Classical model of control in the accounting literature

              The Accounting Historians Journal
Vol. 13, No. 1
Spring 1986
Lee D. Parker GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY
THE CLASSICAL MODEL OF CONTROL IN THE ACCOUNTING LITERATURE
Abstract: This paper outlines a classical management model of control based upon concepts identified in the writings of Frederick Taylor and Henry Fayol. The classical model's constituent concepts are found to be replicated in early accounting literature. The accounting model persisted right through the 1970s with only one conceptual change that reflected a concept discussed by Fayol. A number of factors which may have influenced the accounting model's replication of the classical management model are then considered. These include the linguistic derivation of the term "budget", historical approaches to budgeting by governments, the scientific and efficiency orientation of accountants in the past and their perception of the corporate budget.
In 1964 Luneski [p. 592] published a paper on the meaning of control and pointed but that there is a lack of "universal agreement as to the precise meaning of the word." In analysing various defi-nitions he concluded that the meaning and scope of the term depended on the particular structure of management functions in-volved. This paper sheds further light on the classical concepts of control in accounting by tracing their historical development and by showing that their foundation was the work of Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol.
After outlining the classical management model of control and documenting its influence on accounting, an accounting model is constructed and its replication of the management model is demon-strated. The centrality of the budget to the accounting control model is established and factors which appear to have influenced this development in the accounting literature are discussed.
Acknowledgement: The author is grateful for the advice of Professor R. P. Brief (New York University), Professor K. S. Most (Florida International University), Professor C. G. Peirson, Dr. M. C. Knowles, and Dr. K. Trace (Monash University) and for the encouragement of Professors T. Johnson (University of Washington), A. G. Hopwood (London Business School) and G. J. Previts (Case Western Re-serve University). The paper has also benefited from the comments of participants in the 4th International Congress of Accounting Historians, Pisa, Italy, August 1984.