The DOI matches its Crossref record; 137 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MAKING SENSE OF RESEARCH INTO THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING: A REVIEW OF ITS UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS [1]
Open accessAbstract
A central notion behind this paper is that certain fundamental theoretical and philosophical assumptions underlie any piece of research there is no such thing as a totally objective or value free investigation. Given this initial claim it is thought that the underlying assumptions behind any piece of work should be recognized and assessed by researchers to ensure that they are consistent with their personal beliefs. In other words, researchers into the management sciences should consider their own values and beliefs concerning the nature of society and the social sciences. In order to assist people in this task previous research into the organizational and social aspects of accounting is reviewed and grouped into various schools of thought within a basic sociological framework devised by Burrell and Morgan (1979). This classification of previous accounting literature according to its principal theoretical and philosophical assumptions serves a number of important purposes. First, the framework forms a map that can be used to find one's way through the wealth of research, the aims of which are sometimes confusing and the results conflicting. It will be seen that the multi-disciplinary nature of management accounting, and the consequent variety of theories subsumed under its heading, masks the fact that they tend to stem from similar perspectives towards society and the social sciences. Secondly, a practically oriented subject such as management accounting has often embraced theories from other areas with little concern for their philosophical underpinnings. By making explicit the basic assumptions behind different pieces of work, it is hoped that a greater tolerance and awareness of research from alternative disciplines and perspectives may br
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226550 · Cited by 28,308
The Social Construction of Reality
Rose, D. M., Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/323448 · Cited by 13,820
Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
O'Brien, D. P., & Williamson, O. E. (1976) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2230812 · Cited by 13,381
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Hammer, T. H., Anderson, J., Gurdon, M., Jick, T., Petit, A., Stern, R., Schwartz, H., Vardi, Y., & Dunnette, M. D. (1977) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391755 · Cited by 11,945
Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113
(1969) · Virtual Defense Library (Ministerio de Defensa) · Cited by 10,735
Social Theory and Social Structure
Ross, E. J., & Merton, R. K. (1958) · The American Catholic Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/3709394 · Cited by 10,315
The Science of “Muddling Through”
Lindblom, C. E. (1959) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.2307/973677 · Cited by 8,513
An introduction to cybernetics
Ashby, W. R. (1956) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.5851 · Cited by 7,578
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1994) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198288787.001.0001 · Cited by 7,250
Cited by
Four paradigms of information systems development
Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (1989) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/67933.67937 · Cited by 911
Current directions in IS security research: towards socio‐organizational perspectives
Dhillon, G., & Backhouse, J. (2001) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2575.2001.00099.x · Cited by 578
Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for “middle‐range” thinking
Laughlin, R. (1995) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513579510146707 · Cited by 473
A ‘time–space odyssey’: management control systems in two multinational organisations
Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. (2005) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2003.10.006 · Cited by 473
Self-citationIn Search of Management Accounting Theory
Malmi, T., & Granlund, M. (2009) · European Accounting Review · doi:10.1080/09638180902863779 · Cited by 336
Metadata
- Authors
- Hopper, T., & Powell, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1985-09
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 429-465
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2071951470
- Cited by
- 512
- References
- 137
- FWCI
- 5.20
- 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: MAKING SENSE OF RESEARCH INTO THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING: A REVIEW OF ITS UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS [1]. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00007.x
- The paper
- Hopper, T., & Powell, A. (1985). MAKING SENSE OF RESEARCH INTO THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING: A REVIEW OF ITS UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS [1]. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00007.x
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.