pdf - Nyenrode Business Universiteit

More documents

Recommendations

Info

52. Himmelberg, C.P. & Hubbard R.G. 2000. ‘Incentive pay and the market for CEOs: an analysis of pay-for-performance sensitivity.’ Working paper. 53. Hofstede, G. 1981. ‘Management control of public and not-for-profit activities.’ Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6, 193-211. 54. Holmstrom, B. 1982. ‘Moral hazard in teams.’ Bell Journal of Economics, 13, 324-40. 55. Indjejikian, R.J. & Nanda, D. 2002. ‘Executive target bonuses and what they imply about performance standards.’ The Accounting Review, 77, 793-819. 56. Ittner, C.D. & Larcker, D.F. 2001. ‘Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective.’ Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32, 349-410. 57. Ittner, C.D., Larcker, D.F. & Rajan, M.V. 1997. ‘The choice of performance measures in annual bonus contracts.’ The Accounting Review, 72, 231-56. 58. Janakiraman, S.N., Lambert, R.A. & Larcker, D.F. 1992. ‘An empirical investigation of the relative performance evaluation hypothesis.’ Journal of Accounting Research, 30, 53-69. 59. Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B. & Podsakoff, P.M. 2003. ‘A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research.’ Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 199-218. 60. Jensen, M.C. & Murphy, K.J. 1990. ‘Performance pay and top-management incentives.’ Journal of Political Economy, 98, 225-64. 61. John, G. 1984. ‘An empirical investigation of some antecedents of opportunism in a marketing channel.’ Journal of Marketing Research, 21, 278-89. 62. Kalleberg, A.L., Knoke, D., Marsden, P.V., & Spaeth J.L. 1996. ‘Organizations in america: analyzing their structures and human resource practices based on the National Organizations Study.’ Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications, Inc. 63. Kline, R.B. 2005. ‘Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.’ (2nd edition) New York: The Guilford Press. 64. Kren, L. 2002. ‘Common uncertainty effects on the use of relative performance evaluation for corporate chief executives.’ Advances in Accounting, 19, 119-38. 65. Kruis, A. 2008. ‘Management control systems design and effectiveness.’ Breukelen: Nyenrode Business University. 66. Kunz, A.H. & Pfaff, D. 2002. ‘Agency theory, performance evaluation, and the hypothetical construct of intrinsic motivation.’ Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27, 275-95. 143
144 67. Langfield-Smith, K. & Smith, D. 2003. ‘Management control systems and trust in outsourcing relationships.’ Management Accounting Research, 14, 281-307. 68. Larcker, D.F. & Rusticus, T.O. 2010. ‘On the use of instrumental variables in accounting research.’ Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49, 186-205. 69. Leone, A.J. & Rock, S. 2002. ‘Empirical tests of budget ratcheting and its effect on managers’ discretionary accrual choices.’ Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33, 43-67. 70. Liu, L.S. & Stark, A.W. 2008. ‘Relative performance evaluation in board cash compensation: UK empirical evidence.’ British Accounting Review, forthcoming. 71. Luft, J. & Shields, M.D. 2003. ‘Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research.’ Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 169-249. 72. Maas, V.S. & Van Rinsum, M. 2011. ‘How control system design influences performance misreporting.’ Working Paper. 73. Macher, J.T. & Richman, B.D. 2008. ‘Transaction cost economics: an assessment of empirical research in the social sciences.’ Business and Politics, 10, article 1. 74. Matsumura, E.M. & Shin, J.Y. 2006. ‘An empirical analysis of an incentive plan with relative performance measures: evidence from a postal service.’ The Accounting Review, 81, 533-66. 75. Merchant, K.A. & Manzoni, J.-F. 1989. ‘The achievability of budget targets in profit centers: a field study.’ The Accounting Review, 64, 539-58. 76. Murphy, K.J. 2001. ‘Performance standards in incentive contracts.’ Journal of Accounting and Economics, 30, 245-78. 77. Otley, D.T. & Berry, A.J. 1980. ‘Control, organization and accounting.’ Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5, 231-44. 78. Ouchi, W.G. 1979. ‘A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms.’ Management Science, 25, 833-48. 79. Rainey, H.G. 1983. ‘Public agencies and private firms: incentive structures, goals, and individual roles.’ Administration Society, 15, 207-42. 80. Rogers, E.M. 1995. ‘Diffusion of innovations.’ New York: Free Press. 81. Speklé, R.F. 2001. ‘Explaining management control strucuture variety: a transaction cost economics perspective.’ Accounting, Organizations & Society, 26, 419-41. 82. Speklé, R.F. & Verbeeten, F.H.M. 2008. ‘The use of performance measurement systems in the public sector: effects on performance.’ Working Paper.
Page 2 and 3:
Relative Performance Evaluation in
Page 4 and 5:
NYENRODE BUSINESS UNIVERSITEIT Rela
Page 6 and 7:
Table of Contents Preface 1 General
Page 8:
Preface Why do people make things h
Page 11 and 12:
2 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION I
Page 13 and 14:
4 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION o
Page 15 and 16:
6 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION T
Page 17 and 18:
8 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION F
Page 19 and 20:
10 CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Page 22 and 23:
Chapter 2 The Use of Relative Perfo
Page 24 and 25:
2.1. INTRODUCTION 15 is not a promi
Page 26 and 27:
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 17 The
Page 28 and 29:
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 19 Sinc
Page 30 and 31:
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 21 who
Page 32 and 33:
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 23 suff
Page 34 and 35:
2.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 25 2.2.
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
2.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 29 can
Page 40 and 41:
2.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 31 Comp
Page 42 and 43:
2.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 33 this
Page 44 and 45:
2.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 35 Emph
Page 46 and 47:
2.4. ANALYSES 37 2.4 Analyses This
Page 48 and 49:
2.4. ANALYSES 39 Table 2.8: RPE use
Page 50 and 51:
2.4. ANALYSES 41 2.4.2 Correlations
Page 52 and 53:
2.4. ANALYSES 43 Concerning the con
Page 54 and 55:
2.4. ANALYSES 45 Table 2.13: Result
Page 56 and 57:
2.4. ANALYSES 47 Table 2.15: Summar
Page 58 and 59:
2.5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION 49
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
2.6. CONTRACTIBILITY MIMIC MODEL (A
Page 64 and 65:
2.6. CONTRACTIBILITY MIMIC MODEL (A
Page 66 and 67:
2.7. ANALYSES FOR FOR-PROFIT BUS (A
Page 68 and 69:
Chapter 3 Does Relative Performance
Page 70 and 71:
3.1. INTRODUCTION 61 Holmstrom’s
Page 72 and 73:
3.2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODEL 63 3.
Page 74 and 75:
3.2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODEL 65 RP
Page 76 and 77:
3.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 67 3.3
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
3.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 71 Tabl
Page 82 and 83:
3.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 73 Tabl
Page 84 and 85:
3.4. ANALYSES 75 3.4 Analyses This
Page 86 and 87:
3.4. ANALYSES 77 Table 3.9: Pearson
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
3.4. ANALYSES 83 Larcker & Rusticus
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Chapter 4 Does Relative Performance
Page 98 and 99:
4.1. INTRODUCTION 89 Moreover, chap
Page 100 and 101:
4.2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODEL 91 is
Page 102 and 103: 4.2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODEL 93 Sp
Page 104 and 105: 4.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 95 4.3
Page 106 and 107: 4.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 97 To i
Page 108 and 109: 4.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 99 of R
Page 110 and 111: 4.3. SAMPLE AND MEASUREMENT 101 Tab
Page 112 and 113: 4.4. ANALYSES 103 Table 4.8: Items
Page 114 and 115: 4.4. ANALYSES 105 RPE use ✻ Posit
Page 116 and 117: 4.4. ANALYSES 107 The model does sh
Page 118 and 119: 4.4. ANALYSES 109 RPE and RFMO. Mor
Page 120 and 121: 4.4. ANALYSES 111 room for manageri
Page 122 and 123: 4.5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION 113
Page 124 and 125: 4.5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION 115
Page 126 and 127: Chapter 5 Conclusion 5.1 Summary, C
Page 128 and 129: 5.1. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND DISCU
Page 134 and 135: 5.2. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE 125
Page 136 and 137: 5.3. LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FO
Page 138 and 139: Appendix Overview of Questionnaire
Page 140 and 141: Q5 How often do the following thing
Page 142 and 143: Q14 When serving your clients, how
Page 144 and 145: Q23 Please indicate whether you agr
Page 146 and 147: Noise Q34 NOISE (primary measure) P
Page 148 and 149: References 1. Abernethy, M.A., Bouw
Page 150 and 151: 26. Diamantopoulos, A. & Siguaw, J.
Page 154: 83. Towry, K. 2003. ‘Control in a
Page 157 and 158: 148 beïnvloeden, veroorzaken ruis
Page 160 and 161: Biography Hilco van Elten (1979) ho
show all

pdf - Nyenrode Business Universiteit

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?