Management accountants in a biotechnology company

(1)

University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Management accountants in a biotechnology company

Business partners in risk management?

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of the management accountant in risk management and investigate the role of business partnering herein. A cross-sectional case study was conducted in a biotechnology company in the Netherlands. The biotechnology industry is characterized by high

investment with high risks. Effective risk management is therefore essential as to survive in this industry. The extent of business partnering and the effects on the tasks of the management accountant in risk management was traced. I found that the management accountant has become a business partner over time. However, this does not influence the role of the management accountant within risk management. Rather, the hierarchical position, the job responsibilities and the personal ambitions and skills determine the role of the management accountant in risks management. The findings contribute to studies about enterprise risk management as well as the change in the role of the management accountant. Since the role of the management accountant in risk management has not often been investigated, this paper offers new insights for future research directions into risk management and management accounting.

(2)

1

Over the past years, there has been increasing attention on risk management. Events with a global influence have contributed to risen interest in this field. The financial crisis, food scandals, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and several natural disasters affected numerous organizations and people. The academic world has also paid more attention to the field of risk management. Beck (1992), asserted that the world has got riskier, but Soin and Collier (2013) rejected this. They argued that just the

perception of risk is growing and organizational practices have increasingly become organized around risks, which is partly the result of three factors. At first, there has been increased interest in corporate governance and a focus by the Board on identifying, assessing, treating and monitoring risks as well the evaluation of the effectiveness of risk management controls. Second, Soin and Collier (2013) observed a trend towards ‘world-wide government regulation utilizing risk-based regulatory approaches ’(p.82) in which the regulation focuses on tighter internal control mechanisms. Examples are the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the U.S., the UK’s Corporate Governance Code, the COSO (2004) framework (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commision) and the ISO 31000 standard for risk

management. Third, the media showed an increased and intensified attention on (corporate) scandals (Soin&Collier, 2013).

At the same time, Burns and Baldvinsdottir (2005) noted that the role of management accountants is changing. They spoke of ‘hybrid’ accountants, which take part in “wider, integrated business situations, agendas and decision-making forums” (p. 749). Adopting institutional theory, the authors highlighted institutional contradictions that can cause changes in the role of accountants. Soin and Collier (2013) suggested that management accountants might take a more active role in risk management. They could act as knowledge sharers inside and outside the organizations, who connect and communicate risk control systems. In their empirical research on the new role of accountants, Byrne and Pierce (2007) revealed that role conflicts could occur. Role conflicts for management accountants take place when the role of a controller, somewhat removed and objective, is in conflict with their role as business partner. However, the role of management accountants in relation to risk management has not been investigated yet. This then raises the question: If role conflicts occur, is it desirable to have management accountants positioned in risk management? According to Mikes (2009), risk management is a nascent management control practice, and so is the literature in this field. The objective of this paper is to unfold the role of management accountants in the changing risk management practices. This gives rise to the following research question: What is the relation between Risk Management and the changing role of the management accountant? Besides these theoretical issues, organizations may want to know whether the inclusion of management accountants in risk management is beneficial, or could lead to serious drawbacks such as the loss of objective controllers. The practical implications of this paper could help ‘risk officers’ to evaluate the role management accountants in risk management and to (re)consider the structure of their enterprise risk management.

(4)

3 a biotechnology company, the company is facing many risks that could have tremendous implications both for the organization itself, as well for the clients who use its products. Because of the closed culture of the industry, this paper is one of the few with access to a biotechnology company of this size.

Considering the relevance of the topics mentioned, a number of research goals can be formulated for the current research. This paper tries to add new insight into the role of management accountants in risks management field. Further, relevant literature in this field will be discussed and summarized. Finally, future research directions on the role of the management accountant in risk management will be discovered. The paper will be structured as follows: relevant concepts in the theory will be introduced and defined. Then, the design of the qualitative research will be discussed. Finally, the research findings will be presented, analyzed, discussed and conclusions will be drawn.

2 Theoretical background

In the theory section, the different domains of risk management and the role of accountants will be explained. Building on theory, these concepts will eventually be connected. A conceptual model will be created and the relations between the two domains will be discussed.

2.1 Risk

This section gives an overview of important literature in the field of risk and risk management. Over the years, much has been written about risk. However, it was only since the 1990s that the concept of risk gained significant attention in the business literature. Grounded in the banking and insurance industry, risk and risk management found its way to other business sectors as well. Academics and consultancy researchers developed diverse frameworks and programs that led to the introduction of Enterprise Risk Management etc. But what is meant by ‘risk’ and how can it be managed? This section answers these questions, which are necessary to understand the conceptual model. The definition and meaning of risk will be explored. This is essential in the understanding of risk and its impact on

businesses. Further, the concept of risk management and its development will be discussed.

2.1.1 Definition and meaning of risk

Risk taking behavior belongs to, and is fundamental for, business activities. The concept of risk has become central to corporate governance and is often linked to internal control (Spira and Page, 2003). During the development of rationalism, back in the seventeenth century, the belief arose that natural and social world could be scientifically explored. The rational view was that once there were techniques for the prediction and calculation of risks, risk could be avoided and compensated. Risks were no longer seen as the result of fate or acts of God, but as the unanticipated outcomes of human actions (Spira and Page, 2003). As a result of this scientific advance, external agencies could not be blamed for risk. When risk becomes calculable, risk management becomes institutionalized (Beck, 1998).

(5)

4 objectively quantified by risk assessment. However, many social scientists reject this view and focus on the effects that risky outcome distributions have on the people who experience them. This is a

subjective view. Risks do not exist ‘’out there”, but is dependent on our minds and cultures. Risk is a concept that human beings have invented to understand the uncertainties and dangers of life to cope with them (Slovic and Weber, 2002).

On the continuum of Lupton (1999), epistemological approaches to risk are summarized. On the one side of the continuum there is a realistic position, where risks are seen as objective and measurable. This is also called a technical-scientific perspective. On the other side, there is the constructionist

position. In this position, it is argued that nothing is a risk in itself but that our understanding of risk is built upon our social, political and historical perspectives. Rayner (1992) labeled the conventional, technical-scientific, conceptualization as reactive: the perception of risk is a response to external stimulus, communicated in a quantitative form of information and result in directive and procedurally based risk management. In contrary, the cultural approach proposes that risk perception is an active process, because organizations and societies select risk for attention. In the cultural approached, one can distinguish different regulation regimes. Hood et al. (2001) used Douglas’ grid-group model to create four modal types: egalitarian, individualist, hierarchist and fatalist. The egalitarian approach is based on community decision making where protecting the worst off is important. The individual mode is focused on individual and market choices. Further, the hierarchist mode is related to the technical-scientific approach and contains expert forecasting and management. Finally, the fatalist mode relates to the pre-modern approach, because negative events are bad luck with ad hoc responses (Spira and Page, 2003). Spira and Page also argued that in an organization, different risks may be subject to different regimes. Therefore, there could be no consensus about the meaning of the risk and the way it should be managed. They stated that because risk is vaguely defined, it now has interest in the

corporate governance area. Although the academic debate does not clarify the nature of risks or on whom these might have impact, corporate governance risk management rhetoric assumes that risks can be identified, quantified and strategically managed in an objective manner (Spira and Page, 2003).

In the literature, several researchers have tried to categorize risks. Meulbroek (2002) divided the risk in seven categories, namely: operational risks, product market risks, input risks, tax risks, regulatory risks, legal risks and financial. Liebenberg and Hoyt (2002) noticed the differences between financial and non-financial firms in traditional risk management, in the way risk are managed in separate units within the firm. Financial firms often manage risks that relate to market, credit, liquidity and operations. Non-financial firms often manage hazard, Non-financial, operational and strategic risks. This paper will use the categories of the COSO (2004) framework, which categorizes risks into four categories: operational, financial, strategic and compliance risks. Operational risk relate to the effective and efficient use of resources. Strategic risks relate to the high-level goals that are aligned with the mission of the

(6)

5 2.1.2. Enterprise Risk Management

When uncertainty is organized, it becomes a risk to be managed (Power, 2007). During the last decades of the 20th_{century, risk management frameworks like COSO (2004) were developed. But what}

is risk management? Collier et al. (2007) formulated risk management as ‘the process by which organizations methodically address the risks attaching to their activities in pursuit of organizational objectives and across the portfolio of all their activities’ (p.xvii). They also stated that effective risk management involves four phases: risk management, risk evaluation, risk treatment, and risk reporting. Risk management has to focus on the identification and treatment of the risk in accordance with the risk appetite of an organization. One can speak of an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) approach if risk management is aligned with business strategy and an embedded risk management culture into business operations is intended (Collier et al., 2007). Mikes (2009) suggested that in risk management, two types of models exist. One model is strongly driven by the shareholder value imperative, which is the ERM by numbers. The other model corresponds to the demand of the risk-based internal control imperative, which is called the holistic ERM.

There have been developments in organizational practice that focus on issues of governance and risk management. However, the impact of both uncertainty and risk has not been fully explored. Managers have always faced uncertainty, because it is a characteristic of an organizational setting. However, the range of uncertainties that need to be management has significantly increased. These uncertainties include threats such as operational, reputational and strategic risks (Soin and Collier, 2013). They conclude that the practice of risk management has moved away from an issue of calculative cultures (Mikes, 2009) including the silos view, to one of management control. The financial crisis has proven that one cannot ignore the operational risks. Risk that arise from the actions of people, systems and processes as well as the external risk cannot be ignored by organizations because these could have tremendous consequences (Soin and Collier, 2013).

2.2 The changing role of the management accountant

(7)

6 2.2.1. The role of the management accountant

In the early 2000’s, a lot of attention in the accounting literature was given to the emergence of business oriented roles for management accountants. The researchers in this field primarily conducted their research from an interpretive position, which is reflected in the three main research paradigms that are used (Rom and Rohde, 2007). Institutional theory (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Burns and Scapens, 2000) is used in the research of Granlund and Malmi (2002) and Scapens and Jazaryeri (2003). Caglio (2003) employs the structuration theory of Giddens (1984). Many other researchers (Quattrone and Hopper, 2005; Lodh and Graffikin, 2003; Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005) make use of actor network theory (Callon, 1991; Latour, 1991). Many insights in these study are thus not based on economic realities, but on other theories. These different paradigms might explain the differences that are found in these papers.

Burns and Baldvinsdottir (2005) stated that nowadays, management accountants spend far less time on score keeping and corporate policy. Management accountants are now integrated in wider business activities, including tasks as systems development, organizational design, change management and strategy formulation. They conclude that it might appear that the management accounting does require less time to routine activities, and increasingly comprises a business orientation that spans beyond routine and technical accounting. Granlund and Lukka (1998) explain the fear of the collapse of the accounting profession as motivation for the discussion on the changing role of the management accountant. The arguments for the need of management accountants to move away from historians and company watchdogs towards partnering functions, are commercially oriented. In their article, they described the expansion of the job description of management accountants. At the beginning, the management accountant was the ‘historian’ and ‘watch dog’ of a company. Over time, a transition in the role of management accountant took place. The role was going to include more dimensions like adviser, consultant and eventually a change agent and member of the management team. It is important to note that this process is an extension of the role and not a replacement. At the lower levels, historiography and ‘watching over’ will still be the basis of accounting, regardless the other roles of a management accountant (Granlund and Lukka, 1998).

Rom and Rohde (2007) investigated the reasons for the change. They stated that it is apparent that the introduction of ERP and other information systems lead to new hybrid positions. This is a result of the ‘powerful modalities of structuration’ that are provided by Caglio (2003). In addition to

(8)

7 acknowledges this change towards business partnering and questioned the effects on the accounting culture of an organization. In his paper, he observed that accounting is deeply embedded in the culture of an organizations. In order to change the culture of the management accounting function, there are several types of realms and interventions. These cultural change interventions may be divided in formal and informal interventions (Jarvenpaa, 2007; Burns and Scapens, 2000). Formal interventions are for example structural, systems and HRM interventions. Informal interventions are unconscious in nature, like for example role modelling, paying attention and storytelling (Jarvenpaa, 2007).

In their empirical research on the new role of accountants, Byrne and Pierce (2007) found the potential for role conflicts. Role conflicts for management accountants take place when the role of a controller, somewhat removed and objective, is in conflict with their role as business partner. The role theory (Kahn et al., 1964) explains that the expectations of members of the organizations (the role senders) determine the organizational roles (focal roles). Role senders are influenced by organizational factors such as size and structure. Also, the attributes of the focal role occupant and the relationship between the focal role occupant and role sender are important. In this regard, management

accountants can be seen as role occupants. Hopper (1980) found that although these management expectations have a strong influence, management accountants could experience difficulties in

interpreting the expectations of the role senders. This could happen when managers have different and discretionary approaches. This could lead to a role conflict where on the one hand the management accountants have to adapt to different managerial styles, and on the other hand have to cope with role conflicts about the involvement in managerial processes where the managers do not want their

involvement. Besides the influence from the role senders, Byrne and Pierce (2007) also found that the management accountants themselves have a considerable influence on the design of their own roles. The attitudes, personalities and initiative of the role occupant relate to the capacity shaping an own role. Further, some management accountants have ‘irreconcilable’ visions on the narrowing accounting or the broader partnering roles. This might indicate some difficulties for all accountants to participate in more ‘hybrid’ roles (Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005). The financial and operational managers in the research of Byrne and Pierce (2007) recognized the potential conflicts that could arise if management accountants have roles which need objectivity, integrity and business involvement. However, this was not perceived as a concern. Most firms experienced this as a necessary phenomenon which enables the accountants to be more objective, to gain respect for their work and to develop better relationships with their colleagues in the broader partnering roles. Therefore, their research challenged the argument that management accountants need complete independence for management control. In contrast, the involvement in wider business relations appears to strengthen the effectiveness of control because the accountant knows the organization better and know when, where and why control is needed.

(9)

8 knowhow of the management accountants can result in conflicts when management accountants ask questions that highlight this lack of business knowledge (Byrne and Pierce, 2007).

This study enhances the distinction between a bean counter and a business partner in the role of the management accountant (Byrne and Pierce, 2007).

2.3 Towards a conceptual framework

The developments in risk management have several implications for management accountants in the way they identify, monitor, control and mitigate the risk. Further, the discourse of risk is not always a part of the management control framework of an organization (Soin and Collier, 2013). This paper tries to connect both fields by introducing a framework that explains the relation between risk management and the changing role of the management accountant. The theoretical framework is presented in figure 1 and will be used to analyze the data and to guide the discussion. All the proposed relations will be discussed below. The rationale for the model is that role of the management accountant has an influence on the role as risk manager, which in turn has an influence on the type of risks that are analyzed. This implies that the extent of business partnering of a management accountant determines the role and tasks he has in risk management processes.

Figure 1 Conceptual framework 2.3.1 Role of the MA

In the first box, the changing role of management accountant is graphically demonstrated. Two main roles are defined, that of the bean counter and that of the business partner. As previously discussed, there has been a shift from the traditional bean counter-role to the business partner-role (Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005; Byrne and Pierce, 2007). However, these two are two extreme points on a continuum. This implies that a management accountant is not either a bean counter or a business partner, but could have a role that is somewhere in between. This is consistent with the findings of

Bean Counter

Business

Partner

Financial Reporting Compliance Operational Strategic Role as Risk Manager - Analyst - Catalyst of risk awareness - Finder of Strategies

(10)

9 Burns and Baldsvindottir (2005) and Granlund and Lukka (2008), who stated that the role of

management accountants is in transition and changes slowly. For example, one management

accountant could have predominantly ‘bean counter’ tasks but also partner in wider business activities, whereas other management accountants have the focus more on wider business activities and have less traditional accounting activities. It has not been investigated yet whether or not this is related to the hierarchical position of the management accountant in the accountant. It might be that there is a positive relation between the hierarchical position and the amount of business activities of a

management accountant. However, this is not a part of this paper and will not be taken into account in this model. To conclude, a management accountant could be placed on a continuum between two extreme points, namely the bean counter and the business partner. The place on this continuum might have implications for the role of a management accountant in risk management, which will be further explained.

2.3.2 Risks

This paper adopts the four risk categories of the COSO framework (2004): strategic risk, operational risks, financial risks and compliance risks. The order in which these risk are placed is non-random. The reason for this order is the relation between the role of the MA and the type of risk. The rationale is that the categories that are placed in the lower half of the box need a more holistic view of the management accountant on the company than the categories that are placed in the upper half of the box. In this regard, business partners may be more likely to participate in risk management processes that relate to for example to operational and strategic risks than bean counters, because bean counters have a more narrowed view than business partners who participate in wider activities (Granlund and Lukka, 2008). Because of this participation, business partners collect more information in different units of the organization and are therefore more able to analyze risks that are related to operational and strategic issues. Bean counters on the other hand, stick more to their own department and have a specialized position in their financial and accounting task. In this rationale, bean counters engage in financial reporting or compliance risks and less in operational and strategic risks. The arrow in this box does not represent a shift from financial risks to strategic risks, but relates to the continuum of the role of the management accountant. The more types of risk need to be analyzed besides the financial risks, the more the management accountant needs to be a business partner who has the knowledge to analyze those risks.

2.3.3 Role as Risk manager

(11)

10 catalyst of risk awareness and a finder of strategies. An analyst should support risk management

processes via ad hoc analyses to foster the risk thinking and creativity in risk-response development. A catalyst of risk awareness should encourage the creative use of risk management principles, building awareness about important developments in risk. Building awareness of opportunities is also important by facilitating the discussions about emerging issues .Finally, risk managers can act as finder of

strategies. Finder of strategies can track patterns of action in the organization in order to identify

approaches to risk management which need wider applications. They can affect corporate control by the identification of realized risk management strategies. To conclude, they can track emerging possibilities and are able to draw the attention of the management to the associated possibilities and threats (Ward, 2001).

In the conceptual model, the order of these roles is also important. Analysts are placed above catalysts of risk awareness and finder of strategies because it might be expected that this role is more related to a bean counter than to a business partner, because a bean counter can provide in-depth, financial,

knowledge for analyses of risks. Business partners are more likely to act as catalysts of risk awareness and finder of strategies, since they participate in a wider range of activities and therefore are able to promote risk thinking throughout the organization.

3 Methodology

This is an exploratory paper. An exploratory paper is useful when the researcher wants to discover developments, to ask questions and to assess the observed phenomena in a new light (Robson, 2002). Also, it is useful to clarify the understandings of a problem, which in this paper is the role of the MA in risk management. The great advantage of exploratory research is its ability to change the direction during the research, because of new data that appear or new insights of the observer (Saunders et al, 2007).

The research strategy that is employed in this study is the case study strategy. This is a ‘strategy for doing research which involves an empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon within its real life context using multiple sources of evidence’ (Robson, 2002, p.178). The data collection techniques employed may be various, and can be used in combination. This paper uses a combination of interviews and documentary analysis. According to the research strategies of Yin (2003), this paper contains a single case and is an embedded case study. The single case is the implementation of risk management in the organization and the role of MA within it. Because the case study examines a number of logical sub-units of the organization, an embedded approach is followed.

(12)

11 this limited time span is that changes over time could not be observed (Saunders et al, 2007). The documents were received during the first meeting with the VP of the organization. These documents contained much information about the risk management processes within the organization.

Official job title interviewee Date of interview

Vice President, General Management BioCare EMEA HQ Operations 5-2-2014 and 6-5-2014 MCO Benelux Finance Business Partner at BioCare Benelux 15-5-2014

CFO Benelux at GiantPharma 15-5-2014

Associate Director Finance Planning & Analysis at BioCare 15-5-2014

Regional Head of Finance EMEA at BioCare 23-5-2014

Head of Europe, Middle East and Africa at BioCare 23-5-2014

Accounting Manager Netherlands at BioCare 10-6-2014

Table 1 Overview of interviewees

3.2 The case study organization: A biotechnology company in the Netherlands

The interviews are conducted in multinational biotechnology company BioCare1, whose head office is in the US. The interviews for this paper are conducted in the Dutch office. The Dutch office is responsible for the operations in EMEA: Europe, Middle East and Africa. The company is committed to “discovering and delivering transformative therapies for patients with rare and special unmet medical needs, providing hope where there was none before”. It started more than 30 years ago in Boston, and has had a pioneering role in the development and delivery of transformative therapies. It evolved from a tiny start-up with a few employees to one of the leading biotechnology companies in the world. One of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, GiantPharma2, acquired the company in 2010. Yet, the company has remained independent. BioCare fits this research perfectly, because especially biotechnology companies face enormous risks. Investments are large, payoffs are not certain and the production process of the specialized drugs is complex and vulnerable to costly accidents. Therefore, it is a unique opportunity to conduct a case research in this type of companies.

This study focuses exclusively on the risk management program of BioCare. As part of GiantPharma, BioCare has started the new risk program in October 2013. Before the acquisition by GiantPharma, BioCare ran their own risk program. The current program aims to create a risk profile for BioCare, which will be communicated to the executives of GiantPharma. They compose a risk profile for the GiantPharma group. The new risk program of BioCare is based on the COSO ERM (2004) framework. There is also another specific operational risk program, which analyze all the specific risks around products and the supply chain. This program survived the acquisition and runs next to the new program. All professions, from HR to R&D and Finance, take part in the risk program. Different manager from different geographic levels participate in the program. During regularly scheduled meetings, the risks

1

For confidentiality purposes, the name of the company cannot be revealed. This study will refer to the company by the fictitious name ‘ BioCare’

2

(13)

12 and the implications for the different geographic areas are discussed by the global leaders of the

company.

4 Results

This section summarizes the most interesting findings of the interviews. The section is divided in several parts, which cover the subjects of this paper. Some quotes are used to either clarify the findings or to emphasize the expression of the interviewee. The first part treats the general tasks as well as business partnering of the management accountant. Then, the role of the management accountant in risk management will be described.

4.1 General tasks of the management accountant in BioCare

One of the first questions in every interview was about the current tasks of the management accountant. Surprisingly, some respondents did not know what exactly was meant by the term ‘management accountant’. The term deviated from the terminology of the organization. According to the CFO of GiantPharma Benelux, the finance department is divided in several pillars. These pillars are: Financial Accounting, Management Controlling and some expert roles such as Treasury, Tax Services and Shared Services. Management controllers are associated with the controlling function, financial

accountants are responsible for the ‘hardcore’ accounting, transactions and bookkeeping. According to him, the boundary between these functions is not always clear. Management controllers deliver the accruals, so in some way they have an influence on the results. After the elucidation about the function, management accountants were seen as the employees in a management controlling function.

Furthermore, there is not a single type of management accountant. Every management accountant had, depending on his level and the specific unit he operates, different tasks and responsibilities. This does not mean that it is not possible to give an overview of the general tasks of a management accountant. Although it is a broad function, all management accountants do have some general tasks in the organization. According to the General Manager of the EMEA headquarter, the management

accountants are primary responsible for the long range planning and the analysis of budgets and actuals. Also, there are specific teams of management accountants who analyze the businesses on for example sales, inventories etc. Furthermore, there is a team that focuses their business analysis specifically on the supply chain, because that is one of the riskiest part of BioCare. One of the management

accountants explained that the ultimate goal of a management accountants is to deliver timely and accurate reporting to the managers.

4.2 Business partnering of the management accountant

So far, the primary task of a management accountant are discussed. However, it is more

(14)

13 The general manager of the EMEA headquarter responded:

“Yes, I think that the role gradually changed and became more substantial in terms of business knowledge and estimates. The hard side with numbers is important, but the soft side too. (…) First, we looked pure to the numbers and the vision was one-sided. Now, the view is broader which turned into the setup of the business analysis some years ago. “

The general manager perceived this as a change of the role of finance in general. First, finance had a supportive role. The business told them what they should do and where they were needed. Now, Finance, and thus the management accountants, have become an equal partner who challenges and ask difficult questions, rather than the businessman. The CFO of GiantPharma Benelux supports this view. He explained that the developments include that the transactional parts of bookkeeping are increasingly harmonized and outsourced. Because of the outsourcing, the more generic tasks disappeared. The management accountant has now more complex and strategic tasks. The interfaces from and to the business, the finance business partnering, became increasingly important and has a greater influence than some years ago.

The management accountant also agrees on this change. She recognizes that the partner role to the other functions in the organization, for example Human Resources and Supply Chain. However, in her opinion, the intensity of this business partnering fluctuates. It depends of the time of the year and on demand and supply of the services of the management accountant. Although she recognizes the change in the role of the management accountant, she thinks that the term ‘business partner’ is just a buzz word. According to her, the change in the role is a result of the increased interest from the

management accountant in the story behind the numbers. That leads to curiosity. However, she admits that the position of the finance department, and thus the management accountants, has improved in a positive way. The rest of the organization values the importance of Finance more and more and recognize that Financials are needed in the processes to criticize when it is needed.

(15)

14 The respondents with a higher hierarchical position in the organization tend to participate more in a business partner role, especially in the strategic positions.

The CFO thinks that through the integration and the new organizational structure, the management accountant has another position within the function:

‘’ When I compare the structure of BioCare and GiantPharma, I see that the management

accountant within GiantPharma has more influence and is more seen as responsible for finance than the financial accountants”

A management accountant of BioCare Benelux also highlights the importance of the integration with regard to the role of the management accountant. He appoints the integration as the main reason why the role of the management has accountant changed, because the organization has become more complex and systems have changed. Further, the distinction between the bean counter vs. the business partner heavily depends on the organization and where it is located. For example, in some countries there are no distinct roles. Traditional accountants also act there as business partners, because they simply have to. Finally, he thinks that the change in the role of the management accountant can also come from the professional development and the personal ambitions of the management accountant.

4.3 The effects of business partnering

The effects of the extra tasks on the regular tasks of the management accountant are twofold. First, the respondents appreciated the broader perspective they now have. A management controller said she has now more linkages with the business, more involvement in their operations. She explained that it is important for Finance to understand the business very well, because this improves the

reporting processes of the management accountants. However, there are some caveats. The extra linkages with the business, HR, Marketing or other departments take a lot of time from the management accountants. In her eyes, this is a major counterpart of the business partnering. The finance partner of BioCare Benelux also comments on business partnering in BioCare:

“Absolutely, I think the accountant has been given more tasks. But it is rather a result of the integration, and the fact that we are a part of GiantPharma now, than the development of the role itself. (…) The organization is now twice as complex as before the acquisition. Even before the acquisition, the organization was complex. The organization has become much larger and the systems more complex. (…) This combination ensures that you are forced to do more than a few years ago.”

(16)

15 consider confronting effects between the regular tasks and the business partnering. It cannot stand alone, and is connected to each other. The business partnering creates a higher reliability, but in the end the numbers must correct.

4.4 The management accountant in Risk Management

The risk management process has changed by the integration of BioCare in GiantPharma. The risk management process of BioCare needed to be aligned with the risk processes of GiantPharma. These organizational changes are considered by the interpretation of the interviews and is needed to identify where any changes come from.

The most straightforward answer on the question as to which types of risk the management account should focus is: the types of risk that are linked to the daily operations of the particular management accountant. The management accountant manages the risks he is familiar with. It is further dependent on the role and position of the management accountant in the entire organization and whether or not he or she has an active role in a risk committee. The questions were aimed to identify the position of the interviewee in the ERM and his or her vision on the position of the management accountants in general.

The general manager of BioCare EMEA, who is responsible for the risk program of BioCare, manages all four types of risk. She is responsible for the composition of the risk profiles of the EMEA region, which are communicated with the management of BioCare and GiantPharma. These profiles consist of compliance, financial en operational risks. There is also a profile of BioCare worldwide. This profile is compiled of strategic risks, because “those are in the mindset of the seniors”. The CFO of GiantPharma Benelux deals with financial, compliance and operational risk on the border of the businesses. He is engaged to a lesser extent with strategic risks. He thinks that this is more related to business, on the side of the general management. He admitted that strategic risks has become more important to him since he is in the role of CFO. However, he emphasized that strategy in the scope of the Benelux needs to be considered in the context of the corporate, worldwide strategy. The financial partner of BioCare Benelux underlines that strategic risks belong more to the general managers. He is more involved in the operational, financial and compliance risks. He analyses operational risks because he has ambitions in this area. Not everyone said to be actively engaged with risks. The head of the business in the EMEA region also confirms that strategic risks are handled by those who are higher up in the organization. However, he thinks that the type of risk is not different for any management

accountant but that his role and the type of risk have influence on the level of analysis of a risk. The head of the FPA (financial planning and analysis) mentioned that he and his department do not have an active role, but report risks when it is necessary. This is a result of the nature of their regular tasks; they consolidate data and report this to the managers. They look back and see things when they have happened. He compared his role with the one of a fire detector: he only knows something is going on when there is already smoke. The fire detectors warn the management accountants, who are the firemen. These firemen could both control the smoke and prevent future fires.

(17)

16 analyzed changed over time. The inclusion of strategic risks have become more important compared to some years ago when there was mainly a focus on financial and operational risks. Strategic risks and initiatives are more in the center of debate. According to her, the variety of risks are underestimated and risks are judged on gut-feeling instead of facts. The CFO of GiantPharma Benelux noticed also a change in the importance of different risks:

“Operational risks always have an important position. Since the integration into GiantPharma there is also much attention for compliance risks, after some mistakes in South-America. The role of a management accountant influences the types of risks he is responsible for. It is partly asked and determined by management for which types of risks someone has to do an analysis.”

But it is also determined by the personal ambitions of the management accountant, which is reflected by this quote of the CFO GiantPharma Benelux:

“I think that management actively asks what risks there are. But in my opinion, voluntary contributions also play a major role. Those are the risks that they draw attention to, unasked by the management. They report what they see and that triggers management. (…) I think that in principle, management accountants can participate in all types of risks.”

The same idea is shared by the financial partner of BioCare Benelux. Personal ambitions moved him towards operational risks. However, the CFO nuanced his words. He thinks that people who are not on a management level are not responsible for strategic risks. They rather analyze financial risks and to a lesser extent, compliance risks. He thinks that operational risks are more the concern of higher level management accountants. He believes that one needs an overview and more education to see these risks. If someone just does the analysis of one or a few products, he misses the feeling that is necessary. But he thinks this is also very much dependent on the person and his tasks. If someone is more an all-round controller, he has a better view on the operational things. The general manager also nuanced the statement of the observation of the CFO about the variety of risks that a management accountant could handle:

“That depends on where he is located in the organization (…) and if he has a broader

(18)

17

She explained that the people on the highest level, such as the CFO and the CEO, have these skills to connect things. That is probably the reason why they are in such a position but she would like that the people on regional level are also able to do that. The change in the scope of risks that are now analyzed, has some effects on the organization. Like the effect of the business partnering, the management accountant has a broader perspective on the risks and how they are connected. If something goes operationally wrong, the financial effects will be clear. According the CFO of GiantPharma, the connection with the operations is important. He thinks that that the perspective of a financial

accountant, who identify problems when the numbers are available, will result in problems because the identification is probably too late then.

The types of risks that a single management accountant should handle is now discussed. But what is the position of the management accountant, as a group, in risk management? The head of the FPA already mentioned the metaphor of the fire detector. However, that was specific to his department. FPA only can detect problems in a later stadium than the management accountant, who is responsible for the daily operations. The finance partner for BioCare Benelux believes that the management

accountants are in the center of the risk network and committees. In these committees, different departments take place. Finance, and thus the management accountants, has mainly the task to indicate the financial implications of the risk. Further, they can assist the other departments by identifying the department-specific risks. The head of the Business EMEA confirmed this. He thinks that management accountants can serve the other departments with their financial knowledge to quantify the risks in financial terms. According the finance partner, the Finance department has a leading role and the power because it has such a central position and therefore a great supply of knowledge. The management accountants should therefore act as an analyst for the other departments.

4.5 Implications of the presence of management accountants in risk management

(19)

18 “There can be role conflicts for management accountants for indicating risks, which are rather not seen by general management at short-term. Management accountants definitely must be determined to moot these issues”

These issues may not be appreciated by others or has negative influence on the results. He thinks that this is connected to the bonus policy. However, this effect can be leveled by tying the bonus to risk indicators. In the end, he thinks the culture in the Dutch office is relatively good and people are not reluctant to indicate possible risks.

The finance partner also acknowledges that there could be potential conflicts. He mentioned the ongoing discussion about whom the controller should report. Should he report to the general manager of the commercial team, or to a manager in the Finance department? This fits in the larger discussion about whether the controller is part of the commercial organization and is aimed to meet the targets, or is more focused on compliance. According to him, that is one of the biggest risks every organization faces. Also, the risk that the organization is wasting time on controls without knowing the reason why, is a possible threat which is reflected in the extensive Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. A possible result of a misuse of these controls is that the organization thinks it covered all the risks, just because they went through an extensive list of controls. In his opinion, the consciousness about the weakness of the Sarbanes-Oxley law should lead to an improvement of the practical use of this kind of compliance.

The head of the FPA thinks that role conflicts occur because all rules have different

interpretations. It is a matter of getting consensus. There is a large grey area in which people need to compromise on different interpretations, otherwise these various interpretations can lead to conflicts. Interestingly, the head of Business for the EMEA does not recognize any role conflicts for himself. He thinks that risk management is rather supportive than conflicting in setting the focus and allocating the resources for the business. Therefore he could not see conflicting interests. In his opinion, the balance between business opportunities and risks will always exist. Risk management helps to create a common language about impact, severity and likelihood of risks, but it is just the formalization of considerations that have always been taken in business.

5 Discussion

The discussion is structured using different logical subunits. The findings will be discussed in the context of the theory and the conceptual model. Based on the findings, a new model will be drawn which represents the influencing factors on the risks that are analyzed by the management accountant.

5.1 The role of the management accountant as risk manager

(20)

19 relationship. Business partnering does not have an influence on the role of the management accountant as risk manager. In general, all management accountants are analysts who support risk management processes via ad hoc analyses to foster the risk thinking and creativity in risk-response development (Ward, 2001). It is not very surprising that most of the management accountants mainly have the role of an analyst, because analyzing is one of the most important regular tasks of the accountant. The question is if the management accountants, who have become business partners, also have another role besides the one of analyst. The Risk Officer was found to be the only catalyst of risk awareness in the

organization. She has to build awareness of the risk program and the applicability of risk in the operations of the organizations. Although not everyone can have such a role, the absence of multiple catalysts or risk awareness throughout the organization could be a weakness. Especially in the

implementation of a new risk program, building awareness is essential for a good functioning of the risk program. Without the awareness of the processes and how organizational members should use them, employees may not efficiently use the processes and routines to detect and prevent risks.

Most of the management accountants are not finder of strategies. The strategy of the firm is defined by top management and no management accountants actively participate in the creation of strategy. The risk officer, who is also the catalyst of risk awareness of the risk program, was the only one who had direct meetings with the top management about the potential risks and their influences on the strategy and performance of the organization. So if the management accountant mainly act as an analyst, what types of risk should he analyze? This question will be answered later. First, the business partnering of management accountants will be discussed.

5.2 Business partnering of management accountants

Although business partnering has a weak relation with the role of management accountants in risk management, it is still very important for the functioning of risk management. Business partnering provides the management accountant a broad perspective with various information, which he could use for analyzing and preventing risks. In BioCare there has also been a shift from the ‘bean counter’

accountant to the accountant who act as a business partner. Almost all interviewees recognized the shift and confirmed that this change is also visible in the organization. The broader perspective was the most popular perceived advantage of the interviewees. They think that they now have more business

knowledge, more information which could help them to do their work. However, the source of change is not just the evolution of the management accountant due to changes in for example information

(21)

20 business partner role. The academic world must keep in mind that these changes in the labour market could lead to changes in the organizational roles. Together with institutional changes (Burns and Baldvinsdottir, 2005), innovations in IT (Rom and Rohde, 2007) and mergers and acquisitions, are these the most important reasons for changes in in the role of the management accountants. To conclude, the causes for business partnering can be different and are dependent on the specific circumstances of the organization.

Burns and Baldvinsdottir (2005) argued that nowadays, the management accounting is

participating in wider business activities including system development, organizational design, change management and strategy formulation. In BioCare, some of these activities belong to the current job responsibilities of the management accountant. During the integration with GiantPharma, the management accountants actively participated in for example system development and change

management. Of course, the hierarchical level and the personal ambitions are also important here. The management accountant does not participate in any strategic activity. Even at the higher levels, this is perceived as the concern of general management. As discussed before, there are no direct effects of the business partnering on the role of the management accountant in risk management. It may be necessary to question the influence of business partnering on different processes in the organization. In some processes, the management accountant is a business partner but in other processes he is not. Although the advantages of the business partnering are known in the organization, the organization failed to create business partnering roles throughout the whole organization. Management could facilitate the development of the business partnering by management accountants. Especially in risk management, management accountants need to develop their scope of risk that they analyze. Because Finance has a central position in most of the organizations, management accountants can assimilate a wide range of information. This helps the management accountant to assess different risks.

5.3 The type of risks that are analyzed by a management accountant

There is no congruence about the types of risks a management accountant should be responsible for. It is largely dependent on the position in the organization. Other factors also play an important role, such as personal skills and ambitions or external circumstances of the organization. Therefore it is difficult to define what risks a single management accountant should process. Management accountants are engaged in all type of risks, but the management accountants who have a higher hierarchical

(22)

21 Therefore, by analyzing the results, a new model could be developed.

Figure 2 Tasks of the management accountant in risk management

In this model, the extent of business partnering is not the most important indicator anymore. Rather the hierarchical level of a management accountant, his job responsibilities and his personal ambitions and skills are important indicators for the role as risk manager and the risks that are analyzed by the management accountant. The model indicates that these characteristics both have a direct and an indirect influence on the risk that are analyzed by the management accountant. Referring to the distinction of the cultural interventions of Jarvenpaa (2007), the influences can be both formal and informal. The indirect influence is formal. The characteristics have an influence on the formal role of the management accountant in risk management. For example, the hierarchical position, ambition and skills of a management accountant could lead to an important formal role in a risk committee. However, the characteristics can also have a direct and informal influence on the risks that are analyzed. For example, a management accountant could have the formal role of an analyst of financial reporting risks, but personal ambitions can move him towards compliance or operational risks. Further, job responsibilities could lead to the detection of risks that management accountants are formally not responsible for. Management accountants up in the organization may also escalate various risks by general

management, because their position enables and requires them to do so. Management accountants are thus not bounded by their formal role in risk management, but have considerable influence on their contributions to the risk program.

5.4 Management accountants in risk management: the implications

Notwithstanding the advantages, the participation of management accountants in risk

management may also have implications. Role conflicts could occur if risks need to be balanced against lucrative contracts. Especially those management accountant who have to report risks to their principals

Financial Reporting Compliance Operational Strategic Hierarchical level Job responsibilities

Personal ambitions and skills

Analyst Catalyst of risk awareness Finder of strategies Formal Informal

Role as Risk Manager Characteristics of the Management accountant

(23)

22 which could have implications on the performances, may experience these role conflicts. The role occupants, the management accountants, could receive different expectations from the role senders (Kahn et al., 1964). However, the difficulties (Hopper, 1980) about the misinterpretation of the

expectation of the role senders are not found. On the one hand, the role senders in management clearly define what risks need to be analyzed. On the other hand, the management accountants themselves have a considerable influence on the role they have in the risk management. This is consistent with the view of Byrne and Pierce (2007), who stated that the attitudes, personalities and initiatives of the management accountants have considerable influence on the design of their own roles. Another

implication is the cost of time. Participation in a risk management network results in extra meetings and administration. Further, an organization should be aware of unnecessary, extensive controls which waste valuable resources. This is one of the major ‘risks’ of risk management.

Another implication is related to the outsourcing of transactional activities. Risk detection in these transactional activities is now more complex, because these people do not work on the same location. As a result, it is more complicated in both time and effort to have interactions about possible risks. The shared service organization may also have a different risk regime (Hood, 2001; Spira and Page, 2003), so that risks are interpreted and processed in a different way. Last of all, it is questionable whether the management accountants are still the only ones with a central position in an organization with various information. Rom and Rohde (2007) and Dechow and Mouritsen (2005) state that, through the integrated information systems, accounting has become a dispersed activity. This may lead to a decentralization of control and the integration of control in commercial management. In the case organization, the commercial department was also heavily involved in the risk management, so that may be a conformation of the decentralization of control.

Although there is a potential for role conflicts, management accountants should not isolate themselves by not participating in wider business activities such as risk management. In line with the arguments of Byrne and Pierce (2007), the participation of management accountants in risk

management could strengthen the effectiveness of risk detection and control. Management

accountants are still important because they have the financial knowledge to quantify the risks and to oversee the financial implications. The control may thus be decentralized, the management accountants and the finance department in general are still one of most important actors in the risk network.

6 Conclusion

There is not much research on the role of the of the management accountant in risk management. Therefore, this paper provides some initial insights to the role of the changing

(24)

23 of management accountants within risk management. Rather the hierarchical position, personal skills, capabilities and motivation have an influence on the role of the management accountant as risk manager. Although the participation of management accountants in risk management could have implications, the management accountants are essential to an effective risk management program. Because of their central position in the organization, they are able to include information from different angles to provide an objective, financial analysis. From this point of view, business partnering is thus rather important for the functioning of the management accountant in risk management. Through business partnering, management accountants develop a broad perspective within the organization. This will assist them in analyzing and preventing risks. The answer on the research question is thus that the changing role of the management accountant does not have an influence on his role in risk

management. However, business partnering will improve the quality of the execution of risk management processes.

There are some practical implications of this research. Managers have to be aware of the important role that management accountants could have in risk management. Management accountants and other financials are key players due to their central position in the organization. Management should therefore encourage the participation of management accountants in the risk network. In addition managers should promote business partnering, in order to improve the functioning of the risk program. Although most strategic decisions are taken on corporate level, managers should recognize talented management accountants in strategy processes. Dependent on their capabilities, skills and motivation, some management accountants could add value to these processes. At last, the outsourcing of transactional activities to shared services may have implications for the detection and processing of risks. Managers have to balance cost efficiencies against the loss of control on the risks that are associated with these transactional activities.

This paper has some limitations. The risk program of the case organization was only half a year in operation. Because of that, some interviewees did yet not exactly know the details of the current program. Further, the Dutch office is a small part of the GiantPharma Corporation. Risk management processes may differ throughout the whole organization. Also, the results may be influenced by cultural norms and values because the corporate culture in the Dutch office is different from offices in for example France or the US. At last, the case study method has implications for the generalizability of the research. The design and the execution of the interviews was done by only one person, which could result in a bias in the data collection.

Because this paper is one the first one to question the position of management accountants in risk management, it offers many future research directions for both the literature on management accounting change and risks management. The relation between the different characteristics of the management accountant, and the role as risk manager and the risks that are analyzed, could be further explored. Further, the concept of business partnering could be tested on its applicability on different processes in the organization. It seems like that management accountants are not always in the

(25)

24 could investigate the position of the other professions within the organization such as Legal or HR. Or one could focus on the effects of the risk processes on the work load of organizational members, because the interviews revealed that this might be problematic.

(26)

25 7 References

Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity (Vol. 17). Sage.

Beck, U. (1998), “The Politics of Risk Society” in Franklin, J. (ed) The Politics of Risk Society, Polity Press, London

Burns, J., & Baldvinsdottir, G. (2005). An institutional perspective of accountants' new roles–the interplay of contradictions and praxis. European Accounting Review, 14(4), 725-757.

Burns, J., & Scapens, R. W. (2000). Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional framework. Management accounting research, 11(1), 3-25.

Byrne, S., & Pierce, B. (2007). Towards a more comprehensive understanding of the roles of management accountants. European Accounting Review, 16(3), 469-498.

Caglio, A. (2003). Enterprise resource planning systems and accountants: towards hybridization?. European Accounting Review, 12(1), 123-153.

Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination, 38, 132-161.

Collier, P. M., Berry, A. J., & Burke, G. T. (2007). Risk and management accounting: best practice guidelines for enterprise-wide internal control procedures. Elsevier

Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).2004. COSO Enterprise Risk Management– Integrated Framework. New York, NY: The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants

Dechow, N., & Mouritsen, J. (2005). Enterprise resource planning systems, management control and the quest for integration. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(7), 691-733.

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity. Granlund, M. and Lukka, K., 1998. It’s a small world of management accounting practices,

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 153–179.

Granlund, M., & Malmi, T. (2002). Moderate impact of ERPS on management accounting: a lag or permanent outcome?. Management accounting research,13(3), 299-321.

Hood, C., Rothstein, H., & Baldwin, R. (2001). The government of risk: Understanding risk regulation regimes. Oxford University Press.

(27)

26 Järvenpää, M. (2007). Making business partners: a case study on how management accounting culture was changed. European Accounting Review,16(1), 99-142.

Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. O. and Rosenthal, R. A. (1964) Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity (New York: John Wiley).

Latour B. (1991). We have never been modern. London, UK: Sage Publications;

Liebenberg, A. P., & Hoyt, R. E. (2003). The determinants of enterprise risk management: Evidence from the appointment of chief risk officers. Risk Management and Insurance Review, 6(1), 37-52.

Lodh, S. C., & Gaffikin, M. J. (2003). Implementation of an integrated accounting and cost management system using the SAP system: a field study .European Accounting Review, 12(1), 85-121.

Lupton, D. (1999). Risk and sociocultural theory. Risk and sociocultural theory-New directions and perspectives, 1-11.

Meulbroek, L. (2002). The promise and challenge of integrated risk management. Risk Management and Insurance Review, 5(1), 55-66.

Mintzberg, H. (1994a) The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall. (See also a short summary of the ideas from this text in Mintzberg, H. (1994b) The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning. Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp 107-14.)

Mikes, A. (2009). Risk management and calculative cultures. Management Accounting Research, 20(1), 18-40.

Power, M. (2007). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Power, M. (2009). The risk management of nothing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6), 849-855.

Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. (2005). A ‘time–space odyssey’: management control systems in two multinational organisations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(7), 735-764.

Rayner, S. (1992) “Cultural Theory and Risk Analysis” in Krimsky, S. and Golding,D. Social Theories of Risk, Praeger, Connecticut

Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research (2nd edn), Oxford, Blackwell.

Rom, A., & Rohde, C. (2007). Management accounting and integrated information systems: A literature review. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 8(1), 40-68.

(28)

27 Scapens, R. W., & Jazayeri, M. (2003). ERP systems and management accounting change: opportunities or impacts? A research note. European accounting review, 12(1), 201-233.

Slovic, P. & Weber, E.U. (2002). Perception of Risk Posed by Extreme Events. The Conference on Risk Management Strategies in an Uncertain World Held In April 12-13, 2002, Palisades, NY, 1-21

Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285.

Soin, K., & Collier, P. (2013). Risk and risk management in management accounting and control. Management Accounting Research, 24(2), 82-87.

Spira, L. F., & Page, M. (2003). Risk management: the reinvention of internal control and the changing role of internal audit. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16(4), 640-661.

Ward, S. (2001). Exploring the role of the corporate risk manager. Risk Management: An International Journal, 3(1), 7-25.

(29)

28 Appendix A: Interview guide

The interview guide is written in Dutch because most of the interviews, except one, were conducted in Dutch.

Introductie van de interviewer

1. Controleren van opnameapparatuur 2. Introduceren van interviewer

3. Benadrukken van de vertrouwelijkheid van het interview. Naam van de persoon zal niet worden gepubliceerd, alleen zijn/haar rol in de organisatie.

4. Uitleggen van mijn onderzoeksvraag en de onderwerpen die die besproken zullen worden: rol van de management accountant in risk management. Wat is een management accountant? 5. Vraag geprek

Rol van Management Accountant

Belangrijkste vragen Extra vragen Verduidelijkende vragen

Wat zijn uw belangrijkste taken als management accountant?

Heeft u in vergelijking tot een paar jaar geleden, andere taken als management accountant?

Wat is de reden van een verschil in uw taken? Hebben de verschillende taken invloed op uw werk als MA?

Als u andere taken zou hebben, zal dit dan invloed hebben op je werk als MA?

Beschouwt u de acountancy-taken als het belangrijkste onderdeel van uw werk?

Heeft u door uw extra taken meer

zeggenschap gekregen in andere delen van de organisatie?

Management accountants in a biotechnology company