Budgetstyrning för positiva beteendeeffekter : En kvalitativt jämförande studie ur revisorers och chefers perspektiv

Budgeting is a common management tool applied out of most organizations. Previous studies show many advantages and positive behavioral effects with budgeting, but at least as many show the disadvantages and negative behavioral effects. The majority of previous studies on budgeting are made from an internal perspective. Because an external perspective or an external party often brings new ideas and a holistic approach it can provide a new point of view on how budgeting can provide positive behavioral effects. The purpose of this case study was therefore to create an understanding of how accountants compared to managers at the strategic level think budgeting can be applied to achieve positive behavioral effects. Furthermore the underlying factors were analyzed to identify what the differences between an internal and external perspective are based on. As a representative of an external perspective accountants were chosen because their great insight into a variety of organizations and industries. Personal interviews in semi-structured form were conducted with four accountants and two managers to collect empirical data and compare the two different perspectives. The study’s overall conclusions are that accountants and managers have similar views on how to apply budgeting for positive behavioral effects. The largest differences in their perception was that the accountants believe that follow-up, comparisons and budgeting objectives are the three key components for budgeting with positive behavioral effects. Managers did not emphasis on these components. It has also been identified that managers think budgeting systems have a significant role in budgeting being effective or not. Budgeting systems significant role wasn’t supported by the theoretical framework for this studyValiderat; 20140622 (global_studentproject_submitter