| Summary: | Merger integration includes taking decisions to ensure procedures are shared within a company to achieve common goals. Simultaneously, research shows a need for adaption to specific units’ practices. Consequently, this paper aims to increase the understanding in the interaction between central and local views of management control in terms of the key concepts of budgets and key performance indicators. We pose the question of how intended and perceived control differs, as differences may implicate that control is not followed. It is examined by a theoretical framework built upon four archetypes of change. We used semi-structured interviews to achieve a deep understanding in one merger case. The results show that top management use centralized control by commanding and informing employees in order to gain information from the local units. Yet, local units perceive the intended control as adapted due to that dialogue is used at this level. This amounts to the concept of “false socializing” that is argued to create a deeper understanding of merger integration. It depicts how local units can carry out and perceive control intentions made by a central unit.
|
|---|
