AKMK PENGANGGARAN PARTISIPATIF: EFEK PEMBELAJARAN TEORI KEAGENAN DAN PENATALAYANAN TERHADAP KINERJA MANAJER, DENGAN SIKAP DAN KOMITMEN ORGANISASI SEBAGAI VARIABEL PEMEDIASI (Suatu Penelitian Eksperimental) Hermadi Widijanto ABSTRACT Why accounting scandals frequently happens in big companies and in public companies? Why are key persons in the company working unethically (selfish, opportunistic, self serving)? And are they shaped from what they have learned? There are many criticisms that are pointed towards the academicians in business that have failed in giving proper skills to the students, and therefore implement education that arouses covetousness, which triggers accounting scandals in the future. The principle of exclusivity which based on the agency theory is not recommended, because it ignored the complexity of the human lives, and because of that, there should be another theory that can explain a relation which is based on the non economic assumption. This research is to find out what effect does the study of the theory of agency and stewardship has towards a managers’ performance, and intercede by the attitude and the commitment of the organization. This research uses experimental study with the factorial design 2x1, involving 73 students from the undergraduate students of FEB UGM as the subject. Independent Sample T Test and path analysis was used as the analysis tool, to measure direct and indirect effect from the tested variables. The result of this research indicates that there was not enough evidence to support that learning process theories have an effect in shaping a managers’ attitude and organizational commitment, but there was enough evidence to prove that learning process theories have an effect in the performances of managers. Keywords: Agency Theory, Stewardship Theory, Attitude, Organizational Commitment manager performance 1
33
Embed
PENGANGGARAN PARTISIPATIF: EFEK PEMBELAJARAN TEORI ... · Model keagenan menjadi dasar teori organisasi, ... dengan asumsi yang digunakan dalam permodelan tersebut (Ferraro, 2005).
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
AKMK
PENGANGGARAN PARTISIPATIF: EFEK PEMBELAJARAN TEORI KEAGENAN DAN PENATALAYANAN TERHADAP KINERJA MANAJER, DENGAN SIKAP DAN KOMITMEN ORGANISASI
SEBAGAI VARIABEL PEMEDIASI(Suatu Penelitian Eksperimental)
Hermadi Widijanto
ABSTRACT
Why accounting scandals frequently happens in big companies and in public companies? Why are key persons in the company working unethically (selfish, opportunistic, self serving)? And are they shaped from what they have learned?
There are many criticisms that are pointed towards the academicians in business that have failed in giving proper skills to the students, and therefore implement education that arouses covetousness, which triggers accounting scandals in the future. The principle of exclusivity which based on the agency theory is not recommended, because it ignored the complexity of the human lives, and because of that, there should be another theory that can explain a relation which is based on the non economic assumption.
This research is to find out what effect does the study of the theory of agency and stewardship has towards a managers’ performance, and intercede by the attitude and the commitment of the organization. This research uses experimental study with the factorial design 2x1, involving 73 students from the undergraduate students of FEB UGM as the subject. Independent Sample T Test and path analysis was used as the analysis tool, to measure direct and indirect effect from the tested variables.
The result of this research indicates that there was not enough evidence to support that learning process theories have an effect in shaping a managers’ attitude and organizational commitment, but there was enough evidence to prove that learning process theories have an effect in the performances of managers.
Perhitungan total pengaruh Pembelajaran ke Kinerja Manajer adalah:
• Pengaruh langsung Pembelajaran ke Kinerja = 0,308
• Pengaruh tidak langsung:
Pembelajaran ke Sikap ke Komitmen ke Kinerja:
0,72 X 0,89 X 0,123 = 0,079
• Total Pengaruh Pembelajaran ke Kinerja = 0,308 + 0,079
= 0,387
Simpulan, Keterbatasan dan Implikasi
Simpulan
Dari hasil pengujian yang telah dilakukan, maka dapatlah ditarik beberapa simpulan
sebagai berikut:
Hipotesis yang menyatakan ada efek pembelajaran teori keagenan dan teori
penatalayanan terhadap kecenderungan sikap, tidak terdukung, hal ini dinyatakan dengan
tidak terdukungnya hipotesis 1a dan 1b
Hipotesis yang menyatakan tentang responden yang mendapatkan pembelajaran teori
keagenan dan penatalayanan akan memiliki komitmen organisasi yang lebih tinggi dibanding
grup kontrol yang tidak menerima pembelajaran, dan responden yang menerima
pembelajaran teori penatalayanan memiliki komitmen organisasi yang lebih tinggi dibanding
responden yang menerima pembelajaran teori keagenan, yang dinyatakan dalam hipotesis 2a,
2b, dan 2c, tidak terdukung. Uji beda memberikan nilai rata-rata komitmen dari tiga grup
26
Sikap Komitmenorganisasi
Kinerja ε 3
dengan angka yang berbeda, tetapi angka tersebut tidak berbeda secara statistik. Dari hasil uji
t sampel bebas didapati hasil seperti dalam tabel 8 berikut ini:
Hasil Uji t sampel bebas – komitmen
Hipotesis F Sig t Sig SimpulanH2a 0,057 0,813 0,518 0,607 Tdk SignifikanH2b 0,721 0,400 -1,463 0,150 Tdk SignifikanH2c 0,475 0,494 -1,978 0,054 Tdk Signifikan
Dari tabel di atas disimpulkan bahwa tidak terdapat cukup bukti yang mendukung hipotesis
H2a, H2b dan H2c.
Hipotesis yang menyatakan ada perbedaan signifikan pada kinerja manajer yang telah
mendapatkan pembelajaran teori keagenan dan teori penatalayanan dibanding kinerja manajer
yang tidak mendapatkan pembelajaran, serta kinerja manajer sebagai penatalayan lebih tinggi
dibanding kinerja manajer sebagai agen, yang dinotasikan dalam hipotesis 3a, 3b dan 3c,
tidak semuanya terdukung. Dari hasil uji t sampel bebas didapati hasil seperti dalam tabel 9
berikut ini:
Tabel 9 – Hasil Uji t sampel bebas – kinerja
Hipotesis F Sig t Sig SimpulanH3a 6,289 0,016 3,439 0,001 SignifikanH3b 4,950 0,031 1,644 0,109 Tidak SignifikanH3c 0,049 0,826 2,516 0,015 Signifikan
Hasil uji beda menunjukkan bahwa hipotesis 3a terdukung, hasil ini juga didukung
oleh hasil Homogeneus Subsets, tetapi untuk hipotesis 3b tidak terdukung karena secara
statistik nilai median kinerja grup penatalayanan yang tidak berbeda dengan nilai median
grup kontrol dan untuk hipotesis 3c terdapat cukup bukti untuk mendukung hipotesis
tersebut, nilai kinerja grup penatalayan berbeda secara statistik terhadap nilai kinerja grup
keagenan.
Keterbatasan
27
Beberapa keterbatasan dalam penelitian ini antara lain:
1. Durasi pembelajaran yang singkat (30 menit).
2. Insentif yang ditawarkan sebagai hadiah berupa buku, kurang menggairahkan
3. Subyek penelitian sudah memiliki konsep yang sudah tertanam sebelumnya (mahasiswa
semester 5 dan 7)
4. Instrumen penelitian yang dibangun sendiri, kemungkinan belum mapan.
Implikasi
Walaupun tidak semua hipotesis terdukung, penelitian ini memberikan masukan
bahwa seseorang akan bersikap dan berperilaku dipengaruhi oleh apa yang dipelajarinya
(nilai mean yang berbeda), jika seseorang mendapatkan pembelajaran dan terus
mengembangkan self fulfilling prophecy yang dimilikinya untuk tujuan maksimalisasi
kepentingan pribadi, dan merasa tidak bersalah melakukan suatu tindakan karena faktor-
faktor yang mendukungnya, tanpa mempertimbangkan pihak lain, maka akan banyak skandal
yang akan terjadi. Penelitian ke depan, dengan mengembangkan instrumen penelitian yang
lebih baik, waktu pembelajaran yang lebih panjang, pemilihan subyek pada mahasiswa
tingkat awal, penawaran insentif yang lebih menggairahkan, diharapkan hasilnya akan
memberikan kontribusi yang besar bagi perkembangan penelitian akuntansi manajemen di
masa mendatang. Penelitian mendatang juga dapat menambahkan faktor-faktor relevan lain,
agar penilaian kinerja manajer akan semakin baik.
28
Referensi
Aisyah, N, 2004, “Pengaruh Komitmen Organisasi dan Job Relevant Information Terhadap Hubungan Antara Anggaran dan Kepuasan Kerja”, Skripsi, UGM, Yogyakarta.
Antle, R., and G.D. Eppen, 1985, Capital rationing and organizational slack in capital budgeting, Management Science 31, February: 163-74
Anthony A. Atkinson, Rajiv D. Banker, Robert S. Kaplan, dan S. Mark Young, 1997, Management Accounting, Edisi ke-2, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.,
Anthony Robert N., and Vijay Govindarajan, 2007, Management Control System, Twelfth Edition, International Edition, Mc Graw-Hill, Singapore
Argryis, C, 1964, Integrating the individual and the organization, New York: Wiley
Azwar, S., 1988, Sikap Manusia: Teori dan Pengukuran, Yogyakarta: Liberty
_______, 2007, Sikap Manusia: Teori dan Pengukurannya, Edisi ke-2, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Bass, B. M. 1960. Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.
Bennis, W.G., and J. O’Toole, 2005, How Business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review (May), pp. 96-104
Berle, A., and Means, G., 1932, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, New York: Mac Millan
Buckley Adrian and Mattheus Van Der Nat, 2003, Liquidity Management, Performance Measurement and Benchmarking, Treasury Affairs, Volume 1 (1), July 2003, p. 15-22
Cohen, Jeffrey R. and Lori L. Holder Webb, 2006, Rethinking the Influence of Agency Theory in the Accounting Academy, Issues in Accounting Education, February, Vol 21, No. 1,pp. 17-30
Chow, C.W.,1983, The Effects of Job Standard Tightness and Compensation Scheme on Performance: An Explanation of Linkages, The Accounting Review, October, pp. 667-685
Dayakisni, Tri, dan Hudaniah, (2003), Psikologi Sosial, cetakan kedua, buku satu, UMM press, Malang
Davis James H., F. David Schoorman, Lex Donaldson, 1997, Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 20-47
Demsetz, H, and Lehn, K, 1985, The structure of corporate ownership: Theory and Consequences, Journal of Political Economics, Vol 93:pp. 11-55
29
Donaldson, L, & Davis, J. H., 1989, CEO governance and shareholder returns: Agency Theory or Stewardship Theory, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.
Donaldson, L, & Davis, J. H., 1991, Stewardship Theory and Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns, Australian Journal of Management, Vol 16,pp. 49-64
Doucouliagos, C. 1994, A note on the volution of homo economicus, Journal of Economics Issues, Vol 3:pp. 877-883
Dunk, Alan S., 1993, The effect of budget emphasis and information asymmetry on the relation between budgetary participation and slack, The Accounting Review, Vol. 68, No. 2,p 400-10
D'Aveni, R. A.,& MacMillan, I. C. 1990. Crisis and the content of managerial communicctions: A study of the focus of attention of top managers in surviving and failing firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 35: 634-657.
Folger, R.D., 1986, Rethinking equity theory: a referent cognition model, in justice in social relation, edited by H.W. Bierhoff, R.L. Cohen, and J. Greenberg, 145-162, New York, NY: Plenum Press
Ferraro, F., J. Pfeffer, and R.I. Sutton, 2005, Economics language and assumptions: How theories can become self fulfilling, Academy of Management Review 30 (1):pp 8-24
Frank, R.H., 1994, Microeconomics and behavior, New York: McGraw-Hill
_________, 2003, Commitment problems in the theory of rational choice. Texas Law Review, 81, 7,pp. 1789-1804
Gay, L.R., and Diehl, P.L., 1996, Research Methods for Business and Management, Singapore: Simon and Schuster (Asia) Pte Ltd.
Ghoshal, S., and P. Moran, 1996, Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory, Academy of Management Review, 21, (I), pp. 13-47
Hellriengel, Don., John W. Slocum, Jr., and Richard W. Woodman, 2001, Organizational Behavior, Cincinnati: South Western College Publishing, 9th ed.
Hopwood, A.G., 1972, An empirical study of the role of accounting data in performance evaluation, Journal of Accounting Research 10 (supplement): 156-82
Ikhsan, Arfan, dan Muhammad Ishak, 2008, Akuntansi Keperilakuan, Cetakan ketiga, Penerbit Salemba Empat, Jakarta
30
Jensen, Michael C, and William H. Meckling, 1976, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics, October, Vol 3, No. 4, pp. 305-360
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Kenis, Izzetin, 1979, Effect of Budgetary Goal Characteristics on Managerial Attitudes and Performance, The Accounting Review, Vol. LIV, No. 4, Oktober
Krech, D. and Crutchfield, R.S., 1954, Theory and Problems of Social Psychology, McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., New York
Kunz, Alexis H. and Dieter Pfaff, 2002, Agency theory, performance evaluation, and the hyphothetical construct of intrinsic motivation, Accounting, Organization and Society 27,p.275-295
Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia(LAI), (2002), Alkitab, Cetakan pertama tahun 2002, Jakarta
Libby, T, 1999, The influence of voice and explanation on performance in a participative budgeting setting, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 24:125-137
Lindquist, T.M., 1995, Fairness as an antecedent to participative budgeting: examining the effects of distributive justice, procedural justice and referent cognition on satisfaction and performance, Journal of Management Accounting Research 7:pp. 122-147
Lukka, K. 1988. Budgetary biasing in organizations: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society 13 (3): 281-301.
Mael. F., & Ashforth, B. E. 1992. Alumni and their almamater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13: 103-123.
Mowday, R.T., R.M. Steers, and L.W. Porter, 1979, The Measure of Organization Commitment, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol 14,p. 288
___________________________________, 1982. Organizational linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism. and turnover. New York: Academic Press.
Nahartyo, E., 2003, Budgetary Participation and Stretch Targets: The Effects of Procedural Justice on Budget Commitment and Performance Under a Stretch budget condition, Dissertation, University of Kentucky, USA
Nunnaly, J., 1967, Psychometric Methods, New York, Mc. Graw Hill.
Schieff, M., and A. Y. Lewin, 1970. “The Impact of People Budgets”. The Accounting Review 45. April pp. 259 – 268.
Setiawan, Ivan Aries dan Imam Ghozali, (2006), Akuntansi Keperilakuan: Konsep dan Kajian Empiris Perilaku Akuntan, Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang.
Siegel, G., and H.R. Marconi, 1989. Behavioral Accounting. South Western Publishing, Co. Cincinnati, OH.
Turner, J. C. 1981. The experimental social psychology of intergroup behavior. In J. C. Turner & H. Giles (Eds.), lntergroup behavioc 66-101. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Uno, Hamzah B, 2008, Orientansi baru dalam psikologi pembelajaran, Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara
Weiner, Yoash, 1982, Commitment in Organization: A Normative view, The Academy of Management Review, Vol 7, No. 3, pp. 418-428
Wentzel, Kristin, 1999, The influence of budgetary participation, fairness perceptions and goal acceptance on managers’ performance in a scarce resources allocation setting, Working paper, Drexel University
_____________, 2002, The Influence of Fairness Perception and Goal Commitment on Managers’ Performance in a Budget Setting, Behavioral Research In Accounting, Vol 14, pp 247-271
Williamson, O. E., 1985, The Economic institution of Capital Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, New York: Free Press
Young, S.M., 1985, Participative budgeting: The Effects of Risk Aversion and Asymmetric Information on Budgetary Slack, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol 23 (autumn),pp. 829-42
32
Panitia Seleksi Makalah SNA XII Kantor JRAI Gedung Program Doktor FE UGM Jln. Nusantara, Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta 55281