Similar to most studies, our findings are subject to limitations.
First, it is important to note that our research
approach is comprehensive only with respect to the
overall controlling function, so that the quality of the
accounting information with respect to the specific decision
problems at hand has not been established. Hence,
our results do not support the recommendation to controllers
to relax with respect to information quality per
se, but rather to take special care to present the relevant
management accounting information in a consistent fashion.
Furthermore, our analysis is based on data regarding
companies’ top-management level. Therefore, our results
have to be interpreted carefully with respect to lower
hierarchy levels, even though our theoretical model does
not suggest contradictory results in this respect. Nevertheless,
as local managers’ information needs typically
differ from those of top management, their frame of reference
for judging accounting information consistency
might be different, calling for other solutions than an integrated
accounting system to achieve such consistency.
If, for example, non-financial performance measures are
used locally, they might be more consistent with a separate
management accounting database, using imputed or
standardized costs and revenues for performance measurement.
In that case, the business unit controller has to shield
the local manager from financial accounting information
provided to top hierarchy levels using a separate management
accounting database for operational purposes (Euske
et al., 1993). Such a separate database would not, on the
other hand, be reported in a company-wide, aggregated
fashion to top management. These considerations might
also partly explain the existence of hybrid forms of integrated
accounting system design in larger firms.