The Mandatory Change of AIS: A Theoretical Framework of the Behaviour of Italian Research Institutions

  • D. Mancini
  • C. Ferruzzi
  • M. De Angelis


In Italy, in the last few years the legislator has acted, in the public sector, as a promoter of change of the accounting information system (AIS). The public administrations (PA), in fact, have been the recipient of legislative measures aimed at increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of management processes. These interventions have concerned, directly or indirectly, AIS. The aim of this research is to build an interpretive model of Italian not university research institutions (RI) behavior in adopting legislator acts in order to: understand the extent of the law impacts on RI’s AIS; investigate the determinant factors affecting this behavior.


  1. 1.
    Marchi, L. (1993), Il sistema Informativo Aziendale. Milano, Giuffrè.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Woods, M. (2009), A Contingency Theory Perspective on the Risk Management Control System within Birmingham Council, Management Accounting Research 20(1): 68–81.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Falkman, P. and Tagesson, T. (2008), Accrual Accounting does not Necessarily Mean Accrual Accounting: Factors that Counteract Compliance with Accounting Standards in Swedish municipal accounting, Scandinavian Journal of Management 24(3): 271–283.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borgonovi, E. (2005), Principi e Sistemi Aziendali per le Amministrazioni Pubbliche. Milano, Egea.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anselmi, L. (2003), Percorsi Aziendali per le Pubbliche Amministrazioni. Torino, Giappichelli.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Magistris, V. and Gioioso, G. (2005), Nuovi Profili di Accountability nelle P.A. Roma, Formez.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anessi Pessina, E. (2007), L’evoluzione dei Sistemi Contabili Pubblici. Aspetti Critici nella Prospettiva Aziendale. Milano, EGEA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ahmed, A., McAnally, M., Rasmussen S. and Weaver C. (2010), How Costly is the Sarbanes Oxley Act? Evidence on the Effects of the Act on Corporate Profitability, Journal of Corporate Finance 16(3): 288–301.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chaminade, C. and Roberts, H. (2003), What it Means is what it does: a Comparative Analysis of Implementing Intellectual Capital in Norway and Spain, European Accounting Review 12(4): 733–651.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burns, J. and Scapens, R. W. (2000), Conceptualizing Management Accounting Change: an Institutional Framework, Management Accounting Research 11(1): 3–25.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hopwood, A.G. (1987), The Archaeology of Accounting Systems, Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(3): 207–234.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burns, J., (2000), The Dynamics of Accounting Change Inter-Play Between New Practices, Routines, Institutions, Power and Politics, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 13(5): 566–596.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), Building Theories from Case Study Research, Academy of Management Review 14(4): 532–550.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yin, R. (1994), Case study research. Design and Methods. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corsi, K. and Mancini, D. (2010), The Impact of Law on Accounting Information System: an Analysis of IAS/IFRS Adoption in Italian Companies, in D’Atri, A., De Marco, M., Braccini, A.M. and Cabiddu, F., Management of the Interconnected World. Heidelberg-Germany, Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business StudiesUniversity of Naples ParthenopeNaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations