paper elaborates on how this difference can be understood and on the more general question of how organizational support for change of management control systems may influence incorporations of new aspects in daily routines. An argument is given for the role of controllers as involved in daily operations in order to be the filter between implementation of standardized management accounting systems and change of local routines – a balance that the implementation through projects seem to have problems in handling. The paper, based on a case-study of a Swedish industrial organization, draws on the notions of design and mobilisation to question the project-form for implementing new management control systems and give support to decentralized controllers concerning two aspects: 1) The project, with focus on deadline, is worse equipped than controller to give support for mobilisation over time and 2) The project, with focus on a new feature, is worse equipped than controllers to mobilise in harmony with existing routines. Furthermore, the project is shown to risk providing a picture of successful implementation without achieving changes in routines. Thereby, a senior manager may see a slow, solid development of management control while section managers experience chaos.
SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP -- Ekonomi och näringsliv (hsv//swe)
SOCIAL SCIENCES -- Economics and Business (hsv//eng)