Articles
DOI DOI: 10.62441/actainnovations.v63i.1130

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING AND INNOVATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RELATIONSHIP DIRECTIONS AND POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONAL MECHANISMS

Yanbing Zhao1, Hafizah Abd-Mutalib 2, Zarifah Abdullah 2
  1. 1 Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz School of Accountancy, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia. School of Digital Economy and Intelligent Management, Huanghe Jiaotong University, 454950, Jiaozuo, Henan, China.
  2. 2 Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz School of Accountancy, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia.

Abstract

This review systematically examines the direction and form of the relationship between strategic management accounting (SMA) and organizational innovation, identifies potential organizational mechanisms, and considers the implications for sustainable business development. Searches of Scopus and the Web of Science Core Collection identified 138 records. After deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text eligibility assessment, 18 studies were included: seven core studies on SMA and innovation and 11 supplementary studies on SMA and potential organizational mechanisms. A structured narrative synthesis was used to compare construct definitions, relationship directions, and the analytical roles assigned to potential mechanisms. The Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies (QuADS) was used to assess methodological and reporting quality across different research designs. The evidence does not support a single, consistent relationship between SMA and innovation. Core studies more often treat innovation capability, technological innovation, or innovation activities as antecedents of SMA adoption and use, whereas firm-level evidence that SMA promotes innovation remains limited. Case studies, action research, and model simulations suggest that SMA may contribute to innovation through strategic cost information, knowledge management and organizational learning, information processing and use, cross-functional collaboration, and operational processes. Knowledge-related processes were the most frequently identified. Future research should examine both relationship directions and possible feedback effects using longitudinal, multi-wave, multi-source designs and objective innovation measures. In practice, firms should link SMA with knowledge integration, cross-functional collaboration, and long-term resource allocation to support innovation decisions, organizational adaptability, and sustainable business development.

How to Cite

Zhao, Y., Abd-Mutalib , H., & Abdullah , Z. (2026). STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING AND INNOVATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RELATIONSHIP DIRECTIONS AND POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONAL MECHANISMS. ACTA INNOVATIONS, 63, 609–631. https://doi.org/10.62441/actainnovations.v63i.1130
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX

References

  1. 1. OECD, Eurostat. Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation. 4th ed. Paris and Luxembourg: OECD Publishing and Eurostat; 2018. doi: 10.1787/9789264304604-en
  2. 2. Chenhall RH, Moers F. The role of innovation in the evolution of management accounting and its integration into management control. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 2015; 47: 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2015.10.002
  3. 3. Magnacca F, Giannetti R. Management accounting and new product development: A systematic literature review and future research directions. Journal of Management and Governance. 2024; 28(2): 651–685. doi: 10.1007/s10997-022-09650-9
  4. 4. Ellram LM, Stanley LL. Integrating strategic cost management with a 3DCE environment: Strategies, practices, and benefits. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. 2008; 14(3): 180–191. doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2008.05.003
  5. 5. Gonçalves T, Gaio C, Silva M. Target costing and innovation-exploratory configurations: A comparison of fsQCA, multivariate regression, and variable cluster analysis. Journal of Business Research. 2018; 89: 378–384. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.054
  6. 6. Phornlaphatrachakorn K. Effects of transformational leadership, organisational learning and technological innovation on strategic management accounting in Thailand's financial institutions. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting. 2019; 12(1): 165–188. doi: 10.22452/ajba.vol12no1.6
  7. 7. Anh CT, Huynh QL. Effect of market orientation on innovation, intellectual capital and strategic management accounting: Evidence from tourism enterprises. Access to Science, Business, Innovation in the Digital Economy. 2026; 7(1): 178–194. doi: 10.46656/access.2026.7.1(10)
  8. 8. Ojra J, Opute AP, Alsolmi MM. Strategic management accounting and performance implications: A literature review and research agenda. Future Business Journal. 2021; 7: 64. doi: 10.1186/s43093-021-00109-1
  9. 9. Rashid MM, Ali MM, Hossain DM. Strategic management accounting practices: A literature review and opportunity for future research. Asian Journal of Accounting Research. 2021; 6(1): 109–132. doi: 10.1108/AJAR-06-2019-0051
  10. 10. Simmonds K. Strategic management accounting. Management Accounting. 1981; 59(4): 26–29.
  11. 11. Guilding C, Cravens KS, Tayles M. An international comparison of strategic management accounting practices. Management Accounting Research. 2000; 11(1): 113–135. doi: 10.1006/mare.1999.0120
  12. 12. Pires RAR, Alves MC, Rodrigues LL. Forty years of publications on strategic management accounting: Exploring the conceptual structure through co-word analysis. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review. 2024; 27(2): 288–306. doi: 10.6018/rcsar.491521
  13. 13. Cadez S, Guilding C. An exploratory investigation of an integrated contingency model of strategic management accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 2008; 33(7–8): 836–863. doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2008.01.003
  14. 14. Hadid W, Al-Sayed M. Management accountants and strategic management accounting: The role of organizational culture and information systems. Management Accounting Research. 2021; 50: 100725. doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2020.100725
  15. 15. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 56000:2025 Innovation management—Fundamentals and vocabulary. 2nd ed. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2025.
  16. 16. Dziallas M, Blind K. Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis. Technovation. 2019; 80–81: 3–29. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2018.05.005
  17. 17. Stundziene A, Pilinkiene V, Vilkas M, Grybauskas A, Lukauskas M. The challenge of measuring innovation types: A systematic literature review. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2024; 9(4): 100620. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2024.100620
  18. 18. Fayard D, Lee LS, Leitch RA, Kettinger WJ. Effect of internal cost management, information systems integration, and absorptive capacity on inter-organizational cost management in supply chains. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 2012; 37(3): 168–187. doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2012.02.001
  19. 19. Yoshikuni AC, Dwivedi R, dos Santos MQL, Fragoso R, de Souza AC, de Sousa FH, et al. Effects of knowledge management processes by strategic management accounting on organizational ambidexterity: Mediation of operational processes under environmental dynamism. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management. 2024; 25(3): 513–532. doi: 10.1007/s40171-024-00398-9
  20. 20. Baird K, Su S, Nuhu N. The influence of organisational learning capability on the organisational use of SMA practices: The mediating role of employee creativity and empowerment. Accounting & Finance. 2024; 64(3): 2321–2343. doi: 10.1111/acfi.13217
  21. 21. Teece DJ. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2007; 28(13): 1319–1350. doi: 10.1002/smj.640
  22. 22. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372: n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
  23. 23. Campbell M, McKenzie JE, Sowden A, Katikireddi SV, Brennan SE, Ellis S, et al. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. BMJ. 2020; 368: l6890. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6890
  24. 24. Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al.; PRISMA-S Group. PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews. 2021; 10: 39. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
  25. 25. Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, Pilla B, Jordan Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2024. doi: 10.46658/JBIMES-24-01
  26. 26. McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Ryan RE, Thomson HJ, Johnston RV. Summarizing study characteristics and preparing for synthesis. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.5. Cochrane; 2024.
  27. 27. Harrison R, Jones B, Gardner P, Lawton R. Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): An appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies. BMC Health Services Research. 2021; 21: 144. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y
  28. 28. Coad A. Smart work and hard work: Explicating a learning orientation in strategic management accounting. Management Accounting Research. 1996; 7(4): 387–408. doi: 10.1006/mare.1996.0022
  29. 29. Silvi R, Cuganesan S. Investigating the management of knowledge for competitive advantage: A strategic cost management perspective. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2006; 7(3): 309–323. doi: 10.1108/14691930610681429
  30. 30. Raksudjarit S, Namburi N, Pongkrapan N, Dueloh N. Strategic management accounting and data-driven innovation for operational efficiency in the southern border manufacturing industry of Thailand. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies. 2025; 12(4): 1–7. doi: 10.14419/7gy2r105
  31. 31. Lueg R, Ilieva D. Customer profitability analysis in decision-making: The roles of customer characteristics, cost structures, and strategizing. PLOS ONE. 2024; 19(5): e0296974. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296974
  32. 32. Potnik Galić K, Štavlić K, Đokić K. Development of an integrated strategic cost management model. Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2023; 19(1): 83–93. doi: 10.14254/1800-5845/2023.19-1.7
  33. 33. Beste T, Klakegg OJ. Strategic change towards cost-efficient public construction projects. International Journal of Project Management. 2022; 40(4): 372–384. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.04.006
  34. 34. Al-Mansour J, Al-Nesafi A. Influence of shared knowledge in accounting departments when implementing organizational strategies: Kuwait as a case study. International Journal on Emerging Technologies. 2019; 10(4): 222–232.
  35. 35. Maelah R, Mohamed BAH, Amir AM. Strategic management accounting information and performance: Mediating effect of knowledge management. South East Asian Journal of Management. 2022; 16(1): 1–25. doi: 10.21002/seam.v16i1.1085
  36. 36. Said J, Wee SH, Othman R, Taylor D. The mediating effects of organizational learning orientation on the relationship between strategic management accounting information use and organizational performance. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal. 2010; 5(2): 1–22.
  37. 37. Wichitsathian S, Ekkaphol S. Strategic management accounting and competitiveness affecting sustainable performance: The moderating role of organizational learning capability and competitive culture. Contemporary Economics. 2026; 20(1): 56–76. doi: 10.5709/ce.1897-9254.582
  38. 38. Paul J, Rosado-Serrano A. Gradual internationalization vs Born-Global/International new venture models: A review and research agenda. International Marketing Review. 2019; 36(6): 830–858. doi: 10.1108/IMR-10-2018-0280
  39. 39. Paul J, Khatri P, Duggal HK. Frameworks for developing impactful systematic literature reviews and theory building: What, why and how? Journal of Decision Systems. 2024; 33(4): 537–550. doi: 10.1080/12460125.2023.2197700
  40. 40. Hill AD, Johnson SG, Greco LM, O'Boyle EH, Walter SL. Endogeneity: A review and agenda for the methodology-practice divide affecting micro and macro research. Journal of Management. 2021; 47(1): 105–143. doi: 10.1177/0149206320960533.