| Summary: | This study was conducted to examine the factors that influence the adoption of management accounting innovations (MAIs) generally compared to the use of traditional management accounting practices (TMAPs). This was done by looking at the specific case of Libyan manufacturing and non-manufacturing organisations. In view of the nature of the research questions, a mixed methods approach was adopted prioritising quantitative data from a descriptive analysis of 103 returned questionnaires (a usable response rate 41.2 %) in addition to statistical analysis that included correlations and multiple regressions to test the hypotheses of the study. For the qualitative data, 10 semi- structured interviews were conducted. The TMAPs were divided into five groups while the MAIs were seven techniques taken from a review of relevant literature. In looking at factors affecting adoption of MAIs, these were taken from two different perspectives, that of a hybrid framework of New Institutional Sociology (NIS) and contingency theories. The descriptive analysis indicated that most TMAPs are in use within the Libyan organisations. The management accounting practices (MAPs) that have the highest adoption rates are related to the budgeting group. The results also indicate that three factors were significantly associated with facilitating the adoption of MAIs. They were; using computer systems for MA purposes, top management support, and MA training programmes. The most influential factors hindering the adoption of MAIs were; lack of skilled employees, lack of local training programmes in MAIs, and lack of support from top management. The results of this study indicated that the adoption of MAIs in Libyan organisations have made considerable progress in recent years compared to previous studies conducted in Libya. In addition, the outcomes of empirical analysis and hypotheses test were significant and provide valuable contribution to relevant literature in Libyan context. To conclude, this study made a significant contribution to knowledge by presenting a reasonable explanation of the adoption of MAIs in Libya, and offered additional insights into factors that influence the adoption of MAIs in the Libyan context. Moreover, it suggests future studies, specified the limitations of the study, and filled the gap in MAIs literature by developing a theoretical framework that evaluates the influence of institutional and contingent factors on adopting MAIs in Libya.
|
|---|
