MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312191455 · doi:10.1111/1911-3846.12849

Explaining the Unintended Consequences of Management Control Systems: Managerial Cognitions and Inertia in the Case of Nokia Mobile Phones*

2022· article· en· W4312191455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Teemu Malmi, Katja Kolehmainen, Markus Granlund

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Accounting Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysfunctional familyCognitionUnintended consequencesEmbeddednessControl (management)PsychologyBusinessSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologyManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Management control systems (MCS) have been known to produce unintended, dysfunctional consequences. However, relatively little is known about how MCS can contribute to the inertia and even decline of a firm. Our analysis in the abductive mode was triggered by a surprising case study observation that although Nokia Mobile Phones (NMP) certainly had many capabilities that could have facilitated a timely response to disruptive environmental change, this did not happen. In developing an explanation for this, we draw on the managerial cognitions literature, showing how the cognitions at NMP, developed in the era of organizational success, became embedded in its MCS. This embeddedness, in turn, intensified existing cognitions. As the cognitions became less accurate over time, the once effective MCS started to cause various inertial effects, such as suboptimal and slow decision‐making. We contribute to the literature on the dysfunctional consequences of MCS by theorizing how MCS can contribute to inertia via cognitions in two ways: first, by reinforcing prevailing cognitions and hence preventing management from realizing a need for change; and second, by moderating the impact cognitions have on actions by delaying actions based on renewed cognitions. Both ways may be fatal, especially in hyper‐competitive contexts.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Accounting ResearchSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207