Efeitos do debate do sistema de mensuração de desempenho e do conflito cognitivo na inovação ambidestra

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-6486.rco.2020.170418

Palavras-chave:

Sistema de mensuração de desempenho, Conflito cognitivo, Inovação ambidestra

Resumo

Este estudo segue o fluxo de pesquisas que investigaram a relação entre o sistema de mensuração de desempenho e a inovação, mas difere ao considerar a inovação um construto multidimensional. Este estudo analisa os efeitos do debate do sistema de mensuração de desempenho e do conflito cognitivo na inovação ambidestra. Uma pesquisa de levantamento foi realizada com gestores de empresas listadas na Brasil Bolsa Balcão (B3), conforme o ranking dos valores de pesquisa e desenvolvimento e do ativo intangível, e obteve-se 124 respostas válidas. Para testar as hipóteses utilizou-se a técnica de modelagem de equações estruturais. Os resultados revelaram que o debate do sistema de mensuração de desempenho influencia positivamente na inovação ambidestra e que o conflito cognitivo modera essa relação. Conclui-se que as discussões entre os gestores sobre as medidas de desempenho permitem a resolução de problemas, busca pela aprendizagem, criatividade e inovação, principalmente quando intensificado pelo conflito cognitivo.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Af Wåhlberg, A.E., & Poom, L. (2015). An empirical test of nonresponse bias in internet surveys. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(6), 336-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2015.1111212

Amason, A.C., & Mooney, A.C. (1999). The effects of past performance on top management team conflict in strategic decision making. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4), 340-359.

Anthony, R.N. (1965). Planning and control systems: A framework for analysis. Massachusetts: Harvard University.

Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability–rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 61-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.61

Bedford, D.S. (2015). Management control systems across different modes of innovation: implications for firm performance. Management Accounting Research, 28(3), 12-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2015.04.003

Bedford, D.S., Bisbe, J., & Sweeney, B. (2019). Performance measurement systems as generators of cognitive conflict in ambidextrous firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 72(1), 21-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.05.010

Bedford, D.S., & Speklé, R.F. (2018). Construct validity in survey-based management accounting and control research. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 30(2), 23-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-51995

Bisbe, J., & Malagueño, R. (2009). The choice of interactive control systems under different innovation management modes. European Accounting Review, 18(2), 371-405.

Bisbe, J., & Malagueño, R. (2015). How control systems influence product innovation processes: Examining the role of entrepreneurial orientation. Accounting and Business Research, 45(3), 356-386. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180902863803

Bisbe, J., & Otley, D. (2004). The effects of the interactive use of management control systems on product innovation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(8), 709-737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2003.10.010

Calton, J.M., & Payne, S.L. (2003). Coping with paradox: Multistakeholder learning dialogue as a pluralist sensemaking process for addressing messy problems. Business & Society, 42(1), 7-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650302250505

Chenhall, R.H. (2003). Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(2-3), 127-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00027-7

Chenhall, R.H., Kallunki, J.P., & Silvola, H. (2011). Exploring the relationships between strategy, innovation, and management control systems: the roles of social networking, organic innovative culture, and formal controls. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 23(1), 99-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-10069

Davila, A., Foster, G., & Oyon, D. (2009). Accounting and control, entrepreneurship and innovation: Venturing into new research opportunities. European Accounting Review, 18(2), 281-311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180902731455

Davila, T. (2000). An empirical study on the drivers of management control systems' design in new product development. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(4-5), 383-409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(99)00034-3

Davila, T., Epstein, M., & Shelton, R. (2012). Making innovation work: How to manage it, measure it, and profit from it. Upper Saddle River: FT press.

Dekker, H.C., Groot, T., & Schoute, M. (2012). A balancing act? The implications of mixed strategies for performance measurement system design. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 25(1), 71-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-50356

Desivilya, H.S., Somech, A., & Lidgoster, H. (2010). Innovation and conflict management in work teams: The effects of team identification and task and relationship conflict. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 3(1), 28-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2009.00048.x

Dreu, C.K. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of Management, 32(1), 83-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305277795

Dreu, C.K., & West, M.A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1191-1201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.

Ferreira, A., & Otley, D. (2009). The design and use of performance management systems: An extended framework for analysis. Management Accounting Research, 20(4), 263-282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2009.07.003

Flamholtz, E.G., Das, T.K., & Tsui, A.S. (1985). Toward an integrative framework of organizational control. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(1), 35-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(85)90030-3

Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management: An International Publication of the Product Development & Management Association, 19(2), 110-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1920110

Hair Jr, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). California: Sage publications.

Henri, J.F. (2006). Management control systems and strategy: a resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(6), 529-558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2005.07.001

Jansen, J.J., Van Den Bosch, F.A., & Volberda, H.W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661-1674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576

Jehn, K.A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40 (2) 256-282.

Jehn, K.A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42 (3)530-557.

Kim, D.Y., Kumar, V., & Kumar, U. (2012). Relationship between quality management practices and innovation. Journal of Operations Management, 30(4), 295-315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2012.02.003

Koberg, C.S., Detienne, D.R., & Heppard, K.A. (2003). An empirical test of environmental, organizational, and process factors affecting incremental and radical innovation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 21-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1047-8310(03)00003-8

Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2010). Marketing strategy and marketing performance measurement system: Exploring the relationship. European Management Journal, 28(2), 139-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.007

Lin, H.E., McDonough III, E.F., Lin, S.J., & Lin, C.Y.Y. (2013). Managing the exploitation/exploration paradox: The role of a learning capability and innovation ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(2), 262-278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00998.x

Lopez-Valeiras, E., Gonzalez-Sanchez, M.B., & Gomez-Conde, J. (2016). The effects of the interactive use of management control systems on process and organizational innovation. Review of Managerial Science, 10(3), 487-510. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-015-0165-9

Malmi, T., & Brown, D.A. (2008). Management control systems as a package—Opportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19(4), 287-300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.09.003

Naranjo-Gil, D., & Hartmann, F. (2007). Management accounting systems, top management team heterogeneity and strategic change. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7-8), 735-756. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.08.003

Sarkees, M., & Hulland, J. (2009). Innovation and efficiency: It is possible to have it all. Business horizons, 52(1), 45-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2008.08.002

Simons, R. (1995). Levers of control: How managers use innovative control systems to drive strategic renewal. Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.

Simons, T.L., & Peterson, R.S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: the pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 102-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.102

Tjosvold, D., Poon, M., & Yu, Z.Y. (2005). Team effectiveness in China: Cooperative conflict for relationship building. Human Relations, 58(3), 341-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726705053426

West, M.A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 355-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00951

Publicado

2020-09-03

Como Citar

Monteiro, J. J., & Beuren, I. M. (2020). Efeitos do debate do sistema de mensuração de desempenho e do conflito cognitivo na inovação ambidestra. Revista De Contabilidade E Organizações, 14, e170418. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-6486.rco.2020.170418

Edição

Seção

Artigos