The Impact of Managers’ Personality on Visualization of Management Accounting Data

Management decision making has become increasingly difficult. The visualization of data, i.e. the presentation of data in visual format, can facilitate comprehension and improve decision making. This paper examines transferability of insights from visualization research to the management accounting context and analyzes the impact of personality characteristics on the success of visualizations in management accounting reports. By investigating parameters for successful visualization of data in management accounting reports, we make a contribution to behavioral management accounting research. We generate insights on the differential effect of the manager’s personality on visualization success with an experimental study. Supplementary graphs in management accounting reports have significantly increased decision quality but not affected decision efficiency in terms of speed in a performance evaluation task. Contrary to expectations from visualization research, personality characteristics had no differential impact on visualization success. Hence, the effort of customizing accounting reports entails no significant benefit for management decision making.

[1]  M. Bazerman.  Judgment in Managerial Decision Making , 1990 .

[2]  Stephen Michael Kosslyn,et al.  Graph Design for the Eye and Mind , 2006 .

[3]  Jörn-Axel Meyer,et al.  The acceptance of visual information in management , 1997, Inf. Manag..

[4]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Chartjunk or goldgraph? Effects of persenataion objectives and content desirability on information presentation: effects of presentation objectives and content desirability on information presentation , 1999 .

[5]  I. B. Myers.  Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator , 1985 .

[6]  A. Paivio.  Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach , 1986 .

[7]  E. Cardinaels.  The interplay between cost accounting knowledge and presentation formats in cost-based decision-making , 2008 .

[8]  M Seyrani,et al.  AN EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF EXPERIENCE AND TASK COMPLEXITY ON AUDIT JUDGMENTS , 2009 .

[9]  Dov Te'eni,et al.  Impacts of decision task, data and display on strategies for extracting information , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[10]  J. Bortz,et al.  Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation , 1995 .

[11]  K. Merchant,et al.  Management Control Systems: Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives , 2003 .

[12]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Multiple Factors that Determine Performance with Tables and Graphs , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  COMPUTER GRAPHICS AS DECISION AIDS: DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH* , 1984 .

[14]  Roger L. M. Dunbar,et al.  The Effects of Personality Type on Choices Made in Strategic Decision Situations , 1991 .

[15]  Priti Shah,et al.  The Comprehension of Quantitative Information in Graphical Displays. , 2005 .

[16]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Graphical presentation of accounting data for financial forecasting: An experimental investigation , 1989 .

[17]  Lois S. Mahoney,et al.  An investigation of the effects of decisional guidance and cognitive ability on decision-making involving uncertainty data , 2003, Inf. Organ..

[18]  Vicky Arnold,et al.  Impact of intelligent decision aids on expert and novice decision-makers' judgments , 2004 .

[19]  H. Bruch,et al.  Controllerrollen - fachliche und persönliche Anforderungsprofile, Selbstverständnis und Fremdwahrnehmung , 2003 .

[20]  William R. Kinney,et al.  The Effects of Domain Experience and Task Presentation Format on Accountants' Information Relevance Assurance , 2001 .

[21]  J Meyer,et al.  Performance with tables and graphs: effects of training and a Visual Search Model , 2000, Ergonomics.

[22]  Bernard Pierce,et al.  Towards a More Comprehensive Understanding of the Roles of Management Accountants , 2007 .

[23]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Graphics and managerial decision making: research-based guidelines , 1988, CACM.

[24]  P. Fayers,et al.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1990 .

[25]  Geoffrey B. Sprinkle.  Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting , 2003 .

[26]  G. Corso,et al.  The Effects of Extended Practice on the Evaluation of Visual Display Codes , 1983 .

[27]  Cynthia Frownfelter-Lohrke,et al.  The effects of differing information presentations of general purpose financial statements on users' decisions , 1998 .

[28]  Cheri Speier,et al.  The influence of information presentation formats on complex task decision-making performance , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[29]  Joan H. Coll,et al.  Tables and Graphs: A Classification Scheme for Display Presentation Variables and a Framework for Research in this Area , 1993, Inf. Process. Manag..

[30]  J. Bortz,et al.  Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler , 2006 .

[31]  E. Vance Wilson,et al.  An investigation of the relative presentation efficiency of computer-displayed graphs , 1994, Inf. Manag..

[32]  J. Wayne Spence,et al.  On human cognition and the design of information systems , 1997, Inf. Manag..

[33]  Ian I. Mitroff,et al.  A Program for Research on Management Information Systems , 1973 .

[34]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Behavioral Decision Theory , 1977 .

[35]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[36]  Dennis F. Galletta,et al.  Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[37]  Brad Tuttle,et al.  Information Presentation and Judgment Strategy from a Cognitive Fit Perspective , 1998 .

[38]  J. C. Henderson,et al.  The Influence of Decision Style on Decision Making Behavior , 1980 .

[39]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  Decisional guidance and end-user display choices , 1999 .

[40]  Michael D. Shields.  Research in management accounting by North Americans in the 1990s , 1997 .

[41]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Multiattribute Data Presentation and Human Judgment: A Cognitive Fit Perspective* , 1994 .

[42]  Mark J. Martinko,et al.  Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to Study Managers: A Literature Review and Research Agenda , 1996 .

[43]  Charlotte H. Mason,et al.  Visual Representation: Implications for Decision Making , 2007 .

[44]  Robert Libby,et al.  Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing: The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment , 1995 .

[45]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[46]  George Loewenstein,et al.  The Curse of Knowledge in Economic Settings: An Experimental Analysis , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[47]  Colin Ware,et al.  Information Visualization: Perception for Design , 2000 .

[48]  Jörn-Axel Meyer,et al.  Visualisierung im Management , 1996 .

[49]  S. Kosslyn.  Understanding charts and graphs , 1989 .

[50]  W. Cleveland,et al.  Graphical Perception: Theory, Experimentation, and Application to the Development of Graphical Methods , 1984 .

[51]  R. G. Hunt,et al.  Cognitive style and decision making , 1989 .

[52]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[53]  M. L. Bariff,et al.  Cognitive and Personality Tests for the Design of Management Information Systems , 1977 .

[54]  David K. Simkin,et al.  An Information-Processing Analysis of Graph Perception , 1987 .

[55]  R. Hogarth,et al.  BEHAVIORAL DECISION THEORY: PROCESSES OF JUDGMENT AND CHOICE , 1981 .

[56]  Donald L. Davis,et al.  User cognitive types for decision support systems , 1984 .

[57]  R. Zmud.  INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND MIS SUCCESS: A REVIEW OF THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE* , 1979 .

[58]  Robert Libby,et al.  Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation , 1993 .

[59]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  The role of working memory on graphical information processing , 1997, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[60]  F. Guala.  The Methodology of Experimental Economics: Bibliography , 2005 .

[61]  Malcolm Smith,et al.  The impact of presentation format and individual differences on the communication of information for management decision making , 2003 .

[62]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1986 .

[63]  Iris Vessey,et al.  The effect of information presentation on decision making: A cost-benefit analysis , 1994, Inf. Manag..

[64]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Report format and task complexity: Interaction in risk judgments , 1986 .

[65]  R. Ashton,et al.  Students As Surrogates In Behavioral Accounting Research - Some Evidence , 1980 .

[66]  Barry L. Lewis,et al.  Human information processing research in accounting: The state of the art in 1982 , 1977 .

[67]  Joan H. Coll,et al.  Graphs and tables: a four-factor experiment , 1994, CACM.

[68]  Sarah E. Bonner.  Judgment and Decision Making in Accounting , 2007 .

[69]  R. Hertwig,et al.  Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists? , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[70]  Edward J. Lusk,et al.  The Effect of Cognitive Style and Report Format on Task Performance: The MIS Design Consequences , 1979 .

[71]  Tiina Gallén,et al.  Managers and strategic decisions: does the cognitive style matter? , 2006 .

[72]  Barry L. Lewis,et al.  Determinants of Auditor Expertise , 1990 .

[73]  M. Wiersema,et al.  Top Management Team Demography and Corporate Strategic Change , 1992 .

[74]  B. K. Blaylock,et al.  COGNITIVE STYLE AND THE USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION , 1984 .

[75]  Henry C. Lucas,et al.  The Impact of the Mode of Information Presentation on Learning and Performance , 1980 .

[76]  John W. Payne,et al.  Effort and Accuracy in Choice , 1985 .

[77]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers , 1984 .

[78]  dt ogilvie,et al.  An Empirical Test of Cognitive Style and Strategic Decision Outcomes , 2005 .