ERP systems have little impact on management accounting, but that the management accountant is evolving into a business consultant (Caglio, 2003; Rom and Rohde, 2004). Using a field study of 10 companies in Finland, Granlund and Malmi (2002) examined the effect of integrated enterprise–wide information systems on management accounting and management accountants’ work. They concluded that ‘… ERPS projects have led to relatively small changes in management accounting and control techniques’ (p. 299). Booth et al. (2000) also found similar results, as did Rom and Rohde (2004), who found that strategic enterprise management (SEM) systems had a positive impact on management accounting practices whereas ERP systems only had a positive impact on transactional management accounting (e.g. data collection). Scapens and Jazayeri (2003) found that there was no fundamental change in the nature of management accounting information; however, there were changes in the role of management accountants. ERP systems reduced the routine work undertaken by accountants and led to the routinisation of accounting through evolutionary change. Management accountants and mangers found new ways of working with the ERP system, each performing different tasks than before, for example, operating managers can access the information themselves from the ERP system rather than waiting for the accounting report, and the management accountant performs more analyzing of results than before. Fahy (2000) also explored the implications of SEM software for management accounting and control activities. He concluded that ‘SAP, Peoplesoft and ERP vendors appear to view SEM essentially as a technological issue rather than a management/ decision support issue’; and ‘While SEM technologies will remain largely the domain of established enterprise systems vendors the successful implementation of SEM will require a much richer understanding of the nature of strategic management and an understanding of the decision support process.’ Research into linking SEM, performance measurement and management (PMM) and organizational change programs (which could include ERP implementations) was examined by Brignall and Ballantine (2004). Although they agreed with Fahy that SEM implementations were generally treated as technology projects, successful adoption requires a broad perspective including the needs of the organization. This is consistent with the requirement of a strategic perspective for the implementation of an ERP system, a necessary but not sufficient condition for a successful implementation (Grabski et al., 2001). The use of ERP and ‘Best of Breed’ (BoB) systems in Finland was examined by Hyvonen (2003). Financial departments were more interested in the traditional BoB systems whereas other departments preferred the ERP solution. The preference for an ERP system also occurred when a strategic and technical solution was desired
|
