Since the inception of control systems in the early 1950s shifts in the workforce composition challenges bureaucratic control systems in their (in)ability to accommodate the diverse intergenerational characteristics now present in organizations. While much attention has been given to understanding how individuals within organizations are affected by and interact with Management Control Systems (MCS), there is relatively less emphasis on studying the behavioral characteristics and influences of those who design these systems on MCSs. Thus, this research stems from a gap in the management control literature regarding the relationship between behavioral science and MCS design, from the perspective of the designers of these systems. In this theoretical paper we advocate for a paradigm shift in the approach to MCS development, emphasizing the importance of integrating personality structure and character traits derived from Jean Bergeret's psychodynamic structural model into MCS frameworks to enhance intentionality and improve organizational performance measurement systems and subsequent management. By embracing this perspective, organizations may find new directions for innovation and optimization in MCS design.

This study explores the extent to which accounting and management control practices employed by various types of organisations contribute to resilience in the context of a polycrisis. Through a systematic review of qualitative studies, analysed from a resilience perspective, preliminary findings indicate that these practices can foster resilience by influencing different sub-dimensions, depending on the nature of the crisis (whether economic, environmental, or social). The study provides valuable insights by connecting the fields of accounting and resilience, offering support for organisational responses in uncertain environments.

Social housing in the UK is a “pillar of the society” (CIH, 2018) with one in five of the UK population living in social housing. The social housing sector has significantly changed in recent years in response to societal financial and infrastructural changes (Cooper, Graham, & Himick, 2016; Smyth, 2019; Smyth, Cole, & Fields, 2020). Housing associations (HAs) major providers of social housing operate within this evolving, challenging, fast-moving and highly pressurised environment. Faced with housing shortages, funding needs, various stakeholders and new regulation (Smyth, 2019), it has become increasingly challenging for HAs to discharge accountability (Collier, 2005, 2008; Manochin, Brignall, Lowe, & Howell, 2011; Smyth, 2017) in this complex environment. Despite this complexity, the sector handles huge sums of money.

For example, in 2021 sector revenues in England were £22.1 billion with an operating surplus of £4.9 billion (Regulator of Social Housing, 2021). Sector revenues consist mainly of rental income and service charges income. In 2021 service charges income were £1.4 billion with a ratio of service charge income to associated costs of 79% (Regulator of Social Housing, 2021). Although service charges are a significant revenue earner to HAs and an important cost to tenants, there is a lacuna of scholarship on service charges practices. This study seeks to fill this gap. Employing qualitative methodology, we seek to provide increased understanding on the pricing and accountability practices of HAs in relation to service charge costs. We also seek to provide increased insights of how service costs impact the tenants’ wellbeing, and what part accountability plays in facilitating such charges. Specifically, it provides empirical evidence on the operational and pricing practices of Housing Associations from the tenants’ perspectives and how these pricing strategies impact their financial and mental wellbeing. The study answers the following research questions:

• What are the service cost pricing practices employed by HAs?

• How do these practices impact the wellbeing of tenants?

The study contributes to the accountability literature in social housing (Smyth 2012) by extending the literature on the accountability practices and pricing strategies of HAs, and how these impact the tenants’ financial and mental wellbeing. The study has policy implications for the social housing sector as it will act as a reference guide to housing practitioners as well as raise awareness in the sector on housing associations’ pricing strategies in relation to service charges. Preliminary findings suggest that service charges within housing associations is a rather complex phenomenon and there is limited accountability of tenants.