2004
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsvraagstukken
  4. Volume 42, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 42, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0169-2216
  • E-ISSN: 2468-9424
file format pdf download PDF

Abstract

Samenvatting

Deze studie onderzocht de mate waarin managers in Nederlandse organisaties soft controls gebruiken en in hoeverre situationele bedrijfsfactoren hierop van invloed zijn. Soft controls zijn informele beheersmaatregelen, zoals het uitspreken van waardering en het tonen van voorbeeldgedrag. In deze studie verwijst ‘manager’ naar de formele managementfunctie; ‘leidinggevende’ is een brede term voor iedereen die leiding geeft. We gebruikten de zelfdeterminatietheorie om soft controls te identificeren. In aanvulling daarop gebruikten we de contingentietheorie voor inzicht in de relatie tussen organisatiefactoren en het gebruik van soft controls door managers. In totaal namen 205 managers deel aan een surveyonderzoek. Factoranalyse toonde aan dat er vier dimensies van soft controls kunnen worden onderscheiden: het faciliteren van medewerkers ten aanzien van hun: (1) autonomie, (2) persoonlijke ontwikkeling, (3) de relatie met de leidinggevende, en (4) psychologische veiligheid. De uitgevoerde latenteklasseanalyse liet zien dat managers op basis van hun soft controls-gebruik kunnen worden onderverdeeld in vier klassen, variërend van zeer laag tot zeer hoog. Hoewel de onderzochte organisatiekenmerken enige relatie hebben met het gebruik van soft controls, bleek deze relatie zwak. Vervolgonderzoek is nodig om te bepalen in hoeverre bijvoorbeeld persoonlijke eigenschappen van managers een directe of modererende rol spelen in de toepassing van soft controls.

© Meurs et al.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR
2026-03-01
2026-03-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/01692216/42/1/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 61-89. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393986
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Akroyd, C., & Kober, R. (2020). Imprinting founders’ blueprints on management control systems. Management Accounting Research, 46(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2019.07.002
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Aryee, S., Walumbwa, F. O., Mondejar, R., & Chu, C. W. L. (2015). Accounting for the Influence of Overall Justice on Job Performance: Integrating Self-Determination and Social Exchange Theories. Journal of Management Studies, 52(2), 231-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12067
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Benítez-Márquez, M. D., Sánchez-Teba, E. M., Bermúdez-González, G., & Núñez-Rydman, E. S. (2022). Generation Z within the workforce and in the workplace: A bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 736820. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.736820
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bogers, J. J. D., Kaptein, S. P., & Soeters, J. M. M. L. (2018). Control with care: The value of soft controls in the management control system of the Dutch defence organization [Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam]. Erasmus University Rotterdam. https://repub.eur.nl/pub/108121
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Cardinal, L. B., Sitkin, S. B., & Long, C. P. (2004). Balancing and rebalancing in the creation and evolution of organizational control. Organization Science, 15(4), 411-431. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0084
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chenhall, R. (2003). Management control systems design with in its organizational context: Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28 (2-3), 127-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00027-7
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Child, J. (1973). Predicting and understanding organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(2), 168-185. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392061
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Chua, C. E. H., & Myers, M. D. (2018). Social control in information systems development: A negotiated order perspective. Information Systems Journal, 28(2), 256-287. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-017-0048-4
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Collier, P. M. (2005). Entrepreneurial control and the construction of a relevant accounting. Management Accounting Research, 16(3), 321-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2005.06.007
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Collins, L. M., & Lanza, S. T. (2010). Latent class and latent transition analysis: With applications in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. Wiley.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooke, F. L. (2018). Concepts, contexts, and mindsets: Putting human resource management research in perspectives. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12163
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Davila, A., Foster, G., & Jia, N. (2010). Building sustainable high-growth startup companies: Management systems as an accelerator. California Management Review, 52(3), 79-105. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2010.52.3.79
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Davila, T., (2005). An exploratory study on the emergence of management control systems: formalizing human resources in small growing firms. Organizations Society, 30(3), 223-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2004.05.006
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19-43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Deci, E .L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Dull, J., Ceylan, C., & Jaspers, F. (2011). Knowledge workers’ creativity and the role of the physical work environment. Human Resource Management, 50(6), 715-734. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20454
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 23-43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Egdell, V., Maclean, G., Raeside, R., & Chen, T. (2020). Age management in the workplace: manager and older worker accounts of policy and practice. Ageing and Society, 40(4), 784-804. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X18001307
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Fiedler, F. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 149-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60051-9
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Forner, V. W., Jones, M., Berry, Y., & Eidenfalk, J. (2020). Motivating workers: How leaders apply self-determination theory in organizations. Organization Management Journal, 18(2), 76-94. https://doi.org/10.1108/OMJ-03-2020-0891
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Gómez, C. B., & Sánchez, J. I. (2005). Human resource control in MNCs: A study of the factors influencing the use of formal and informal control mechanisms. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(10), 1847-1861. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500298438
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Grabner, I., & Moers, F. (2013). Management control as a system or a package? Conceptual and empirical issues. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(6), 407-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2013.07.001
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hales, C. (2001). Managing through organization: The management process, forms of organization, and the work of managers (2e ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hoefnagel, W. (2024). IT- en financiële sector voorop in AI-toepassingen. Dutch IT Leaders.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Jokipii, A. (2010). Determinants and consequences of internal control in firms: a contingency theory based analysis. Journal of Management and Governance, 14(2), 115-144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-009-9085-x
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Jöhnk, J., Weißert, M., & Wyrtki, K., (2021). Ready or not, AI comes: An interview study of organizational AI readiness factors. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 63(1), 5-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-020-00676-7
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Johns, G. (2017). Reflections on the 2016 decade award: Incorporating context in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 42(4), 577-595. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0044Invited
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing and testing a measure for the ethical culture of organizations: The corporate ethical virtues model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(7), 923-947. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.520
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kaptein, M. (2011). Understanding unethical behavior by unraveling ethical culture. Human Relations, 64(6), 843-869. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726710390536
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kim, S., Lee, H., & Connerton, T. P. (2020). How psychological safety affects team performance: Mediating role of efficacy and learning behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01581
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kirsch, L. J. (1997). Portfolios of control modes and IS project management. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.3.215
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Li, F., Cohen, A., Kim, S. H., & Cho, S. J. (2009). Model selection methods for mixture dichotomous IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33(5), 353-373. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662160832642
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Organizational structure: Minzberg’s framework. International Journal of Scholarly, Academic, Intellectual Diversity, 14(1), 1-8.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. Harper & Row Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. McAdam, R., Miller, K., & McSorley, C. (2019). Towards a contingency theory perspective of quality management in enabling strategic alignment. International Journal of Production Economics, 207, 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.07.003
     [Google Scholar]
  37. McCarthy, S., O’Raghallaigh, P., Li, Y., & Adam, F. (2023). Control enactment in context: Understanding the interaction of controlee and controller perceptions in inter-organisational project teams. Information Systems Journal, 33(5), 1029-1084. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12434
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2012). Management control systems: Performance measurement, evaluation and incentives (3e ed.). Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Meurs, D. N. D., Born, M. P., Van der Grift, Y., Lycklama à Nijeholt, M., & Schippers, J. (2023). Soft controls and employee well-being: An analysis of SMEs in Europe. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 41(3), 339-370.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Meurs, D. N. D., Born, M. P., Van der Grift, Y., Lycklama à Nijeholt, M., & Schippers, J. (2024). Informal human resource management and innovation: Insights from European SMEs. International Small Business Journal, 43(2), 128-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/02662426241288719
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Meurs, D. N. D., & Lycklama à Nijeholt, M. P., (2022). Soft controls: wat werkt in welke situatie? Onderzoek naar de verhouding tussen soft en hard controls in het mkb. Tijdschrift voor Management & Organisatie, 76(1), 4-21.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Miao, Q., Eva, N., Newman, A., & Cooper, B. (2019). CEO entrepreneurial leadership and performance outcomes of top management teams in entrepreneurial ventures: The mediating effects of psychological safety. Journal of Small Business Management, 57(3), 1119-1135. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12465. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12465
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Mikalef, P., Lemmer, K., Schaefer, C., Ylinen, M., Fjørtoft, S. O., Torvatn, H. Y., Gupta, M., & Niehaves, B. (2022). Enabling AI capabilities in government agencies: A study of determinants for European municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101596
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Mintzberg, H. (1992). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Mintzberg, H. (2009). Tracking strategies: Toward a general theory of strategy formation. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Moores, K., & Yuen, S. (2001). Management accounting systems and organizational configuration: A life-cycle perspective. Organizations Society, 26, 351-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(00)00040-4
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Nudurupati, S. S., Garnego, P., & Bititci, U.S. (2021). Impact of the changing business environment on performance measurement and management practices. International Journal of Production Economics, 232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107942
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Nugraha, F., Prasetyo, B. E., Sugiarti, R., & Suhariadi, F. (2025). Perception of Generation Z towards leadership in the workplace: A study at HIJ Company. Ranah Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 7(3), 1856-1866. https://doi.org/10.38035/rrj.v7i3.1557
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Oosterling, M., & Van Dijk, G. (2014). Private en (semi-)publieke organisaties: Waar zijn de ‘responsible’ leiders?TIAS.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Peters, P., Ligthart, P. E., Bardoel, A., & Poutsma, E. (2016). ‘Fit’ for telework’? Crosscultural variance and task-control explanations in organizations’ formal telework practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(21), 2582-2603. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1122408
     [Google Scholar]
  51. PotgieterI. L., Ferreira, N., & Coetzee, M. (2019). Theory, research and dynamics of career wellbeing: Becoming fit for the future. Springer Cham.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2019). Brick by brick: The origins, development, and future of self-determination theory. In A. J.Elliot (Red.), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 6) (pp. 111-156). Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Sardi, A., Sorano, E., Garengo, P., & Ferraris, A. (2020). The role of HRM in the innovation of performance measurement and management systems: a multiple case study in SMEs. Employee Relations, 43(2), 589-606. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-03-2020-0101
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Sen, S., & Bradshaw, L. (2017). Comparison of relative fit indices for diagnostic model selection. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41(6), 422-438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621617695521
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Sheehan, M. (2014). Human resource management and performance: Evidence from small and medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal, 32(5), 545-570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612465454
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Shonhadji, N., & Maulidi, A. (2022). Is it suitable for your local governments? A contingency based-theory-based analysis on the use of internal control in thwarting white-collar-crime. Journal of Financial Crime, 29(2), 770-786. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-10-2019-0128
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Smith, M., & Bititci, U. S. (2017). Interplay between performance measurement and management, employee engagement and performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37(9), 1207-1228. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-06-2015-0313
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Speklé, R., Van Elten, H., & Widener, S. (2017). Creativity and control: A paradox. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 29(2), 73-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2480471
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Strauss, E., & Zecher, C. (2013). Management control systems: a review. Journal of Management Control, 23(4), 233-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-012-0158-7
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Truss, C., Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., McGovern, P., & Stiles, P. (1997). Soft and hard models of human resource management: A reappraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 34(1), 53-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00049
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Tucker, B. P. (2019). Heard it through the grapevine: Conceptualizing informal control through the lens of social network theory. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 31 (1), 219-245. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-52064
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Van Breukelen, J. W. M. (2012). Het belang van de context voor onderzoek binnen de organisatiepsychologie. Gedrag & Organisatie, 25(3), 244-253. https://doi.org/10.5117/2012.025.003.244
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Van Dalen, H. P., Henkens, C. J. I. M., & Schippers, J. J. (2009). Dealing with older workers in Europe: A comparative survey of employers’ attitudes and actions. Journal of European Social Policy, 19(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/095892870809852
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Van de Ven., A., H., Ganco, M., & Hinings, C. R. (2013). Returning to the frontier of contingency theory of organizational and institutional designs. The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 393-440. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2013.774981
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Van den Broeck, A., Ferris, D. L., Chang, C.-H., & Rosen, C. C. (2016). A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1195-1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316632058
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Van den Broek, S., & De Pooter, M. (2013). Management accounting & control: Vertrouwen als bron van prestaties. Management Control & Accounting, 17(5), 9-13.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Wagner, J. A. (1994). Participation’s effects on performance and satisfaction: A reconsideration of research evidence. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 312-330. https://doi.org/10.2307/258707
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Wiener, M., Mähring, M., Remus, U., & Saunders, C. (2016). Control configuration and control enactment in information systems projects: Review and expanded theoretical framework. MIS Quarterly, 40(3), 741-774. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2016/40.3.09
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Wilms, I., & Van de Ven, A. (2016). Soft controls die het verschil maken: Een case study bij een financiële instelling. Maandblad voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie, 90(4), 124-136. https://doi.org/10.5117/mab.90.31283
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR
Loading
Gebruik van soft controls door Nederlandse managers
TA 42, 5 (2026); https://doi.org/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR
/content/journals/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR
/content/journals/10.5117/TVA2026.1.002.MEUR
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): management control; organizational characteristics; soft controls; the Netherlands

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error