Integrated Information Systems and Management Accounting System Design: A Global Bibliometric Analysis of Their Impact on Interorganizational Performance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35870/emt.v10i2.5929Keywords:
Management Accounting System (MAS), Integrated Information Systems (IIS), Inter-Organizational Performance, Bibliometric AnalysisAbstract
This study examines the role of the Management Accounting System (MAS) in supporting interorganizational performance through Integrated Information Systems (IIS). Using a bibliometric analysis approach on global publications, the research explores trends, core themes, and the relationships among MAS, IIS, and interorganizational performance. The results indicate a significant increase in publications related to this topic since 2007, with prominent focuses such as cost accounting, competition, decision-making, and accounting. The integration of IIS and MAS has been shown to enhance efficiency, coordination, and transparency within interorganizational relationships, as well as to support strategic decision-making. The study also identifies learning systems and organizational learning as areas that require further exploration.
Downloads
References
Abernethy, M. A., & Vagnoni, E. (2004). Power, organization design and managerial behaviour. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(3-4), 207-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(03)00049-7.
Abernethy, M. A., Bouwens, J., & Van Lent, L. (2004). Determinants of control system design in divisionalized firms. The Accounting Review, 79(3), 545-570. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2004.79.3.545.
Anderson, S. W., & Sedatole, K. (2003). Management accounting for the extended enterprise: Performance management for strategic alliances and networked partners. Management accounting in the digital economy.
Anthony, R. N., & Govindarajan, V. (2004). Management control systems (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Irwin.
Athey, S., & Stern, S. (1998). An empirical framework for testing theories about complementarity in organizational design. Working Paper No. 6600. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Baiman, S. (1982). Agency research in management accounting: A survey. Journal of Accounting Literature (Spring), 154–213.
Baiman, S., & Demski, J. (1980). Economically optimal performance evaluation and control systems. Journal of Accounting Research, 18, 184–220.
Barua, A., Konana, P., Whinston, A. B., & Yin, F. (2004). Assessing net-enabled business value: An exploratory analysis. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 585–620.
Bharadwaj, A. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169–196.
Chalos, P., & O’Connor, N. G. (2004). Determinants of the use of various control mechanisms in US-Chinese joint ventures. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29, 591–608.
Das, T. K., & Teng, B. (2000). Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions perspective. Organization Science, 11(January–February, 1), 77–101.
Davila, A., & Foster, G. (2005). Management accounting systems adoption decisions: Evidence & performance implications from early-stage/startup companies. The Accounting Review, 80(4), 1039–1068.
Drake, A. R., Haka, S. F., & Ravenscroft, S. P. (1999). Cost system and incentive structure effects on innovation, efficiency and profitability in teams. The Accounting Review, 74(3), 323–345.
Garvin, D. A. (1998). The processes of organization and management. Sloan Management Review (Summer), 33–49.
Grafton, J., Lillis, A. M., & Widener, S. K. (2010). The role of performance measurement and evaluation in building organizational capabilities and performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(7), 689–706.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization science, 7(4), 375-387. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.4.375.
Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of management journal, 38(1), 85-112.
Harrigan, K. R. (1988). Strategic alliances and partner asymmetries. Management International Review (Special Issue), 53–71.
Indjejikian, R. J., & Matejka, M. (2006). Organizational slack in decentralized firms: The role of business unit controllers. The accounting review, 81(4), 849-872. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2006.81.4.849.
Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Vaidyanath, D. (2002). Alliance management as a source of competitive advantage. Journal of management, 28(3), 413-446.
Johnston, H. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1988). Creating competitive advantage with interorganizational information systems. MIS Quarterly, 12(2), 153–165.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1990). The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. The American Economic Review, 511-528.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1992). Economics, organization and management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1995). Complementarities and fit: Strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 19(March–May), 179–208.
Nicolaou, A. I. (2004a). Quality of post-implementation review for enterprise resource planning systems. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 5(May, 1), 25–49.
Nicolaou, A. I. (2004b). Firm performance effects in relation to the implementation and use of enterprise resource planning systems. Journal of Information Systems, 18(Fall), 79–105.
Nicolaou, A. I. (2011). Integrated Information systems and interorganizational performance: the role of management accounting systems design. In Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research (pp. 117-141). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1475-1488(2011)0000014008.
Nicolaou, A. I., & Bhattacharya, S. (2006). Organizational performance effects of ERP systems usage: The impact of post-implementation changes. International journal of accounting information systems, 7(1), 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2005.12.002.
Otley, D., & Berry, A. (1980). Control, organization, and accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5(2), 231–246.
Parkhe, A. (1993). Strategic alliance structuring, a game theoretic and transaction cost examination of interfirm cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 794–829.
Rai, A., Patnayakuni, R., & Seth, N. (2006). Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 225–246.
Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(June, 2), 237–263.
Simons, R. (1995). Levers of control, how managers use innovative control systems to drive strategic renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Simons, R. (2000). Performance measurement and control systems for implementing strategy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
Young-Ybarra, C., & Wiersema, M. (1999). Strategic flexibility in information technology alliances: The influence of transaction cost economics and social exchange theory. Organization Science, 10(4), 439–459.
Zaheer, A., & Venkatraman, N. (1995). Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 373–392.
Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization science, 9(2), 141-159. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.2.141.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Silmy Auliya Zahra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Copyright Retention and Open Access License
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal non-exclusive right of first publication under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2. Rights Granted Under CC BY 4.0
Under this license, readers are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use
- No additional restrictions — the licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as license terms are followed
3. Attribution Requirements
All uses must include:
- Proper citation of the original work
- Link to the Creative Commons license
- Indication if changes were made to the original work
- No suggestion that the licensor endorses the user or their use
4. Additional Distribution Rights
Authors may:
- Deposit the published version in institutional repositories
- Share through academic social networks
- Include in books, monographs, or other publications
- Post on personal or institutional websites
Requirement: All additional distributions must maintain the CC BY 4.0 license and proper attribution.
5. Self-Archiving and Pre-Print Sharing
Authors are encouraged to:
- Share pre-prints and post-prints online
- Deposit in subject-specific repositories (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv)
- Engage in scholarly communication throughout the publication process
6. Open Access Commitment
This journal provides immediate open access to all content, supporting the global exchange of knowledge without financial, legal, or technical barriers.
