4
SPEZIAL
|
CONTROLLING INTERNATIONAL
|
ISSUE 12
|
SEPTEMBER 2015
CONTROLLER
During the Brussels meeting,
I found an amazing degree of
curiosity towards the concept
of controlling. Representatives
of various associations from
countries as diverse as the
UK, the US, Canada, Australia,
India, Pakistan, Sweden, or the
Netherlands joined me in an in-
tensive debate about the differences
and similarities – as well as the future
– of management accounting. My impression
was that quite a few representatives of the different
accounting associations in the room were deeply concerned
about the future and the relevance of management ac-
counting in the above mentioned countries, in particular the
US, the UK, and the other members of the Commonwealth.
Therefore, the concept of controlling, especially the Dutch,
Scandinavian and German approaches, got a lot of attention.
The key lesson I learned was that we need to intensify the
dialogue on a global level to learn from each other more than
in the past.
But let me come back to the differences between control-
ling in the German tradition and management accounting.
Historically, there are three drivers of notable differences
in corporate practice: the academic traditions, the busi-
ness traditions and, finally, the national cultures. Of course,
these three drivers are not independent from each other. On
the contrary, they can reinforce each other over time and
create idiosyncratic path dependencies. Let’s consider the
first driver, which is the differences in academic traditions:
With Schmalenbach, Kilger, Riebel and others, Germany has
a long tradition of cost accounting research that has also
been closely connected to corporate practice and that has –
compared with most English language countries – resulted
in a different and arguably more refined cost accounting
practice.
BELGIUM
While globalisation is an ex-
tremely powerful force in
accounting and controlling
alike, most experienced
controllers would claim
that there are significant
differences between the
practice of controlling, as we
know it in the International As-
sociation of Controllers, and the
Anglo-Saxon model of management
accounting. At the same time, the discus-
sion of the two concepts mostly suffers from the fact
that we know little about the differences in national
management accounting practices let alone what is
driving them. Given this situation, I was invited to
discuss the differences and similarities of control-
ling and Anglo-Saxon style management accounting
at a meeting of the IFAC Professional Accountants
in Business (PAIB) Committee in Brussels on March
23rd, 2015.
The International Federation of Accountants is the global
organisation for the accountancy profession, comprising
over 175 member bodies and associates in 130 countries
and jurisdictions, representing approximately 2.5 million ac-
countants in public practice, education, government service,
industry, and commerce. In Germany, for example, the Insti-
tut der Wirtschaftsprüfer and the Wirtschaftsprüferkammer
are both members, while German-speaking controllers are
not yet represented.
Utz Schäffer
WHU – Otto Beisheim
School of Management,
Vallendar, Germany
Head ofr the Chair for
Management Accounting &
Control and Director of the
Institute of Management
Accounting and Control
Member ICV Board of
Trustees
CONTROLLING MEETS
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING
AN INSIGHTFUL DISCUSSION AT THE IFAC
MEETING IN BRUSSELS
