MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145019341 · doi:10.17722/ijme.v2i3.104

Determinants of Performance Measurement Practices: Toward a Contingency Framework

2014· article· en· W2145019341 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaveh Asiaei, Ruzita Jusoh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Management Excellence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContingencyContingency theoryBusinessProcess managementEconometricsComputer scienceEconomicsKnowledge managementEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract-The issue of understanding the antecedent conditions that are necessary for the effective implementation of performance measurement system (PMS) is at the heart of the debate in the management accounting control systems (MACS) literature. This study intends to examine empirically the associations between one element of MACS i.e. PMS and some contextual factors, namely organizational culture, industry type, and firm size from contingency lens. The paper is based on the results of a study carried out in Iran through a questionnaire survey of Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) belong to 128 companies in Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). SMARTPLS V2.0 M3, which using partial least squares (PLS), was utilized to analyze the data collected in this study. The results of the survey reveal that organizational culture and size are the contributing factors in the usage of certain PMS, i.e. the extent use of multidimensional performance measures, within Iranian public listed companies. This study extends the current management accounting literature in general and previous research on PMS in particular through offering an exhaustive conceptualization of PMS. Moreover, this study sheds light on the way in which practitioners and organizations may realize those antecedents that are pivotal to their effective usage of PMS with the ultimate purpose of taking full advantage of their PMS implementation. Such insight offers guidance as to the focus required in understanding necessary organizational traits as a basic phase of the procedure of PMS usage. Keywords- Performance measurement system (PMS); Multidimensional performance measures; Contingency theory; Iran 1.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Management ExcellenceSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207