Reliance on accounting performance measures: dead end or new beginning?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Otley and Fakiolis (2000) concluded that many RAPM studies were not comparable with each other due to differences in measurement.
“These difference were outlined and reviewed in Otley and Fakiolis (2000) which concluded that many of the studies were not comparable with each other due to these differences in measurement.”
From The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980–2014 (2016) · cites this paper as Otley and Fakiolis (2000)
Cites
Budget use and managerial performance
Otley, D. T. (1978) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.2307/2490414 · Cited by 623 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980–2014
Otley, D. (2016) · Management Accounting Research · doi:10.1016/j.mar.2016.02.001 · Cited by 769 · see citing works
Self-citationBisbe, J., Batista-Foguet, J.-M., & Chenhall, R. (2007) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.010 · Cited by 422 · see citing works
Management Control Research and the Management of Uncertainty: Rethinking Knowledge in Management
Saulpic, O., & Zarlowski, P. (2014) · Management Control and Uncertainty · doi:10.1057/9781137392121_14 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Otley, D., & Fakiolas, A.
- Affiliations
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Otley, David
- ORCID
- Otley, David
- Venue
- Accounting, Organizations and Society
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4-5
- Pages
- 497-510
- ISSN
- 0361-3682 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2129203734
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 12.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Accounting Organizations and Society (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Accounting and Organizational Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting Theory and Financial Reporting
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
- Keywords
- accounting performance measures, managerial behavior, performance evaluation (human resources), management accounting
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
