Terminological distinctions of ‘control’: a review of the implications for management control research in the context of innovation

Abstract The article reviews the terminological distinctions (e.g. action and result control, interactive and diagnostic control) used for control in twenty-five empirical studies on management control in the context of innovation. The terminological distinctions are classed in three categorizations. These are (a) the types of managerial control, (b) the design and use mode of managerial control instruments and (c) the enabling and constraining character of managerial control instruments. By analyzing the categorizations, it becomes evident that there are two, almost independent ontological streams shaping the empirical field: the determinist perspective and the voluntarist perspective of management control with different understandings of contingency. The ‘ideal fit’ approach to contingency of the determinist perspective adds little cumulative knowledge to the field of management control in the context of innovation. Therefore, the article suggests to strengthen the voluntarist perspective and to develop a ‘quasi fit’ interpretation of contingency. The agenda for prospective research in management control in the context of innovation includes to investigate deviant and repair behavior related to management control systems (MCS) in innovating activities, to understand MCS as dependent as well as independent variable and to explore the role of MCS in economizing innovative activities.