This article provides an assessment of previous research on the nexus between accounting and migration. Despite ideas of accounting and migration interlinking in many ways, and with migration as one of the most important global challenges, the research conversation is limited and sprawling. Four different streams are discerned in the nexus between accounting and migration: i) historizing the migrant, ii) controlling migrants at the border, iii) constructing the employable migrant, and iv) listening to the voices of migrants. Based on a cross-stream analysis, five interrelated roles of accounting in the making of migrants and migration are highlighted, roles that also serve as springboards to suggestions for future research. 

Purpose: This paper analyzes the ways in which accounting enables operations managers to enter and perform multiple roles in their interplay with organizational groups on the shop floor and in management, and the associated negotiations that operations managers have with “the self.”

Design/methodology/approach: Using field-based studies in a mining organization, the study draws on Goffman’s backstage–frontstage metaphor to analyze how operations managers enter and perform several roles with the aid of accounting.

Findings: The findings show that accounting legitimizes operations managers when they cross organizational boundaries, as accounting gives them an “entry ticket” that legitimizes their presence with the group. Accounting further allows operations managers to embrace more than one role by “putting on a mask” to become an outsider or insider in relation to a group. In performing their roles, operations managers exhibit varying attributes and knowledge. Accounting can thereby be withheld from, or shared with, organizational groups. The illusion of accounting as deterministic presented frontstage is not necessarily negotiated that way backstage. Rather, alternatives discussed backstage often become silenced in the frontstage performance. The study concludes that operations managers cross boundaries, embrace roles and exert agency as they navigate with accounting, enrolling it into their performance simultaneously as they backstage reflect upon accounting and its role for their everyday work.

Originality/value: This study relies on the frontstage/backstage metaphor to visualize the discrepancies in how accounting is enrolled into role performances and how seemingly categorical fronts do not necessarily share that dominant position backstage.

This thesis concerns operations managers who are required to adhere to both management accounting and operational concerns in their everyday operational work. The question addressed in this thesis is how management accounting is implicated in the everyday operational work of operations managers and their team members in production environments. The purpose is to explore management accounting practices in the everyday work of operations managers and their team members in production environments, and to theorize about their practices at the intersection of management accounting and operations. The research process drew upon ethnographic ideas and included travels back and forth between theory and practice at a mining company. This thesis shows that operations managers use management accounting in an analytical manner when they draw upon management accounting frames of reference to organize and mobilize action in their everyday operational work. An analytical use of management accounting suggests that management accounting extends beyond accounting departments and meeting rooms at operational levels and reaches out to the shop-floor and the mines. In such settings, operations managers are found doing accounting when they alternate between management accounting and operational frames of reference to interpret, construct and talk accounting in their everyday operational work. Management accounting enables operations managers to make sense of operational situations, and to gain and exert agency in their operational work. The results indicate that management accounting becomes a ‘way of doing things’ in everyday operational work via mimetic mechanisms. At times, operations managers are required to abide by management accounting in their everyday operational work via coercive mechanisms. The first conclusion is that management accounting is implicated in the everyday operational work of operations managers and their team members through its presence as a frame of reference. Operations managers do not always need to rely on accounting artefacts to mobilize action. Rather, they can rely on their developed management accounting knowledge. The second conclusion is that management accounting is implicated in the everyday work of operations managers and their team members through its presence as a practice. Management accounting influences operational routines and activities, which enables operations managers and their team members to handle the intersection between management accounting and operations by developing ways of practicing management accounting in everyday operational work. One contribution to the accounting practice literature is presenting how operations managers are shown to engage in management accounting, thereby making it a practice in their everyday work. Another contribution to the literature on the intersection between management accounting and operations is showing that operations managers gain agency via management accounting in their everyday work, which helps them navigate between management accounting and operational concerns.

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore the ways in which notions of space, constituted by management accounting and operations, interact, conflict and are understood by operations managers in a variety of situations within the context of iron ore mining. The authors address a dual question: How do accounting space and production space relate to each other? And what does it mean for operations managers to reside in both those spaces at once?

Design/methodology/approach

The paper is based on field studies at a mining company involving operations managers who experience tensions between accounting and production responsibilities and must prioritize between different courses of action to create value.

Findings

In contrast to the view that management accounting poses a problem for operations managers in production environments, the authors show how especially discursive tensions foster reflection and choice. Operations managers prioritize their actions in accordance with management accounting or operations based on how they experience and reflect upon the tensions they encounter, dominating artifacts and their experienced relation to space. Operations managers are not tied to specific spaces, but they prioritize their responsibility to management accounting or operations depending on the space to which they feel a sense of belongingness.

Originality/value

Drawing upon a conceptualization of tensions between management accounting and operations as a spatial phenomenon, it is possible to understand the dilemmas experienced by operations managers in a dynamic and relational way. The authors propose that viewing tensions between management accounting and production as spatial phenomena enables a novel understanding of how such tensions can create reflexivity in responsibility with operations managers.

Management accounting’s ability to provide relevant information in production environments has long been discussed in the fields of management accounting (MA) and operations management (OM). Researchers from each field play a major part not only in disseminating their research results, but also in channelling their perceptions of management accounting in production environments through journal publications. The thesis of this paper is that via an examination of the paradigms, theories, and methods in the fields of MA and OM our understanding of the prevailing assumptions about management accounting in production environments in the academic community can be enhanced. The review shows a divide between the fields where the field of OM is oriented towards problem-solving, and the field of MA is more theory oriented. The review points out that the understanding of practice is a divider between the fields, but it also suggests that incorporation of practicing production members into research is a promising path forward. The paper then concludes that OM problematizes management accounting in production environments as a starting point for their research agenda and that both fields portrayal of management accounting in production environments need to be nuanced. There is a need to challenge the research expectations and to accept unconventional research methods to enhance knowledge about management accounting in production environments.

This paper focuses on the operations managers’ use of non-financial information in their operational work and examines whether this use increases their satisfaction with management accounting systems. Survey responses from 168 operations managers in a Swedish mining company unexpectedly demonstrate a positive relationship between operations managers’ use of traditional management accounting and management accounting system satisfaction. Our findings from a subsequent qualitative workshop in which operations managers participated suggest that trust in integrated systems is damaged by careless handling of input in such systems and interpretation difficulties caused by a lack of effective guidance from accountants. Operations managers perceive traditional management accounting as objective and appear to use it collectively as a basis for learning and improvement. Operations managers use traditional management accounting proactively with their teams, but simultaneously seek help from ‘business-oriented’ accountants to navigate in operational situations.