Audit credibility and LGBTQI rights: certification operation in the margins

Fredrik Svärdsten, Kristina Tamm Hallström
{"title":"Audit credibility and LGBTQI rights: certification operation in the margins","authors":"Fredrik Svärdsten, Kristina Tamm Hallström","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-12-2022-6179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The aim of this paper is to contribute to knowledge about the diversity of credibility arrangements in new audit spaces “in the margins” of auditing and the implications of such arrangements.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The paper is based on an in-depth qualitative study of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) rights certification run by the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex Rights (RFSL) during its first decade of operation. We have interviewed employees and studied documents at the certification units within the RFSL. We have also interviewed certified organizations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>We highlight two features that explain the unusual credibility arrangements in this audit practice: the role of beneficiaries in the organizational arrangements chosen and the role of responsibility as an organizing value with consequences for responsibility allocation in this certification. These features make it possible for the RFSL to act as a credible auditor even though it deviates from common arrangements for credible audits.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>The RFSL certification is different in several ways. First, the RFSL acts as both a trainer and an auditor. Second, the trainers/auditors at the RFSL have no accreditation to guarantee their credibility. Third, the RFSL decides for itself what standards should apply for the certification and adapts these standards to the operation being audited. Therefore, this case provides a good opportunity to study alternative credibility arrangements in the margins of auditing as well as their justifications.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":501027,"journal":{"name":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-12-2022-6179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this paper is to contribute to knowledge about the diversity of credibility arrangements in new audit spaces “in the margins” of auditing and the implications of such arrangements.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper is based on an in-depth qualitative study of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) rights certification run by the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex Rights (RFSL) during its first decade of operation. We have interviewed employees and studied documents at the certification units within the RFSL. We have also interviewed certified organizations.

Findings

We highlight two features that explain the unusual credibility arrangements in this audit practice: the role of beneficiaries in the organizational arrangements chosen and the role of responsibility as an organizing value with consequences for responsibility allocation in this certification. These features make it possible for the RFSL to act as a credible auditor even though it deviates from common arrangements for credible audits.

Originality/value

The RFSL certification is different in several ways. First, the RFSL acts as both a trainer and an auditor. Second, the trainers/auditors at the RFSL have no accreditation to guarantee their credibility. Third, the RFSL decides for itself what standards should apply for the certification and adapts these standards to the operation being audited. Therefore, this case provides a good opportunity to study alternative credibility arrangements in the margins of auditing as well as their justifications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审计可信度与男女同性恋、双性恋、变性者和跨性别者的权利:边缘认证业务
设计/方法/途径本文基于对瑞典女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性者、同性恋者和双性人权利联合会(RFSL)在其运作的第一个十年中开展的女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性者、同性恋者和双性人(LGBTQI)权利认证的深入定性研究。我们采访了瑞典女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人、同性恋者和双性人权利联合会认证部门的员工,并研究了相关文件。我们强调了两个特点,这两个特点解释了这一审计实践中不同寻常的信誉安排:受益人在所选择的组织安排中的作用,以及责任作为一种组织价值在这一认证中对责任分配的影响。这些特点使 RFSL 有可能成为可信的审计机构,尽管它偏离了可信审计的常见安排。首先,RFSL 同时担任培训师和审核员。其次,RFSL 的培训师/审核员没有任何认证来保证其可信度。第三,RFSL 自行决定认证应适用的标准,并根据被审核的运营情况调整这些标准。因此,这个案例为研究审计边缘的其他可信度安排及其理由提供了一个很好的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ways of not seeing: visibility, blindness, and the transparency game Accounting for racial inequality in South Africa with the black economic empowerment policy Boundary objects: sustainability reporting and the production of organizational stability Responding to employee-based race inequalities in National Health Service (England): accountability and the Workforce Race Equality Standard The failure of the United Kingdom’s accounting and fiscal governance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1