Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 127 of the 127 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems

Open access
Bedford, David S., Malmi, Teemu, Sandelin, Mikko·2016·Accounting, Organizations and Society

Abstract

This study examines management control (MC) combinations that are effective in different strategic contexts through two related approaches – MC as a package and MC as a system. First, this study identifies how a set of MC practices combine (i.e. MC packages) to achieve effective control outcomes for firms operating in defender and prospector strategic contexts by applying fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Using data from a survey of top managers the analysis reveals that there are multiple ways by which firms can effectively combine MC practices in a given strategic context. Furthermore, the analysis shows that not all MC practices found to be relevant in isolation are relevant when examined simultaneously as a package. Second, based on a comparison of effective MC packages this study examines interdependencies between MC practices (i.e. MC systems). Results show that in defender firms a diagnostic control use of accounting and mechanistic structural controls act as complements, while mechanistic structural controls and measure diversity act as substitutes. In prospector firms an interactive control use of accounting and organic structural controls are found to have complementary effects. These results indicate that the effectiveness of accounting control and structural control choices are determined not only by their fit with strategic context but also by how they fit with each other. This study also demonstrates how an understanding of MC packages can provide guidance for theory development and empirical analysis of MC systems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aos.2016.04.002

Cites

127 of 127 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 127 references

Metadata

Authors
Bedford, D. S., Malmi, T., & Sandelin, M.
Venue
Accounting, Organizations and Society
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
51
Pages
12-28
ISSN
0361-3682 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2344850942
Cited by
328
References
127
FWCI
43.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.aos.2016.04.002
The paper
Bedford, D. S., Malmi, T., & Sandelin, M. (2016). Management control effectiveness and strategy: An empirical analysis of packages and systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.04.002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.