{"title":"Elite Networks and the Rise of Social Impact Reporting in the UK Social Sector","authors":"Julia Morley","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2736167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study analyses the structural factors that led to the emergence of the dominant aspirational norm of ‘social impact reporting’ in the social sector. While the results of this analysis are consistent with the existing literature on professionalisation and governmentality, they offer insights into the specific social structures that have underpinned this shift in norms of best practice. Such social structures have not been addressed in the accounting literature. This paper focuses on explaining how, rather than why, it was possible for this new way of thinking about performance reporting to emerge and be disseminated in the social sector. It finds that the structure of the niche community of social investment professionals and intermediaries was an important driver of this change in perceived best practice (see DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Abbott, 1988; Hwang and Powell, 2009; Suddaby and Viale, 2011) and was at the heart of the emergence of this norm of performance measurement. Furthermore, the diffusion of this norm to the broader community of social enterprises and charities was enabled by investment flows (Granovetter, 1974; Padgett and Ansell, 1993; Watts and Strogatz, 1998, Strang and Soule, 1998; Padgett and Powell,2013).","PeriodicalId":240153,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Corporate Reporting (Topic)","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Corporate Reporting (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2736167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
This study analyses the structural factors that led to the emergence of the dominant aspirational norm of ‘social impact reporting’ in the social sector. While the results of this analysis are consistent with the existing literature on professionalisation and governmentality, they offer insights into the specific social structures that have underpinned this shift in norms of best practice. Such social structures have not been addressed in the accounting literature. This paper focuses on explaining how, rather than why, it was possible for this new way of thinking about performance reporting to emerge and be disseminated in the social sector. It finds that the structure of the niche community of social investment professionals and intermediaries was an important driver of this change in perceived best practice (see DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Abbott, 1988; Hwang and Powell, 2009; Suddaby and Viale, 2011) and was at the heart of the emergence of this norm of performance measurement. Furthermore, the diffusion of this norm to the broader community of social enterprises and charities was enabled by investment flows (Granovetter, 1974; Padgett and Ansell, 1993; Watts and Strogatz, 1998, Strang and Soule, 1998; Padgett and Powell,2013).
本研究分析了导致社会部门“社会影响报告”这一主导理想规范出现的结构性因素。虽然这一分析的结果与现有的关于专业化和治理的文献一致,但它们提供了对支持最佳实践规范转变的特定社会结构的见解。这种社会结构在会计文献中尚未得到解决。本文的重点是解释这种关于绩效报告的新思维方式是如何出现并在社会部门传播的,而不是为什么。研究发现,社会投资专业人士和中介机构的利基社区结构是感知最佳实践变化的重要驱动因素(见DiMaggio和Powell, 1983;阿伯特,1988;Hwang and Powell, 2009;Suddaby和Viale, 2011),是这种绩效衡量规范出现的核心。此外,投资流动使这一规范向更广泛的社会企业和慈善团体扩散(Granovetter, 1974;帕吉特和安塞尔,1993;Watts and Strogatz, 1998; Strang and Soule, 1998;帕吉特和鲍威尔,2013)。