Boundary subjects and boundary objects in accounting fact construction and communication

Purpose This paper aims to elaborate the concepts of boundary subjects and boundary objects in constructing and communicating relevant accounting facts for managing product development (PD). Boundary subjects as reflective actors benefit effective accounting enactment, by building a shared understanding about different actors’ roles and information needs, and by helping to respond to these needs with new boundary objects. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses a longitudinal interventionist case study of a machinery manufacturer. The focus of this case study was the production ramp-up phase at the end of a PD program. Different actors’ needs were first collected and elaborated by interventionist researchers (boundary subjects). Then accounting prototypes (boundary objects) provided new means of communication. Findings The findings show that dealing with boundaries is crucial in accounting development. The role of boundary subjects was fundamental in the process of choosing, constructing, elaborating and communicating accounting facts. During this process, accounting prototypes integrated new accounting facts, the boundary subjects mitigated the boundaries and the boundary objects focused and restricted communication about accounting facts. Research limitations/implications The paper tests the pragmatic constructivism approach by examining accounting enactment under uncertainty and ambiguity. The study refines pragmatic constructivism in terms of boundaries, boundary subjects as actors and boundary objects. Practical implications The intentional use of boundary subjects and objects as communication platform could push a more active inclusion of business controllers as active business partners. Originality/value The paper contributes to the literature on accounting development by highlighting the use of boundary subjects and boundary objects as fundamental mechanisms in constructing and communicating accounting facts.

[1]  K. Goffin,et al.  Managing Lessons Learned and Tacit Knowledge in New Product Development , 2010 .

[2]  J. Kraaijenbrink.  Integrating Knowledge and Knowledge Processes: A Critical Incident Study of Product Development Projects , 2012 .

[3]  Angelo Ditillo,et al.  Designing Management Control Systems to Foster Knowledge Transfer in Knowledge-Intensive Firms: A Network-Based Approach , 2012 .

[4]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Knowledge for Theory and Practice , 2006 .

[5]  Marc Wouters,et al.  Using Prototypes to Induce Experimentation and Knowledge Integration in the Development of Enabling Accounting Information , 2010 .

[6]  Thomas Ahrens,et al.  Management Accounting as Practice , 2005 .

[7]  Frances A. Kennedy,et al.  Enabling the management accountant to become a business partner: Organizational and verbal analysis toolkit☆ , 2006 .

[8]  Pja Peter Verdaasdonk,et al.  Supporting management decisions with ex ante accounting information , 2002 .

[9]  Luciana D'Adderio,et al.  Crafting the virtual prototype: how firms integrate knowledge and capabilities across organisational boundaries☆ , 2001 .

[10]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Product development performance : strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry / Kim B. Clark, Tahahiro Fujimoto , 1991 .

[11]  Petri Suomala,et al.  Management Accounting Research in Practice: Lessons Learned from an Interventionist Approach , 2011 .

[12]  M. Wouters,et al.  Management Accounting in the Manufacturing Sector: Managing Costs at the Design and Production Stages , 2006 .

[13]  Tuomas Korhonen,et al.  Managing program impacts in new product development: An exploratory case study on overcoming uncertainties , 2016 .

[14]  Janine Nahapiet,et al.  The roles of accounting in organizations and society , 1980 .

[15]  R. Scapens,et al.  Governing product co-development projects : the role of minimal structures , 2015 .

[16]  Marko Järvenpää,et al.  Making Business Partners: A Case Study on how Management Accounting Culture was Changed , 2007 .

[17]  Bill Nixon,et al.  Research and development performance measurement: A case study , 1998 .

[18]  Beth A. Bechky.  Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[19]  Martin Messner,et al.  Accounting and Strategising: A Case Study from New Product Development , 2010 .

[20]  Tuomas Korhonen.  Performance Measurement Dynamism in Product Development , 2014 .

[21]  Tony Huzzard,et al.  Constructing interorganizational collaboration , 2010 .

[22]  M. Wouters,et al.  Using Prototypes to Induce Experimentation and Knowledge Integration in the Development of Enabling Accounting Information*: Prototypes to Induce Experimentation and Knowledge Integration , 2011 .

[23]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  The rise of the balanced scorecard! – Relevance regained? , 2012 .

[24]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[25]  Hanne Nørreklit.  The art of managing individuality , 2011 .

[26]  K. Lukka,et al.  There and Back Again: Doing Interventionist Research in Management Accounting , 2006 .

[27]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[28]  Matthew D. Hall,et al.  Accounting information and managerial work , 2010 .

[29]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  Towards a paradigmatic foundation for accounting practice , 2010 .

[30]  Michael J. Earl,et al.  Prototype systems for accounting, information and control , 1982, DATB.

[31]  K. Lukka,et al.  Battlefield around interventions: A reflective analysis of conducting interventionist research in management accounting , 2014 .

[32]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[33]  Wai Fong Chua,et al.  The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in management accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based costing , 2001 .

[34]  Petri Suomala,et al.  Innovation for Multiproject Management: The Case of Component Commonality , 2016 .