ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
THE EFFECT OF ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING ON APPLYING MANAGEMENT
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION AND FIRM PRODUCING OPERATION
Fatemeh Rasouli
M.A. in Accounting, Accounting Department, Marvdasht Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Marvdasht, Iran
Hashem Valipour
Assistant professor, Accounting Department, Firozabad Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Firozabad, Iran
Javad Moradi
Assistant professor, Accounting Department, Shiraz Branch, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Abstract
Present study is examine the relation between the effect of organizational learning on applying
management accounting information and firm producing operation. The universe includes the
firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange based on the conditions considered for 129 firms in 2012.
The NAFMA questionnaire (National Award for Management Accounting) was used to collect
the data to test the hypotheses. NAFMA is the best choice to assess the firms in field of the
research. Generally the information indicate that there isn't a significant relation between
interaction organizational learning, management accounting approaches and techniques firm
operation but there is a positive and significant relation between the firm size and operation.
Key words: Organizational learning, Management Accounting Information, Firm producing
operation, Organizational learning facilitators.
1– Introduction:
The study focuses on organizational learning begun 40 years ago and developed increasingly
(Susana et al., 2005).Organizational learning was presented for the first time by March &
Simonin 1985 (Falconer, 2006).Organizational learning is a special form of learning
development in an organization by the key personnel in the organization may be in relation to
following changes in the organization (Curado, 2006).Organizational learning prioritizes
innovation and learning new science and focuses on the people's role in innovating and applying
new science. Organizational learning is an important method to achieve successful operation
and competitive advantage for organizations Miller (1992) proposes in relation to learning
assessment that organizational learning means learning science by the people and groups
interested in applying it in their jobs and influence others to execute their duties which are
important for the organization (Choe, 2004).
By virtue of above mentioned matters it can be said that organizational learning may be
described simply as a situation or processes influencing production or yield (Thomas and Allen,
2006). Continuous organizational learning needs valid and transparent information, careful
assessment of management accounting information and operational information about their
suitability and respondence system.
Organizational learning is influenced by individual learning of the organizational personnel
(Rhodes et al., 2008).
When an organization benefits from advanced producing technology it creates optimal operation
by applying management accounting techniques and approaches to report rapidly and assess
carefully management accounting information as the basis of continuous organizational
learning. In previous studies only the relation between management accounting information,
organizational learning and producing operation were examined while application of the
management accounting information led to optimal firm operation in production had been
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
391
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
ignored. That is why in this study we examine the effect of organizational learning on applying
management accounting information and firm producing operation.
2– Study hypotheses:
Organizational learning is enhanced by creating variety in activities and experiences in the firm
(Choe, 2004). Activities execution in different conditions increases variety of occurrences and
beliefs identified by a firm; such operational variety enables firm to found a primary skill and
science and enhance and increase nest firm's learning. Other facilitators protecting and
promoting organizational learning are environmental changes, rapid and continuous reporting,
management accounting approaches and techniques, etc. which are as an intermediate between
the firm and external conditions (Sim and Killough, 1998).
By virtue of lab experiences Lam (1997) found that a logistic system group for decision may
increase the decision quality or influence of joint learning by improving group interaction.
Shirani et al. (1999) indicated that a logistic system group may influence positively science
achievement and belief creation by helping group relations. Scott (2000) indicated the obstacles
against learning in all levels of organization and lack of relation between learning processes in
organization lead to a gap between organizational learning and the learner organization.
Deveraux (2005) concluded that the organizational learning increase influences the rate of
applying management accounting approaches and techniques and optimal use of management
accounting information and organizational learning by the managers adjust the producing
operation.
By virtue of above matters it can be said that if the organizational learning is applied well, it is
more probable that the management accounting information collection relates to effective
organizational learning. When the organizational learning is not applied well, the information
collection may lead to improper learning and then it does not improve the operation. Thus, we
may propose the hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis: Organizational learning adjusts the relation between applying management
accounting approaches and techniques and producing operation.
3– Study framework:
Organizational learning: It seems that the phrase 'organizational learning' was used for the first
time by Cyert and March when they were studying the behavioral dimensions of organizational
decision in 1963 (Davies, 2003), but some others believe the academic researchers pad attention
to organizational learning in 1950s (Choe, 2004). Regardless the exact date of the organizational
learning discussion commencement the subject was not discussed seriously until the late 1970
when Argyris and Schon (1978) focused their activities on organizational learning.
Although related studies continued in 1980s the organizational learning subject was only one of
the subjects proposed in the management field trends like production strategy and management
in 1990s and then the learning subject was influenced by new management subjects including
the learner organizations (Ghorbanizadeh, 2008).
The 'organizational learning' expression apparently indicates individual learning in organization,
but organizational learning indicates more the group or organizational learning. Individual
learning is done by study, interview, knowledge, experience, exercise and effective mental
models development in mind, but organizational learning appears when the group learns to have
interaction, share its knowledge and do collectively in a way that the group's intact capacity of
the group increases and gains the ability to understand and do effectively (Choe, 2004).
Organizational learning is a process by which the organization understands and manages its
experiences. Organizational learning essentially relates to science production. Garvin (1993)
considers organizational learning as a change in the science condition. In fact, organizational
learning includes to benefit from science and apply it.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
392
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
Management accounting information system: Management accounting information system's
goal is to collect, classify and summarize the information which finally lead to present the
information report for programming, controlling and assessing producing activities (Bruggeman
and Slagmulder, 1995).
Management accounting includes designing and using accounting in the organization. It is not
possible to consider management accounting as a collection of fixes rules, but the management
accounting methods is to achieve organization's goals through improving decisions by its
managers and personnel. Considering the organizations have different goals and are a
composition of different members it is not possible to define general and monotone rules for all
organizations. So management accounting should adapt itself with related organization's
qualities and needs (Shabahang, 2011).
Management accounting which is advanced industrial accounting including different subjects to
be able to help the users of internal financial information specially the managers to do their
duties well and sufficiently (Namazi, 2005).
Management accounting is relation to prepare and apply accounting information for internal
managers of the organization to give them the information to permit them to be equipped better
in their directional and control duties and take official and commercial decisions.
By virtue of CIMA Institute's (Chartered Institute Management Accounting) view management
accounting means: Identifying, collecting, analyzing, preparing and exchanging information to
program, assess and control internally and also it is used to secure proper application and
responsibility by the managers. Also management accounting includes preparing financial
reports for non-managing groups such as shareholders, beneficiaries, governmental
organizations and tax department.
Management accounting information: Management accounting information in organizational
learning are used as basic elements of learning. The Management accounting information play
critical role in creating new science and up-to-dating mental models presented by the
organization (Ouksel et al., 1997).
Producing operation: Producing operation includes product quality, flexibility and product
delivery on time. Jayram et al., Joshi et al. and Deveraj et al. define such cases as follows: 1–
Product quality may be defined as the product adaptation with the qualities expected by the
client realized according to the latter's needs and final product presentation. 2– Flexibility is
assessed in two dimensions: volume and features of the product. Flexibility is to increase or
decrease the organization's production ability upon the client's demand without consuming time
and expense shock. Also it is possible to consider the organization ability to change the client's
view concerning the product design or its production process as flexibility. 3–Delivery on time
means the organization's ability to deliver the product on due time and delivery speed in client's
emergency conditions or when the client benefits from 'Just in Time Production System' (Choe,
2004).
Types of operations: It is possible to divide the operations into financial and nonfinancial
operation information groups (Abernethy and Brownell, 1997). Financial operation indicates
how much the organization's goals (Such as capital productivity, sale productivity and
investment productivity) have been achieve (Miller, 1992). The nonfinancial operation
information includes qualitative and nonfinancial measures such as client's satisfaction, product
quality and personnel's partnership (Harrison et al., 1997).
Considering the importance of the factors such as human force, capital, product and
management it is possible to group the operation assessment methods as follows:
A) Financial assessment: The assessment is done through financial ratios or reports and methods
such as profit and loss, balance sheet, budgeting, budget adaptation, costing based on activity,
etc.
B) Human resources assessment: The assessment is done by the methods such as work
evaluation, obligational choice, comparison, sensible events registration, dual comparison, etc.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
393
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
C) Assessing production processes:
Adam Smith's methods.
Tailor's ergometry.
Project control.
Statistical quality control.
Models to program production control.
D) Assessing management processes:
Iso 140000-9000.
Management based on goal.
Comprehensive quality management.
Malcolm Baldrich's prize.
Hoshin's management system.
Self-assessment.
Balanced score card.
Puberty models.
European Quality management foundation.
Beneficiaries' views.
4– Study history:
Miller (1996) presented the article, 'Organizational Learning ' in the 'Academy of human
Resource Development' based on the research done by Laura L.Bierema and David M.Berdish
under title, 'Assessing Organizational Learning Rate' of some part of Ford Motor Firm; the
study conclusion indicated that if the management , friends', colleagues' and resources'
protection is weak and no feeling and meaning are created in the team relating to organizational
learning, it may influence negatively the successful organizational learning realization and
operation improvement.
Chenhall (1997) examined the organizational learning panorama to identify the types of
management accounting information necessary for advanced production technology. In his
study he showed experimentally that by virtue of advanced production technology the effects of
organizational learning of operational information may promote production operation.
Fullerton et al. (2002) examined the effect of the operational information of qualitative
management and organizational learning on producing operation; in their study they showed in
detail the operational information of qualitative management has a positive effect on the
producing operation through organizational learning.
In 2003 in their article under tittles, 'Examining Organizational Learning Learner Organization'
with emphasis on 'Learning Cycle' John Scott and Peterson examined the roots of learner
organization formation and finally stated the reasons of the gap between organizational learning
and learner organization and obstacles against learning transfer in all levels of organization and
also lack of relation between learning processes in the organization.
In a study under title, 'Studying Organizational Learning, Culture and Strategy' Hudspeth (2004)
emphasized on the role and importance of organizational learning culture and considered the
culture of the organization effective in changing the organization to a learner one.
In their study Schaffer (2004) examined how to apply management accounting information,
organizational learning and organizational operation. The study indicated that different
information do not influence learning; the study stated that applying management accounting
information have direct and indirect positive effect on organizational operation through learning
process; the findings indicated that different types of management accounting information have
different effects on keeping main model, main structural model and organizational learning.
In his study Choe (2004) examined the relations of management accounting information,
organizational learning and producing operation; by virtue of the study organizational learning
was examined to improve producing operation through examining management accounting
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
394
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
information for AMT (Advanced Making Technology); the findings in a study under title,
'Organizational Learning In International Organizations' Nordtvedt (2005) concluded that
effective organizational learning and training increase sale, market share, profitability and firm
operation and organizational learning plays an important role in the organizational success.
Rosete's (2005) study findings proposed that the organizations should pay attention to the
method training the managers their role in organizational learning; the managers should create
an atmosphere in which the organizational learning would find its position in the organization
and finally by virtue of the leaders' protection the science and information systems which are
important instruments of the organization lead it to organizational learning whose result is
improvement of producing operation.
In a study under title, 'From Individual Learning To Organizational Learning' Aslam et al.
(2011) stated that in the era known as hyper-changing the organizations should benefit well
from science and learning as competitive advantages; they found that the organizations' view
and mission should be in line with organizational learning and the people should change
individual learning to the organizational learning and consider collective and organizational
learning in order to develop and improve producing operation which is final organizations' goal.
Russ (2011)states that the leaders try to gain resources, listen carefully what their personnel say,
try in line with their progress and help to facilitate learning in the organization to achieve the
organizational goals.
5- Study methods and variables:
NAFMA (National Award for Management Accounting) questionnaire which is the best choice
to assess firms in the field was used to collect the data and test the hypotheses. The
questionnaire was created officially by MIA (Malaysian Institute of Accountant) and CIMA
(Chartered Institute of Management Accounting)in Kuala Lumpur on April, 13, 2004.
The general and main regression model designed to test the hypotheses is as follows:
Yi=α + β1 MA*TEQ + β2 Size + β3 Debt Ratio + Ɛ
Regarding how to use organizational learning, management accounting approaches and
techniques and their effects on the firms' operation the studies indicate that applying
organizational learning and management accounting techniques increase the assets yield (Choe,
2004).
Following models are used to test the hypothesis:
ROA =α + β1 MA*TEQ + β2 Size + β3 Debt Ratio + Ɛ
ROE =α + β1 MA*TEQ + β2 Size + β3 Debt Ratio + Ɛ
Regarding the study models, the dependent variable in the study is producing operation (ROA,
ROE) and the independent ones in this study are organizational learning level and approaches
and management accounting techniques. The control variables in the study are the firm size
(Normal logarithm of the data) and debt ratio.
By virtue of the limitations 129 firms were selected as the sample.
Table 1: Number of the distributed and gathered questionnaires
distributed
Gathered
number of the questionnaires
160
129
no reply
31
The measurement method is used in the study by which the questionnaire was used to collect the
data. First in the tentative step 50 questionnaires were given to the universe subjects who were
sampled and then gathered in order to examine the reliability of the questionnaire. Having
analyzed the data the reliability coefficient was calculated by Cronbach alpha test and the
questionnaire alpha was 0.8597 percent.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
395
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
The questions' numbers related to each variable are defined in following table:
Table 2: Number of the questions relating to each variable
the variable under consideration
special questions
management accounting
5
management accounting information
2
organizational learning, organizational learning dimensions
4
and organizational learning facilitators
commerce results (Operation measures)
2
management accounting approaches
26
6- Statistical analysis:
6–1: Descriptive statistics:
In this section the study variables descriptive statistics are described to validate the study
findings.
Table 3: Operational variables descriptive statistics and other final variables used in the study models
Study variables
minimum
maximum
mean
standard deviation
Assets yield
-0.060
0.59
0.140
0.124
Owners equity yield
-0.370
1.67
0.338
0.273
How much the
management
0.289
1.000
0.585
0.227
accounting is used
Advantage to use the
management
0.380
0.920
0.613
0.144
accounting techniques
Organizational
0.300
1
0.660
0.177
learning
Interaction between
the rate of using
management
0.117
0.908
0.389
0.236
accounting and
organizational
learning
Interaction between
the advantage to use
management
0.132
0.826
0.405
0.184
accounting techniques
and organizational
learning
Firm size
10.932
19.114
13.632
1.716
Debt ratio
0.050
1.840
0.602
0.219
6-2: Inferential statistics :
Four following regression models of the least usual squares were estimated and examined in
order to test hypothesis based on organizational learning adjusts the relation between applying
management accounting approaches and techniques and producing operation.
The dependent variable namely assets yield with the independent variable (The rate of using
management accounting), control variables of the firm size and debt ratio were examined in
order to estimate first model; related findings are shown in Tables 4 and 5.
R
0.563
Table 4: The findings from general examination of first model
adjusted
Fischer test
R2
determination
Fischer test
significance
coefficient
0.317
0.290
11.431
0.00
Durbin– Watson
statistic
2.183
As you see in Table 4 the Fischer test rate and related significance indicate that the estimated
regression model is statistically significant.
In continuation the findings from examining the partial coefficients of the model presented in
Table 5 are described. As you see the examined positive coefficient of the independent variables
state there is a positive relation between the rate of using management accounting and
organizational learning and interaction between the rate of using management accounting and
organizational learning with assets yield though the 't' statistic rate and the significance related
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
396
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
to the independent variable state that the relations are not statistically significant. Having taken
into consideration the model's findings Hypothesis is not accepted. The coefficients and
significance rate of the 't' statistic related to the control variables indicate the firm size has a
significant and positive relation and the debt ratio has a significant and negative relation with
the assets yield.
variable title
The rate of using
management
accounting
Organizational
learning
Interaction between
the rate of using
management
accounting and
organizational
learning
Firm size
Debt ratio
Fixed rate
Table 5:The findings from partial examination of first model
coefficient
standard deviation
't' statistic
significance
0.268
0.214
1.255
0.212
0.150
0.165
0.909
0.365
0.328
0.287
1.143
0.255
0.118
-0.237
-0.086
0.006
0.045
0.145
3.087
-5.318
-0.595
0.002
0.00
0.553
The dependent variable namely assets yield with the independent variable (The advantage of
using management accounting), control variables of the firm size and debt ratio were examined
in order to estimate second model; related findings are shown in Tables 6 and 7.
R
0.562
Table 6: The findings from general examination of second model
adjusted
Fischer test
R2
determination
Fischer test
significance
coefficient
0.316
0.289
11.385
0.00
Durbin– Watson
statistic
2.188
As you see in Table 6 the Fischer test rate and related significance indicate that the estimated
regression model is statistically significant.
In continuation the findings from examining the partial coefficients of the model presented in
Table 7 are described. As you see the examined positive coefficient of the independent variables
state there is a positive relation between the advantage of using management accounting and
organizational learning techniques and interaction between the advantage of using management
accounting and organizational learning with assets yield though the 't' statistic rate and the
significance related to the independent variable state that the relations are not statistically
significant. Having taken into consideration the model's findings Hypothesis is not accepted.
The coefficients and significance rate of the 't' statistic related to the control variables indicate
the firm size has a significant and positive relation and the debt ratio has a significant and
negative relation with the assets yield.
variable title
The advantage of
using management
accounting and
organizational
learning techniques
Organizational
learning
interaction between
the advantage of using
management
accounting and
organizational
learning
firm size
debt ratio
fixed rate
Table 7: The findings from partial examination of second model
coefficient
standard deviation
't' statistic
significance
0.268
0.214
1.255
0.212
0.150
0.165
0.909
0.365
0.328
0.287
1.143
0.255
0.018
-0.237
-0.068
0.006
0.045
0.145
3.087
-5.318
-.595
0.002
0.00
0.553
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
397
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
The dependent variable namely owner equity yield with the independent variables (The rate of
using management accounting, organizational learning) and interaction between the rate of
using management accounting and organizational learning and control variables of the firm size
and debt ratio were examined in order to estimate third model; related findings are shown in
Tables 8 and 9.
R
0.396
Table 8: The findings from general examination of third model
adjusted
Fischer test
R2
determination
Fischer test
significance
coefficient
0.156
0.145
4.562
0.00
Durbin– Watson
statistic
2.150
As you see in Table 8 the Fischer test rate and related significance indicate that the estimated
regression model is statistically significant.
In continuation the findings from examining the partial coefficients of the model presented in
Table 9 are described. As you see the examined positive coefficient of the independent variables
state there is a positive relation between the rate of using management accounting and
organizational learning and interaction between the rate of using management accounting and
organizational learning with owner equity yield though the 't' statistic rate and the significance
related to the independent variable state that the relations are not statistically significant. Having
taken into consideration the model's findings Hypothesis is not accepted. The coefficients and
significance rate of the 't' statistic related to the control variables indicate the firm size has a
significant and positive relation and the debt ratio has no significant relation with the owner
equity yield.
variable title
the rate of using
management
accounting
organizational
learning
interaction between
the rate of using
management
accounting and
organizational
learning
firm size
debt ratio
fixed rate
Table 9:The findings from partial examination of second model
coefficient
standard deviation
't' statistic
significance
0.977
0.548
1.783
0.077
0.344
0.424
0.811
0.419
1.070
0.736
1.453
0.149
0.050
-0.061
-0.315
0.015
0.114
0.371
3.598
-0.536
-0.849
0.00
0.593
0.398
The dependent variable namely owner equity yield with the independent variables (The
advantage of using management accounting, organizational learning) and interaction between
the rate of using management accounting and organizational learning techniques and control
variables of the firm size and debt ratio were examined in order to estimate fourth model;
related findings are shown in Tables 10 and 11.
R
0.389
Table 10: The findings from general examination of fourth model
adjusted
Fischer test
R2
determination
Fischer test
significance
coefficient
0.152
0.137
4.397
0.00
Durbin– Watson
statistic
2.146
As you see in Table 10 the Fischer test rate and related significance indicate that the estimated
regression model is statistically significant.
In continuation the findings from examining the partial coefficients of the model presented in
Table 11 are described. As you see the examined positive coefficient of the independent
variables state there is a positive relation between the advantage of using management
accounting and organizational learning and interaction between the advantage of using
management accounting and organizational learning techniques with owner equity yield though
the 't' statistic rate and the significance related to the independent variable state that the relations
are not statistically significant. Having taken into consideration the model's findings Hypothesis
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
398
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
is not accepted. The coefficients and significance rate of the 't' statistic related to the control
variables indicate the firm size has a significant and positive relation and the debt ratio has no
significant relation with the owner equity yield.
variable title
The advantage of
using management
accounting and
organizational
learning techniques
organizational
learning
interaction between
the advantage of using
management
accounting and
organizational
learning
firm size
debt ratio
fixed rate
Table 11: The findings from partial examination of fourth model
coefficient
standard deviation
't' statistic
significance
1.194
0.726
1.644
0.103
0.506
0.575
0.879
0.381
1.255
0.975
1.288
0.200
0.050
-0.072
-0.506
0.015
0.114
0.473
3.662
-0.633
-1.070
0.00
0.528
0.287
7– Conclusion:
In hypothesis the rate of organizational learning effect was examined on the relation between
the rate of applying the management accounting approaches and techniques and producing
operation. In fact, we try to examine if the organizational learning improves the application of
the management accounting approaches and techniques and then is the firm's operation
improved?
We defined two indexes for the firm operation: 1–Assets yield and 2–Owner equity yield and
also we took into consideration the organizational learning, the management accounting
approaches and techniques (Two mentioned indexes) and interaction between organizational
learning and management accounting approaches and techniques as the independent variables
in order to test the hypothesis. Then four models were supposed to define the hypothesis. The
variables: firm size and debt ratio were considered as the control variables in the models.
Generally the findings of the model in which the assets yield was used as the index indicating
firm's operation indicate that there is a no significant relation between organizational learning
and management accounting approaches and techniques (Two mentioned indexes) and
interaction between the organizational learning and management accounting approaches and
techniques and firm's operation.
But there is a significant and positive relation between the firm's size and owner equity yield
and there is a negative and significant relation between the debt ratio and owner equity yield.
Also the findings of the two models in which the owner equity yield was used as the index
indicating the firm's operation indicate that there is no significant relation between
organizational learning, the management accounting approaches and techniques (Two
mentioned indexes) and interaction between the organizational learning and management
accounting approaches and techniques and firm's operation, but there is a significant and
positive relation between the firm's size and owner equity yield and there is no relation between
the debt ratio and owner equity yield.
The findings of this study are inconsistent with the findings of Roset (2005), Nordtvedt (2005),
Choe (2004) and Schaffer (2004).
As it was indicated by virtue of the findings it seems that the managers do not have a proper
understanding of organizational learning and the potential to use organizational learning to
promote the firm's operation is low. Schaffer (2004) indicated that different types of information
have no effect on learning. In this study it was stated that application of management accounting
information has a considerable direct and indirect positive effect on the organizational operation
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
399
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
through the organizational learning process. Thus, it can be said that the managers are not able
to create proper interaction between the application of management accounting information and
organizational learning.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
400
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
References
Abernethy, M., Brownell, P., 1997. Management control systems in research and development
organizations: therole of accounting, behavior and personnel controls. Accounting,
Organizations and Society 22 (3/4), PP: 233–248.
Argyris. C., Schon., 1978, Organizational learning II, Reading, Mass_ Addison Wesley. PP. 8490.
Aslam, H, D; Javadi, T; Tanveer, A, Mannan, J; Shabbir, Farooq. (2011). A Jourmey From
Individual to Organizational learning, International Journal of Academic Research. Vol. 3,
No. 3, II Part, PP: 52-60.
Bruggeman, W., Slagmulder, R., 1995. The impact of technological change on management
accounting. Management Accounting Research 6, PP: 241–252.
Chenhall, R.H., 1997. Reliance on manufacturing performance measures, total quality
management and organization performance. Management Accounting Research 8, PP:187–
206.
Choe, J-M. (2004); "The relationships among management accounting information,
organizational learning and production performance"; Strategic Information System; 13, PP:
61-85.
Curado , Carla, 2006, organizational learning and organizational design ,Emerald Group
publishing limited , Vol.13, No.1, PP:25-48.
Davies, Malone, 2003, " Knowledge Management: A Model for organizational Learning "
International Journal of Accounting Information System, Vol. 3, PP:11-123.
Deveraux, L. (2005). Merging role- negotiation and leadership practices that influence
organizational learning. [ Deissertation Abstract Ed. D]. university of Toronto.
Falconer ,Liz ,(2006) ,organizational learning , tacit information and learning :a review, the
learning organization, Vol.13, No.2, PP:140-151.
Fullerton, R., McWatters, S., 2002. The role of performance measures and incentive systems in
relation to the degree of JIT implementation. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27,
PP:711–736.
Garvin, D., (1993) "Building learning organization": Harvard Business Review; 71, JulyAugust, PP :78-91.
Ghorbanizadeh , Vajhollah , 1999 , Organization Learning and The Learner Organization With
A Glance At New Management Knowledge (Translated by Ahmad Jafarnezhad & Khadijeh
Safiri ) ,Moassesseh Keab Publications , Mehraban Press ,pp. 125 .
Harrison, S.P., Poole, M., 1997. Customer-focused manufacturing strategy and the use of
operations-based non financial performance measures: a research note. Accounting,
Organizations and Society,Vol.22, No.6, PP: 557–572.
Hudspeth, L. J. (2004). A study of organizational learning culture, strategic responsiveness and
mass customization capabilities of unite state manufacturing enterprises. [ Dissertation
Abstract Ph. D]. The university of Toledo. PP.1.
Lam, S., 1997. The effects of group decision support system and task structures on group
communication and decision quality. Journal of Management Information System, Vol 13(4),
PP:193-215.
Miller, J.A., 1992. Designing and implementing a new cost management system. Journal of Cost
Management(Winter), PP:41–53.
Miller, R. (1996). Learning organization. Academy of human Resource Development
conference available http:// search ERIC. Org/ Edd4 03479. Htm.
Nmazi, Mohammad , 2005 , Industrial Accounting(2) , Budgeting and Controlling Standard
Systems , 3rd Edition , PP: 15 , 148-150 , 126-128 and 201 – 210.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
401
ijcrb.webs.com
JANUARY 2014
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 5, NO 9
Nordtvedt, L. P. (2005) Organization Learning from internation business affiliations: Effects of
effective and efficient transfer knowledge on firm performance. [ Disseration Abstract Ph.
D]. PP.15.
Ouksel, A., Mihavics, K., Chalos, P.,1997.Accounting information systems and organizational
learning. Accounting, Management and Information Technology 7 (1), PP: 1–19.
Rhodes ,Jo and Lok ,Peter and Yuon Hung ,R.Y and Fang ,sh. ch, 2008, An integrative model of
organizational learning and social capital on effective knowledge transfer and perceived
organizational performance, Emerald Group publishing limited ,Vol.20, No.4, PP:245-258.
Rosete, D. & Ciarrochi. J. (2005). Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace
performance outcome of leadership effectiveness. Leadership and organization Development
Journal. Bradford: Vol. 26, Iss. 5/6: PP. 388.
Russ, Vince. (2011). Organizational learning, knowledge contradiction, The organizational
learning. Knowledge and capabilities conference. Hall university Business School. July, pp.9.
Schaffer Daniel , 2004.u.t.z. steiners chair of management accounting & control.Europen
Busines School . Destrich-winled, may, PP: 25-84.
Scott, J., 2000. Facilitating interorganizational learning with information technology. Journal of
Management Information System 17(2), PP: 81-113.
Shabahang, Reza , 2011 , Management Accounting , Special Studies , Accounting & Auditing
Center of Auditing Organization, PP: 3-6 , 19-20 , 254-255.
Shirani, A., Tafti, M., Affisco, J., 1999. Task and technology fit: acomparison of two
technologies for synchronous and asynchronous group communication. Information an
Management 36, PP:139-150.
Sim, K.L., Killough, L.N., 1998. The performance effects of complementarities between
manufacturing practices and management accounting system. Journal of Management
Accounting Research 10, PP: 325-346.
Simonin, B., 1997. The importance of collaborative know-how. Academy of Management
Jounal 40 (5), PP:1150-1174.
Susana , Peres.L and Gose , Manuel ,M and .V .ordas , Camilo .J,(2005) , organizational
Learning as adetermining factor in business Performance ,The Learning organization , vol
(12 No 3) , PP: 227-247
Thomas ,keith and Allen ,Stephen ,(2006) , the learning organization:a meta – analysis of
themes in literature , Emerald Group publishing limited ,Vol.13, No. 2, PP:123-139.
COPY RIGHT © 2014 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
402