Management control systems in innovation companies: A literature based framework

Past research has traditionally argued that management control systems (MCSs) may present a hindrance to the creativity of innovation companies. This theoretical paper surveys the literature to focus an investigation on the MCSs of innovation companies. Within the object of control paradigm the paper develops and presents a theoretical model of the impact of eleven external, organisational and innovation related contingency factors on the MCSs in companies that engage in innovation activities. We also suggest measures for further empirical research. By formulating hypotheses on 43 potential interactions the model predicts contradictory influences on two direct control categories, results and action control, but stresses the importance of two indirect categories, personnel and cultural control. More specifically, the high levels of technological complexity and innovation capability in this type of company are expected to be negatively associated with the application of results and action control, whereas personnel and cultural seem to be more appropriate. Furthermore, important sources of finance, venture capital and public funding, are both hypothesised to be positively associated with the application of results, action and personnel control; whereas only public funding is predicted to be positively related to the application of cultural control. The principal contribution of this paper lies in synthesising the literature to provide a model of the impact of a unique set of eleven contingency factors for innovation companies on a broad scope of controls. In addition, the contingency model, if empirically validated, would add value by inferring the particular forms of management control which would be beneficial in innovative company settings. © 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates