The question of if and how decision makers in the public sector use performance and accounting information has received considerable attention in public administration research (see Moynihan and Pandey 2010, Van Dooren et al. 2015, Kroll 2015, Van Helden 2016). In particular, accrual-based reforms of public sector accounting that have been implemented across countries and governmental levels during the last decades have raised the question whether the use of accounting information changes after such a reform. However, research appears scattered and inconclusive so far.
The present study aims to add to the knowledge by analyzing the use of accounting information (financial, non-financial) by different actors at the central government level in Austria – administrators in line ministries and legislators. The case of Austria is particularly interesting as a recent extensive budgeting and accounting reform led to a change from commitment-based to accrual-based budgeting and accounting. The budgeting and accounting reform was fully implemented in 2013 and therefore has been in place a sufficient time for decision-makers to become accustomed to the new system in general and the different accounting information in particular. The paper applies a mixed-method approach to explore (1) which accounting information is used (cash, accrual, non-financial) and to what extent, (2) the types of use (following the typology put forward by Liguori, Sicilia & Steccolini 2012), and (3) the change in use and use type during the reform processes.
We combine an online survey and interviews with public managers from different hierarchical levels in line ministries, interviews with legislators, and a content analysis of parliamentary debates. The latter analysis in particular allowed a pre-post comparison of the use of accounting information before and after the implementation of the budgeting and accounting reform. The (preliminary) results show that legislators tend to use cash information to a higher extent than the newly introduced accrual information (except during the transition period to the new system), while the debates and interviews reveal a comparatively higher level of performance information use.
However, the type of use differed based on their party affiliation, the quality of performance information, as well as their individual expertise. While administrators at different levels acknowledge that the introduction of accrual accounting provide a more comprehensvie view of the financial situation, the steering rationale broadly remained the same. The use of performance information substantially differ between the minsitries, strongly depending on the organizational structure and the type of provided service.
Accounting and accountability of value creation in innovative public service delivery arra
