Many accounting studies have investigated the effects of differences in evaluative style on subordinate managersâ€™ attitudes and performance. These studies have usually based the distinction of different evaluative styles on the extent to which a superior uses and relies on accounting performance measures when evaluating subordinate managersâ€™ performance. The literature on this concept of evaluative style has become known as RAPM (reliance on accounting performance measures). Recently, this literature has been subject to severe criticism. This paper argues that to gain relevance for the accounting and management community, future research on evaluative style needs to (1) incorporate the development in management accounting and control towards a broad array of information, (2) recognize the importance of organizational context and control system design for understanding evaluative style effectiveness, and (3) consider characteristics of the superior-subordinate relationship. The relevance of these three issues is empirically illustrated with interview data from a pilot study. Overall, these three avenues for future research provide a valuable approach to increase our understanding of evaluative style effectiveness in contemporary organisations.