The Direction Of Future Management Accounting Research In The Asia Pacific Region

Grahita Chandrarin


The direction of development of management accounting research is line with the shift of paradigm of
management accounting in practice supported by development of information technology. The direction
will lead to the new strategy that moves to contemporary management accounting.
Today, competition among companies in many industries is turning global. To be competitive,
businesses must adopt new ways of thinking about business to improve the old management practices.
Since 1990s, contemporary management accounting concept has moved from traditional management
accounting concept with focuses on technical issues, so that become behavior centered. This is to say that
global competition requires companies to use bottom-up information that empowers the work force to
control processes for customer satisfaction. To stimulate competitiveness, management information must
follow the bottom-up empowerment cycle. It must come from customers and processes that must be
gathered and used primarily by people in the work force who face customers and run the processes.
This paper explains how the paradigm shifts from conventional accounting management to
contemporary accounting management in practice and research. Therefore, It recommend that the
direction of management accounting research in Asia Pacific region on the future should cover all studies
included in contemporary accounting management area, that holds the idea that contemporary
management practice does not only focus on profit but also social and environmental factors for


Contemporary management accounting; conventional management accounting; and direction of management accounting research

Full Text:



Abdel-khalik, A.R. and B.B. Ajinkya. 1979. Empirical Research in Accounting: a methodological Viewpoint.

Sarasota, Florida: American Accounting Association.

Albright, T.. 1998. “The Use of Target Costing in Developing the Mercedes Benz M-Class.” International

Journal of Strategic Cost Management (Autumn): 13-23.

Birnberg, J.G., M. D. Shields and S. M. Young. 1990. “The case for Multiple Method in Empirical Management

Accounting Research.” Journal of Management Accounting Research 2 (Fall): 33-66.

Burgstahler, D. and G.L. Sundem. 1989. “The Evolution of Behavioral Accounting Research in the United

States, 1968-1987.” Behavioral Research in Accounting 1: 75-107.

East West Council for Education, Center of Asian Pasific Studies of Peking University. 2004. The Forth of

Hawaii International Conference on Business. USA: Hawaii, Honolulu.

Hopwood, A.G.. 1989. “Behavioral Accounting Retrospect and Prospect.” Behavioral Research in Accounting

: 1-21.

Institute of Management Accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP, and Consortium for Advanced Manufacturing-

International. 1998. Statements on Management Accounting No. 4GG. “Practices and Techniques: Tools and

Techniques for Implementing Target Costing.”

Jensen, M. 2001. “Corporate Budgeting is Bad- Let’s Fix It.” Harvard Business Review (November): 94-101

Jensen, M.C. and W.H. Meckling.1976. “Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and

Ownership Structure.” Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305-360.

Johnson, H.T. 1992. “Relevance Regained: From Top-Down Control to Bottom-Up Empowerment.” New

York: Macmillan, Inc..

------ and R. S. Kaplan. 1991. “Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting.” Boston,

Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan, R.S. 1984. “The Evolution of Managemnt Accounting.”The Accounting Review, July:390-418.

Maher, M.W. 1995. “Managerial Accounting Research: Relevance vs. Elegance?” Unpublished Working Paper.

Management Control Association. 2004. “Management and Control.” The Sixth International Management

Control System Research Conference. Scotland: Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt University


  • There are currently no refbacks.

International Conference On Law, Business and Governance (ICon-LBG)
Bandar Lampung University
ISSN: 2339-1650