CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Accounting and Organizational ManagementManagement and Organizational StudiesManagement Theory and Practice

Management Control Research and the Management of Uncertainty: Rethinking Knowledge in Management

Saulpic, Olivier, Zarlowski, Philippe·2014·Management Control and Uncertainty
DOI 10.1057/9781137392121_14
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The role of managers in organizations has long been construed as that of decision-making under conditions of limited rationality and uncertainty (Simon & March, 1958; Cyert & March, 1963). For instance, decision- makers can only access a limited set of alternative solutions to the problem at hand, or might discover their preferences between competing alternatives through the decision-making process itself. The uncertainty about both the future conditions of the environment and the possible outcomes of ambiguous decisions would reinforce the consequences of limited rationality. In an organizational context of uncertainty and ambiguity, management control researchers have underlined how management control systems might play an enabling role for managers through enhanced monitoring and learning about organizational performance (Burchell et al., 1980; Ferreira & Otley, 2009). The divide between practice and research, or the lack of relevance of research for practice, has been documented and commented on by several prominent researchers in our field of management control (see for instance, Baldvinsdottir et al., 2010; Hopwood 2007, 2008, 2009; Otley, 2001; Scapens, 2008; van Helden & Northcott, 2010) or in the field of management studies (e.g. Miller et al., 2009; Van de Ven & Johnson, 2006). However, little has been said about how management control research might facilitate the management of uncertainty in organizational contexts and enhance the enabling properties of management…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/9781137392121_14

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In this field, research does not often lead to establishing what does or does not work in a specific organizational context.

    “As Saulpic and Zarlowski (2014) point out, we need to recognise that in this field ' research does not often lead to establishing what does or does not work in a specific organizational context' (p.215).”

    From The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980–2014 (2016) · cites this paper as Saulpic and Zarlowski (2014)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Saulpic, O., & Zarlowski, P.
ORCID
Venue
Management Control and Uncertainty
Publisher
Palgrave Macmillan UK
Published
2014
Pages
207-223
DOI
10.1057/9781137392121_14
OpenAlex
W2402742496
Cited by
15
References
58
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.22
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)
Locations
  • Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Palgrave Macmillan Books (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Accounting and Organizational Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management Theory and Practice
Keywords
management control systems, uncertainty management, bounded rationality, decision making under uncertainty, research-practice gap, organizational performance monitoring, organizational learning

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