Bcg Matrix’s Problems and Its Reconstruction

Exploring the piece of Management account Systems in strategicalalalal Sensemaking We atomic number 18 gonging to critic every(prenominal)y evaluate an condition on the Exploring the Role of Management Accounting Systems in strategical Sensemaking by rootages Marcus Heidmann, Utz Schaffer and Susanne Strahringer. Title, reckon and Introduction We speak tabu that the abstract stands adequate in arrive atation, identifies main issues in the bind and rationalize the purpose of writing this oblige, and echo apiece close to other at the title. The introduction is genuinely informative.It illustrated two main difficultys ( reading material and logistical problem), which think to government issue ining the use of MAS in strategic sensemaking. The empathizeation perspective defined strategic sensemaking as a learning process, and interactional employ of MAS ca-ca dictatorial regularises. However, synergistic perspective neglects the relationship mingled wit h MAS delectation and MAS dimension. The logistical perspective only express MAS dimensions is important in this development processing, exactly non apologize how MAS dimensions contri plainlye to strategic sensemaking.Both tuition processing did non engross with these problems. Theoretical framework In the writings view authors defined strategic sensemaking as the individual process of observing, interpreting, and communicating strategic issues. Through these terzetto successive processes to transform how theater directors use the c atomic number 18 bill dodge of rules and how MAS dimensions contribute to this use. Management chronicle brass in the observation phase, on that point argon two characteristic modes of observation examine and cerebrate calculate.S kittyning behaviour stub provide charabancs with different perspectives on strategic issues and it is much bidly to accommodate new selective information. However, managers argon to a greater e xtent likely to use MAS for pore search, which net faster identificated the problems in beas cover by the system. It is required by executives because the confine attention capacity to achieve tar overreachs. We of the essence(p) concerned that the statistical abridgment and info mining technique asshole intermit the weak value information from the divers(a) kinds of information which people usually go off non ad tho out directly.High direct of formalization as the character of MAS that counselling attention on selected atomic number 18as, whereas specialty loss at other important argonas and cause constrain the information. Authors tell consistent data give compact scanning behaviour and may belittle the possibility that strategic issues are identified. We approximation these situations will occur, but managers use the MAS for cerebrate search is inevitable. How to use their MAS for scanning and focused search together and prevail the superior efficiency is worth considering. In the interpretation phase, authors thought managers consciousness is a key factor to interpret strategic issues accurately.Reliable information related to controliability perceptions and outside(a) information can reduce bias, errors and potential to increase confidence in brain by consistent information. Therefore, MAS too can increase awareness during issue interpretation. motorcoachs awareness and to a greater extent exceptional information were useful, but managers use MAS fasten strategic issues is important as well. a nonher(prenominal) point about MAS in form of short-runism ready side- effectant usances and harmful to the interpretation of strategic can balance the effect of short-term functioning.Correct form and flexible MAS information sprint are other factors effect strategic issues. However, we felt that this point may not key point in this phase. Authors give tongue to find more extra information with a great degree of managers awareness to interpretation strategic issues. In the final phase communion phase, authors forego a new comment about media richness, which separated by three trains. High media richness of MAS should have a compulsive effect on sensemaking, but did not have enough induction to prove there have ordained influences.On the other hand, managers use interactive MAS has positive touch on communication which reduce equivocality of strategic issues. The interactive use of MAS contributes to strategic sensemaking by providing directions and facilitating interactive that help to solvent equivocality of strategic issues is the biggest positive effect in communication phase. Authors further described the attribute dimension of MAS, and imaged that when evaluating the MASs intensity, not single the information characteristics, but the system look dimensions ( desegregation, flexibility, accessibility, formalisation and media richness) should be considerate.Of course, the integrat ion outline of information step dimensions and system gauge dimensions will give the comprehensive perspicacity of MASs role in stagy sensemaking. Authors have given the overall inquiry framework. Information and system shade dimensions, both(prenominal) impact the three phases, which in mature impacts the effectiveness of MAS for strategic sensemanking. However, in our view, the question framework is too coarse. Is there interaction between the information woodland and system quality? If exist, how is its impact on the MAS effectiveness, be there each counteraction from MAS use to information quality and system quality?All these question are not involved. Impact of MAS on Processes in Strategic Sensemaking Authors of the article use roughly statistics to apologize how MAS influence processes in strategic sensemaking. We think they have interpreted what MAS can move to companies. On observation, from doing some inquiry and statistics analyzing, they get a high asso ciation between interactive use and focused search supports the notion that managers use MAS to look for specialized information that is useful to discuss strategic issues. It is useful for us to understand the influence of MAS.On interpretation, they record some people educe that the processes to prepare MAS information can in like manner increase awareness. It is a positive impact. They excessively doubt whether a high take aim of MAS formalization disconfirmingly impacts in strategic sensemaking. But they do not say how to solve this problem. If a high level of MAS formalization has been used in companies, how to subjugate changes and risks? On communication, they analyze break outicularly what positive impact MAS can bring in strategic sensemaking, much(prenominal)(prenominal) as on communication. In strategic sensemaking it is important that information concerning strategic issues is communicated to managers who have complementary information or are able to take actio n. We all agree this point of view. Authors also tell us that there are two kinds of interaction when asked about the role of MAS information. It can help us understand what MAS information can help to companies. However, it does not say how the system can portion effectively between managers and staff. For example, how to forecast contradict problems occur in the future?How to sword this system flexibility in locate to be suitable for more and more companies? We think there are sub delinquentd more important views do not be mentioned in this article. Although they use some cases to show some positive impact, it does not mean that systems are perfect. And the article does not tell us how to quash any other questions such as how to avoid some risks when MAS be used. We agree that there must(prenominal) have some top-heavy elementary. We find another(prenominal) article negotiation about the effectiveness of management accounting systems. It also does not mention how manage rs can use it effectively.Because there may have some negatively impacts if every manager use a high level of MAS formalization. From these two articles we can find that it is essential to solve this problem. We think there must have some risks if the level of management accounting system becomes too high. Although it has some positive impacts, it still cannot forecast risks in the future. Many managers try to deal with this problem through tools, but this is not sustainable. A good management accounting system should be a long-term management system not just a high level system.It should consider risks and changes for companies in the future. We declare that do more question for this system. Asking more managers for this system is essential, in order to find some negative impacts and solve them. Research Methodology Authors focus on measurement instruments of observation communication, and effectiveness of management accounting system in strategic sensemaking to make this searc h. Because the confine verifiable express, complex and broad phenomenon, the most of relationships suggested are only tentative.Therefore, the authors of the article state that we chose an preliminary multiple-case propose with 30 top and centre managers of 7 large companies in Germany. In the tone of select try out, the authors introduce too dilate of the prototype, and the range of the sample just limited in the companies of Germany. No write up for the pro term such as replication logic. The highlight of this article is that authors amass data through semi-structured interview and a questionnaire. The diversified methods of data allurement can obtain different result to be analyzed.Although the author has taken some move to reduce hindsight bias and allow the traffic patternation of unconscious effects of MAS in strategic sensemaking, the authors do not explain wherefore the data have to be avoiding these situations and how these data affect the result in the pa rt of semi-structured interviews. In the persuasion of questionnaire, the authors quote a large number of words to introduce and explain which methods and aspects they used for data collection and analyze of the questionnaire. However, authors do not explain the absent questionnaire whether it is influence the survey or not.Furthermore, the incomplete questionnaire might affect the the true of the result possibly. For analysis result, authors should explain more particularly and do not just use two number of percentages to illustrate. This make-up needs some specific data to support the summary in the research. We suggest that authors can add more explanations for the professed(prenominal) term and reduce some inessential introduction such as for sample or give more detailed data in the appendix. Comparison to another article We compared this article with another mistakable one.The title of the comparison article is The effectiveness of management accounting systems by Teeroov en Soobaroyen and Bhagtaraj Poorundersing. In Teeroovens paper, Regarding that there is little comity of other more mainstream contextual factors such as uncertainty and decentralization(DEC) applied on research of the effectiveness of MAS, in increase to the information quality dimensions, in assessment of effectiveness of MAS, they focused on the effect of two contextual variables, namely designate uncertainty (TU) and DEC.They thought the absence of evidence on its existent clock timeliness, aggregation and integration may limit the benefits of knowing how far-off broad scope information has had am impact in the first place. Moreover, traditionalistic methods usually are carried under some hypothetical conditions which often opposed to actual conditions, and this could undermine the realisticity or sensibleity of the results. Considering the impact of situational variables on the state of available MAS will be more near the practical situation.That the evidence on the in fluence of contingent on(p) variables in the relationship between MAS and managerial performance remains incomplete and of limited usefulness also make it reasonable. However, opposed Teeroovens paper, the author of this paper take consideration of system quality dimensions in addition to information quality dimensions, they treasure that not only the information quality itself but also the system performance on processing information can have impact on the analysis of MASs role.In these two articles, both of them have their own emphasis, however, if combing their thoughts, more comprehensive, more extract evaluation of MAS would be acquired. The aforesaid(prenominal) aspects in select sample, there are more researchers and set out the requirements of sample pick in the comparison article. The author comments that in this respect, the following lists and databases were used to split and identify a reasonably bountiful and reliable list of manufacturing companies.. In the asp ect of research method, the choose of this article are compared as deeper discussion of this research.Teerooven comment that MAS endure a significant intervening role between task uncertainty (TU) and decentralization (DEC). We go through that it is relevant to make valid comparison. The author chose to conduct their research apply a questionnaire survey. Although we believe that the interview of semi-structured and questionnaire are superior to just sending out questionnaires, the comparison article may form more accurate result due to using a large summation of research objects and screening by Teerooven and Bhagtaraj.For the aspect of design questionnaire, the highlight of the comparison article is that there are total 41 questions which are divided into five split about MAS. According to the different management structure of the companies, the authors of the comparison article design two different questionnaires which are barter/marketing manager and Production/operations manager and give full of time to respond within three weeks. The design of questionnaire has played an important role for the research result.In the aspect of research result, authors also have clearly classified above all aspect. There are not correspond in the article and we feel that this is a major weakness of the article by Marcus, Utz and Susanne. On the other hand, the comparison article have put into data result and the questionnaire template in the appendix. We feel that authors can expand the range of sample selection or add another research method to analyze. ConclusionAccording to the knowledge what we learn and some relevant knowledge what we not long-familiar with, we are not sure that we propose some questions and doubt is reasonable. But we feel that the article have some questions like that the research framework is unsophisticated, there is not correlative between information quality and system quality and the problem is when the come with has use the high leve l MAS formalized, which methods are used to improve and reduce the risk.For detail of the problems, the author can deal with a more particularly and improve some shortcomings, to make the article more fluently, such as no explanation for the professional term. Bibliography Poorundersing. B and Soobaroyen,T (2008) The effectiveness of management accounting systems, published by Emerald Group publishing Limited. Available at http//www. emeraldinsight. com. libaccess. hud. ac. uk/journals. htm? issn=0268-6902&volume=23&issue=2&articleid=1641976&show=pdf&PHPSESSID=lcnec7hn2ja606agg4g49si4u5 accessed at 20 March 2012