Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Management control systems and student performance in Norwegian primary education: an exploratory case study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Management Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The management control literature has devoted limited attention to the design and use of management control systems (MCSs) in schools and by local school authorities (LEAs) and to their role with respect to student performance. This study aimed to narrow this knowledge gap by exploring the design and use of MCSs in schools and by LEAs and the relationships between the design and use of MCSs and student performance. A case study approach was applied, building on interviews with headmasters and other employees in six schools and three LEAs, in addition to plans, reports, student performance measures and other types of public information. The case studies provide insight into the design and use of MCSs on the school and LEA levels and how MCSs might substitute for and complement each other. The findings suggest that learning-focused design and use of MCSs and flexible organization of students and teaching are factors that are positively related to student performance. This study also suggests that clan control based in a learning focus instilled in teachers during their professional education and training, and facilitated by a flexible and transparent school organization, may moderate or substitute for the role of learning-focused MCSs. Finally, it proposes that a learning focus on the LEA level in small and unified LEAs might substitute for a school-level learning focus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.skoleporten.udir.no/.

  2. http://www.udir.no/Stottemeny/English/Curriculum-in-English/.

  3. http://www.skoleporten.udir.no.

  4. http://apu.aftenposten.no/skole/prover/.

References

  • Abernethy, M. A., & Brownell, P. (1997). Management control systems in research and development organizations: The role of accounting, behavior and personnel controls. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22, 233–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abernethy, M. A., & Brownell, P. (1999). The role of budgets in organizations facing strategic change: an exploratory study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 24, 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agyemang, G. (2009). Responsibility and accountability without direct control? Local education authorities and the seeking of influence in the UK school sector. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 22, 762–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agyemang, G. (2010). Accounting for needs? Formula funding in the UK school sector. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23, 82–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2004). Interfaces of control. Technocratic and socio-ideological control in a global management consultancy firm. Accounting, Auditing and Society, 29, 423–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, R. N., & Young, D. W. (2003). Management control in nonprofit organizations (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry A J, Broadbent J, Otley D (2005). Procedures for control. In Berry A J, Broadbent J, Otley D (ed), Management Control. Theories, Issues and Performance. 2nd ed.,). Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Vol 1, pp 44–62.

  • Bisbe J., Otley D. (2004). The effect of the interactive use of management control systems on product innovation. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29 \(:\)709–737.

  • Blåka S., Tjerbo T., Zeiner H. (2012). Kommunal organisering 2012. Redegjørelse for Kommunal og regionaldepartementets organisasjonsdatabase. Oslo. (https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/KRD/Rapporter/Rapporter_2012/2012-21.pdf) Accessed July 10, 2014

  • Bonesrønning H., Iversen J. M. V. (2010). Prestasjonsforskjeller mellom skoler og kommuner: analyse av nasjonale prøver 2008. Trondheim. (http://www.sof.ntnu.no/SOF-R%2001_10.pdf). Accessed February 10, 2014

  • Bosworth, R. (2014). Class size, class composition, and the distribution of student achivement. Education Economics, 22, 141–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, J., & Laughlin, R. (1998). Resisting the “new public management”: absorption and absorbing groups in schools and GP practices in the UK. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 11, 403–435.

  • Broadbent, J., Jacobs, K., & Laughlin, R. (1999). Comparing schools in the U.K. and New Zealand: individualizing and socializing accountabilities and some implications for management control. Management Accounting Research, 10, 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 127–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chong, K. M., & Mahama, H. (2014). The impact of interactive and diagnostic uses of budgets on team effectiveness. Management Accounting Research, 25, 206–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S., Campell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P., Ezzamel, M., McLean, C., & Robson, K. (2000). Budgeting and strategy in schools: the elusive link. Financial Accountability and Management, 16, 309–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P., Ezzamel, M., & Robson, K. (2005). Budgetary reforms: survival strategies and the structuration of organizational fields in education. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18, 733–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P., Ezzamel, M., Robson, K., & Taylor, M. (1995). The development of local management of schools: budgets, accountability and educational impact. Financial Accountability and Management, 11, 297–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P., Ezzamel, M., Robson, K., & Taylor, M. (1996). Comprehensive and incremental budgeting in education. The construction and management of formula funding in three English local education authorities. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9, 4–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, A., & Otley, D. (2009). The design and use of performance management systems: an extended framework for analysis. Management Accounting Research, 20, 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Germeten, S. (2005). Vil en ny læreplan endre skolens praksis? Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 89, 280–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49, 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henri, J. F. (2006). Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31, 529–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Høgheim, S., Monsen, N., Olsen, R. H., & Olson, O. (1989). The two worlds of management control. Financial Accountability and Management, 5, 163–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ismail, S., & Pendlebury, M. (2006). The private finance initiative (PFI) in schools: the experiences of users. Financial Accountability and Management, 22, 381–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen, J. M. V., & Bonesrønning, H. (2013). Disadvantaged students in the early grades: Will smaller classes help them? Education Economics, 21, 305–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kominis, G., & Dudau, A. I. (2012). Time for interactive control systems in the public sector? The case of the Every Child Matters policy change in England. Management Accounting Research, 23, 142–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin, R., Broadbent, J., Shearn, D., & Villig-Atherton, H. (1994). Absorbing LMS: The coping mechanism of a small group. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 7, 59–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful shool leadership. School Leadership and Management, 28, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malina, M. A., & Selto, F. H. (2001). Communicating and controlling strategy: An empirical study of the sffectiveness of the Balanced Scorecard. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 13, 47–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control systems as a package–Opportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19, 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayston, D. J. (1998). Devolved budgeting, formula funding and equity. Management Accounting Research, 9, 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant K. A., Van der Stede W. A. (2012). Management Control Systems. Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives, 3 edn. Financial Times Press/Prentic Hall, Harlow.

  • OECD (2009). Evaluating and rewarding the quality of teachers. International practices: OECD Publishing. (http://www.oxydiane.net/IMG/pdf_8709031E.pdf). Accessed October 1, 2015

  • OECD (2011). Designing for education : Compendium of exemplary educational facilities 2011. (https://www.oecd.org/edu/innovation-education/centreforeffectivelearningenvironmentscele/48533289.pdf). Accessed August 13, 2015

  • OECD (2013a). Innovative learning environments. (http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/innovative-learning-environments_9789264203488-en#page1) Accessed August 12, 2015

  • OECD (2013b). Synergies for better learning : an international perspective on evaluation and assessment. (http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/synergies-for-better-learning-an-international-perspective-on-evaluation-and-assessment_9789264190658-en). Accessed March 19, 2015

  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. The Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otley, D. (1999). Performance management: A framework for management control systems research. Management Accounting Research, 10, 363–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25, 833–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersen, I. J. (1995). Budgetary control of hospitals - ritual rhetorics and rationalized myths? Financial Accountability and Management, 11, 207–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. (1995). Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, A., & Tymms, P. (2010). Dysfunctional effects of league tables: A comparison between english and scottish primary schools. Public Money and Management, 22, 43–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. (1978). A budget for all seasons? Why the traditional budgets lasts. Public Administration Review, 38, 501–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin R K (1994). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, California.

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to two anonymous reviewers for constructive suggestions and feedback and to the Research Council of Norway for financing this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Law, University of Agder, NO-4604, Post Box 422, Kristiansand, Norway

    Liv Bente Hannevik Friestad

Authors
  1. Liv Bente Hannevik Friestad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liv Bente Hannevik Friestad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Friestad, L.B.H. Management control systems and student performance in Norwegian primary education: an exploratory case study. J Manag Control 27, 323–350 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-016-0233-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-016-0233-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation