Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1959.3/190142

Title

Japanese cost management meets Sri Lankan politics: state regulation and management controls in a privatized utility

Author(s)

Wickramasinghe, Danture;  Hopper, Trevor;  Rathnasiri, Chandana

Abstract

The Sri Lanka Telecommunications company was recently partially privatised and a major Japanese company became responsible for its management. Previously, it was a government department characterised by rule bound, bureaucratic management and political interventions into operational issues. The longitudinal study illustrates how a Japanese manager's charismatic and patrimonial leadership eliminated bureaucratic controls, brought new management controls and reward systems, and achieved some commercial success. However, some employees unsympathetic to the changes allied with politicians frustrated with their exclusion from organisational affairs to get the Japanese manager removed and restore formal bureaucracy. This was achieved not through direct intervention but largely through the politicians' control of the regulatory system. Conflicts between the two competing management control ideologies were profound and violent. The paper traces how modes of production and management accounting and controls in less developed countries are related, and are transformed in an unpredictable and often unexpected fashion due to cultural, economic, and political factors.

Publication type

Conference paper

Source

Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Conference for Interdisciplinary Perspectives in Accounting (APIRA 2001), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 15-17 July 2001

Publication year

2001

Keyword(s)

Bureaucracy;  Japan;  Management accounting;  Privatisation;  Sri Lanka

Publisher

University of Adelaide

Publisher URL

http://www.commerce.adelaide.edu.au/research/aaaj/apira_2001/papers/default.htm

Copyright

Copyright © 2001.

Additional information

A revised version of this paper was later published in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 85-120 (2004).

Peer reviewed