Proceedings

H6. “Universities’ departmental performance” is negatively associated with “more
budget control”.
Figure 1, concisely, illustrates hypothesis 1 to 6 in a schematic expression.
Figure 1 Effects of external variables on Iranian universities’ accounting system
and performance (proposal)
Competitive
position
H1b H1c
Improved
accounting system
Competitive
advantage
H4b
H1a
1.5. Comprehensive performance measures (H7)
Financial pressure Decentralization
H2a H2b
More emphasis on
budget control
H6
University’s departmental
performance
According to the balanced scorecard notion (Kaplan and Norton, 1993) it seems
evident that in a new situation such as competitive position organizations are more
likely to employ new and comprehensive measures to evaluate their performances.
Use of qualitative measures besides quantitative measures in the competitive positions
appears to be prevalent to lead organizations in a better point compared to their rivals
(Amir and Lev, 1996). As a result of another empirical study, it is claimed that there is
a positive and significant association among the magnitude of market competition and
use of multiple performance measures in manufacturing organizations (Hoque et al.,
2001). Recently this idea was confirmed in Taiwanese high-tech manufacturing firms
as well (Schulz et al., 2010). Although Kaplan (2001) giving several evidence, claims
that use of non-financial performance measures alongside with the traditional
measures is also useful in non-for-profit organizations, little empirical investigation
has been conducted in the context of public organizations. Thus, it seems interesting
to below hypothesis be tested in some public organizations:
H7. Use of “comprehensive performance measures” is more important for the
universities which are facing more intense “competition”.
~ 96 ~
H5b
Participative
budgeting system
H4b H5a
H5b
H4a
H3b
H3a
Satisfaction with
budgets