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.

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.