TY - JOUR
T1 - Performance measurement systems as generators of cognitive conflict in ambidextrous firms
AU - Bedford, David S.
AU - Bisbe, J.
AU - Sweeney, Breda
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Ranjani Krishnan (editor) and the two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions. This study has benefited from comments from participants at the AAA Management Accounting Section Meeting 2017, New Directions in Management Accounting Conference 2016, AOS Conference on Quantitative Empirical Research on Management Accounting 2016, International Management Accounting Conference 2016, European Accounting Association Conference 2016, Management Accounting in Practice and Research Workshop 2015, and seminar participants at the University of Otago and University of Canterbury. We would also like to express our sincere thanks to management in organisations who participated in this study and to the Chartered Accountants Ireland Education Trust (OAmbidexMCS2014) and the Irish Research Council New Foundations Award for their support in funding this research.
Funding Information:
We thank Ranjani Krishnan (editor) and the two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions. This study has benefited from comments from participants at the AAA Management Accounting Section Meeting 2017, New Directions in Management Accounting Conference 2016, AOS Conference on Quantitative Empirical Research on Management Accounting 2016, International Management Accounting Conference 2016, European Accounting Association Conference 2016, Management Accounting in Practice and Research Workshop 2015, and seminar participants at the University of Otago and University of Canterbury. We would also like to express our sincere thanks to management in organisations who participated in this study and to the Chartered Accountants Ireland Education Trust (OAmbidexMCS2014) and the Irish Research Council New Foundations Award for their support in funding this research.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - This study explores the decision-facilitating role of performance measurement systems (PMSs) in firms attempting to translate competence ambidexterity (i.e., the simultaneous pursuit of exploration and exploitation) into innovation ambidexterity outcomes (i.e., the achievement of both radical and incremental innovations). Drawing on paradox and organisational conflict literature, this study emphasises the role of cognitive conflict, generated by PMSs, in shaping the relationships between competence ambidexterity and innovation ambidexterity. Based on survey data from a sample of 90 Irish firms, our findings indicate that competence ambidexterity is associated with (a) the choice to have a balanced set of performance measures, and (b) the use of PMSs for frequent and intensive debate between top managers. Furthermore, the study reveals that these choices are interdependent, as they function as complements in generating cognitive conflict, which in turn drives the realisation of innovation ambidexterity outcomes. The results also show that cognitive conflict is not directly associated with the development of competence ambidexterity, but is instead generated through the conjoint action of a balanced PMS design and the use of PMSs for intensive debate. Overall, this study demonstrates the interdependent nature of choices concerning the design and use of PMSs, and the significant role of PMSs as generators of cognitive conflict in firms attempting to achieve ambidexterity.
AB - This study explores the decision-facilitating role of performance measurement systems (PMSs) in firms attempting to translate competence ambidexterity (i.e., the simultaneous pursuit of exploration and exploitation) into innovation ambidexterity outcomes (i.e., the achievement of both radical and incremental innovations). Drawing on paradox and organisational conflict literature, this study emphasises the role of cognitive conflict, generated by PMSs, in shaping the relationships between competence ambidexterity and innovation ambidexterity. Based on survey data from a sample of 90 Irish firms, our findings indicate that competence ambidexterity is associated with (a) the choice to have a balanced set of performance measures, and (b) the use of PMSs for frequent and intensive debate between top managers. Furthermore, the study reveals that these choices are interdependent, as they function as complements in generating cognitive conflict, which in turn drives the realisation of innovation ambidexterity outcomes. The results also show that cognitive conflict is not directly associated with the development of competence ambidexterity, but is instead generated through the conjoint action of a balanced PMS design and the use of PMSs for intensive debate. Overall, this study demonstrates the interdependent nature of choices concerning the design and use of PMSs, and the significant role of PMSs as generators of cognitive conflict in firms attempting to achieve ambidexterity.
KW - Ambidexterity
KW - Cognitive conflict
KW - Performance measurement systems
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048782124&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.aos.2018.05.010
DO - 10.1016/j.aos.2018.05.010
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85048782124
SN - 0361-3682
VL - 72
SP - 21
EP - 37
JO - Accounting, Organizations and Society
JF - Accounting, Organizations and Society
ER -