بررسی رابطه سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری و بهره وری سازمانهای خدماتی با استفاده از روش دیماتل
محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت بازرگانی
جواد میرزایی نصیر آباد
1
,
سلیمان ایران زاده
2
,
محمد تقی هوشوند
3
1 - دانشجوی دکتری حسابداری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
2 - دانشیار، گروه مدیریت، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
3 - مربی، گروه مدیریت، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
کلید واژه: بهره وری, روش دیماتل, سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف اصلی این تحقیق بررسی رابطه سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری و بهره وری سازمانهای خدماتی با استفاده از روش دیماتل می باشد. تحقیق حاضر مطالعه ای کاربردی است که به شکل پیمایشی اجرا شده است. جامعه آماری این پژوهش 140 نفر از کارکنان بخش حسابداری و مالی مؤسسات خدماتی پلیس +10 استان آذربایجان شرقی شامل می شود که براساس جدول مورگان 102نفر به عنوان نمونه آماری انتخاب می گردد. همچنین قلمرو زمانی این پژوهش نیمه اول سال 1395 می باشد. در این پژوهش با مطالعه پیشینه و متون مرتبط با تحقیق، به بررسی ابعاد و عناصر مؤثر بر موفقیت سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری و نقش آن در بهره وری سازمانهای خدماتی با استفاده از روش دیماتل شده است. همچنین با تلفیق ساختار سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری با عوامل مؤثر بر بهره وری و انجام مقایسات زوجی بین آنان،میزان اثر هریک از عناصر سیستم اطلاعات حسابداری را با منظور نمودن اثرگذاری عوامل بهره وری بر موفقیت در سیستم، رتبه بندی شده است. با توجه به نتایج این پژوهش به ترتیب معیارهای داده،کارکنان،رویه و دستورالعمل و نهایتاً نرم افزار در نیمه مثبت که متعلق به عوامل است قرار گرفته اند. همچنین از عوامل مؤثر بر بهره وری،ابعاد کارکنان با اثر کل42% و نرم افزار با اثر کل 23% در رده های اول و دوم وابعاد داده ها و دستورالعملها و رویه ها در رده های بعدی قرار دارند.
The present paper was a descriptive-applied research. The mainobjective of the study was to investigate the relation of the accountinginformation system and productivity of service organizations accordingto Dematel method. The statistical population included 140 employees ofthe accounting department and financial institutions of Police Serviceplus 10 in East Azerbaijan province. Using Morgan’s table the samplesize was 102 employees. The study was done in the first half of 2016.Integrating the accounting information system with effective factors onproductivity and using paire comparisons among them the amount ofeach accounting information factors considering the productivity factorsin the success of the system were ranked. The results showed that datacriteria, personnels, procedures and guidelines and the software were inthe mid-positive which was related to the causal factors. The factorsaffecting the productivity were personnels dimension 42%; software 23%and the data, procedures were the last in order respectively.
Anderson, S. W, & Widener, S. K. (2007), Doing quantitative field research in management accounting. Handbook of Management Accounting Research: Oxford.
Ahrens, T. (2011), Overcoming the subjective–objective divide in interpretive management accounting research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 292–297.
Kristanto, S. (2010), Mapping of management accounting research. Working paper. Krida Wacana Christian University.
Hopwood, A. G. (2008), Management accounting research in a changing world. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 20, 3–13.
Mehrani, S., & Nonahal nahr, A. (2006), The role of management accounting in enhanced performance. Business units. Accountant Magazine, 190, (In Persian).
Mahbobi, J. (2010), to increase productivity in the services sector, monthly prudence. Industrial Management Institute,137,(In Persian).
Mohammadi, M., & Nuri fard, M. (2012), The impact of innovation and creativity to enhance and improve employee productivity. sturdiness Magazine, 52, (In Persian).
Memar, M, (2009), human-centered strategies in the post-industrial age; Human Resources Development Conference, (In Persian).
Mehrabi, H. (2006), Models of efficiency. Economy magazine, (In Persian).
Mitchel, L. (2011), Employee praticpation in a Quality circle program: Impact on quality of work life productivity , and absenteeism. Journal of Applied psychology, 71(1).
Modell, S. (2011), Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Management Accounting Research: A Critical Realist Approach, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester.
Modell, S. (2010), Bridging the paradigm divide in management accounting research: The role of mixed methods approaches. Journal of management accounting research, 21, 124-129.
Namazi, M. (2010), the future of management accounting. Journal of Accounting Studies. AUDITING REVIEW, (In Persian).
Najafi, S. E., Aryanzhad, M., Hossein Zadeh Lotfi, F., & Abnalrasoul, S. A. (2007), evaluate performance measurement system by combining two BSC and DEA. Journal of Management, 11, (In Persian).
Saghafi, A., & Barzegar, GH. A. (2011), Management accounting research with an emphasis on qualitative methods. Journal of Management Accounting,1, 71-87, (In Persian).
Shabahang, R. (2004), Management Accounting. Institute of Accounting and Audit Corporate Audit, (In Persian).
Shery, S. (2010),Cost analysis, and quality. Journal of the auditor, the spring, (In Persian).
Samadi Lrgany, M. (2006), Comparative study of traditional and modern performance measurement indicators. Journal of Accounting, twenty-second years, (In Persian).
Senik, R. (2012), Understanding accounting research paradigms: Towards alternative methodologies. Department of accounting & finance faculty of economics & management, University Putra Malaysia.
Tangen, S. (2005), Demystifying productivity and performance. International Journal of productivity and perfornanve management, 53.
_||_Anderson, S. W, & Widener, S. K. (2007), Doing quantitative field research in management accounting. Handbook of Management Accounting Research: Oxford.
Ahrens, T. (2011), Overcoming the subjective–objective divide in interpretive management accounting research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 292–297.
Kristanto, S. (2010), Mapping of management accounting research. Working paper. Krida Wacana Christian University.
Hopwood, A. G. (2008), Management accounting research in a changing world. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 20, 3–13.
Mehrani, S., & Nonahal nahr, A. (2006), The role of management accounting in enhanced performance. Business units. Accountant Magazine, 190, (In Persian).
Mahbobi, J. (2010), to increase productivity in the services sector, monthly prudence. Industrial Management Institute,137,(In Persian).
Mohammadi, M., & Nuri fard, M. (2012), The impact of innovation and creativity to enhance and improve employee productivity. sturdiness Magazine, 52, (In Persian).
Memar, M, (2009), human-centered strategies in the post-industrial age; Human Resources Development Conference, (In Persian).
Mehrabi, H. (2006), Models of efficiency. Economy magazine, (In Persian).
Mitchel, L. (2011), Employee praticpation in a Quality circle program: Impact on quality of work life productivity , and absenteeism. Journal of Applied psychology, 71(1).
Modell, S. (2011), Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Management Accounting Research: A Critical Realist Approach, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester.
Modell, S. (2010), Bridging the paradigm divide in management accounting research: The role of mixed methods approaches. Journal of management accounting research, 21, 124-129.
Namazi, M. (2010), the future of management accounting. Journal of Accounting Studies. AUDITING REVIEW, (In Persian).
Najafi, S. E., Aryanzhad, M., Hossein Zadeh Lotfi, F., & Abnalrasoul, S. A. (2007), evaluate performance measurement system by combining two BSC and DEA. Journal of Management, 11, (In Persian).
Saghafi, A., & Barzegar, GH. A. (2011), Management accounting research with an emphasis on qualitative methods. Journal of Management Accounting,1, 71-87, (In Persian).
Shabahang, R. (2004), Management Accounting. Institute of Accounting and Audit Corporate Audit, (In Persian).
Shery, S. (2010),Cost analysis, and quality. Journal of the auditor, the spring, (In Persian).
Samadi Lrgany, M. (2006), Comparative study of traditional and modern performance measurement indicators. Journal of Accounting, twenty-second years, (In Persian).
Senik, R. (2012), Understanding accounting research paradigms: Towards alternative methodologies. Department of accounting & finance faculty of economics & management, University Putra Malaysia.
Tangen, S. (2005), Demystifying productivity and performance. International Journal of productivity and perfornanve management, 53.