Pub Date : 2021-07-23DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4309
A. Morinière, I. Georgescu
PurposeThis study aims to understand whether and how the use of performance measures in the context of healthcare organizations facilitates the dynamics of compromise or whether it creates moral struggles among a wide variety of actors. It offers novel insights into the concept of hybridity by investigating its underlying moral dimension. Drawing upon the sociology of worth theory (Boltanski and Thévenot, 1991, 2006), this paper examines how actors negotiate and compromise over time concerning issues of justice, involving the use of performance measures on a day-to-day basis.Design/methodology/approachThe article presents a single case study of a medical unit in a French public hospital. Data were obtained through the ethnographic method, semi-structured interviews and internal financial and accounting documents.FindingsUnlike earlier accounting studies, the authors analyze whether, and how, accounting, on one hand, contributes to the dynamics of compromise between actors with divergent values that characterize hybrid organizations, and, on the other hand, increases tensions among actors with convergent values involved in caregiving. This offers practical insights into three relational mechanisms underlying the dynamics of compromise and their limits through the time dimension.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors use a single case study in a country-specific context.Practical implicationsThis study helps managers of healthcare organizations to understand the relationships between the use of performance measures and their impact on the evaluation of worth in practice.Originality/valueIn terms of theoretical contribution, the authors show how the sociology of worth (Boltanski and Thévenot, 1991, 2006) complements the analysis of hybridity and develop an original approach to understanding the ambivalent role of performance measures in bringing together divergent values within French public hospitals.
{"title":"Hybridity and the use of performance measurement: facilitating compromises or creating moral struggles? Insights from healthcare organizations","authors":"A. Morinière, I. Georgescu","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4309","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study aims to understand whether and how the use of performance measures in the context of healthcare organizations facilitates the dynamics of compromise or whether it creates moral struggles among a wide variety of actors. It offers novel insights into the concept of hybridity by investigating its underlying moral dimension. Drawing upon the sociology of worth theory (Boltanski and Thévenot, 1991, 2006), this paper examines how actors negotiate and compromise over time concerning issues of justice, involving the use of performance measures on a day-to-day basis.Design/methodology/approachThe article presents a single case study of a medical unit in a French public hospital. Data were obtained through the ethnographic method, semi-structured interviews and internal financial and accounting documents.FindingsUnlike earlier accounting studies, the authors analyze whether, and how, accounting, on one hand, contributes to the dynamics of compromise between actors with divergent values that characterize hybrid organizations, and, on the other hand, increases tensions among actors with convergent values involved in caregiving. This offers practical insights into three relational mechanisms underlying the dynamics of compromise and their limits through the time dimension.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors use a single case study in a country-specific context.Practical implicationsThis study helps managers of healthcare organizations to understand the relationships between the use of performance measures and their impact on the evaluation of worth in practice.Originality/valueIn terms of theoretical contribution, the authors show how the sociology of worth (Boltanski and Thévenot, 1991, 2006) complements the analysis of hybridity and develop an original approach to understanding the ambivalent role of performance measures in bringing together divergent values within French public hospitals.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88502856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-20DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3629
Mercedes Ruiz-Lozano, Marta de Vicente-Lama, Pilar Tirado-Valencia, Magdalena Cordobés-Madueño
PurposeThis paper aims to assess the disclosure of the materiality process in the preparation of sustainability reports of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). This paper also explores the effects of regulation mandating that SOEs prepare sustainability reports. In the specific case of port authorities, the study analyses the influence of a sector guideline that determines what should be included and the structure of the report. Another aim of this paper is to delve into SOE's motivations for disclosing information on materiality assessments, using the assumptions of the different theories to explain their reporting practices.Design/methodology/approachUsing a sample of SOEs sustainability reports, a content analysis is undertaken. The methodology involves the analysis of the information disclosed by SOEs in Spain and the development of a materiality disclosure index. This index enables sampled entities to be classified on a scale of 0–5, based on the extent of their disclosures of the materiality determination process. This study also identifies several variables that explain differences in these disclosures.FindingsA low rate of information disclosed about the materiality process can be attributed to the desire of SOEs to create symbolic legitimacy. In a context where the disclosure of sustainability information is mandatory, only few organisations apply the principle of materiality to define the content of their sustainability reports. These results highlight that institutional isomorphism has only had a limited effect on the materiality process.Research limitations/implicationsLimitations associated with the sample size and composition of the sample by sector apply.Practical implicationsThis research shows that generally accepted reporting guidelines constitute a reference framework for sustainability reporting but that the principles underpinning these frameworks are not always implemented.Originality/valueThis study extends the literature on the implementation of the principle of materiality and uses disclosure theories to explain the actual reporting by SOEs of their materiality process.
{"title":"The disclosure of the materiality process in sustainability reporting by Spanish state-owned enterprises","authors":"Mercedes Ruiz-Lozano, Marta de Vicente-Lama, Pilar Tirado-Valencia, Magdalena Cordobés-Madueño","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3629","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to assess the disclosure of the materiality process in the preparation of sustainability reports of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). This paper also explores the effects of regulation mandating that SOEs prepare sustainability reports. In the specific case of port authorities, the study analyses the influence of a sector guideline that determines what should be included and the structure of the report. Another aim of this paper is to delve into SOE's motivations for disclosing information on materiality assessments, using the assumptions of the different theories to explain their reporting practices.Design/methodology/approachUsing a sample of SOEs sustainability reports, a content analysis is undertaken. The methodology involves the analysis of the information disclosed by SOEs in Spain and the development of a materiality disclosure index. This index enables sampled entities to be classified on a scale of 0–5, based on the extent of their disclosures of the materiality determination process. This study also identifies several variables that explain differences in these disclosures.FindingsA low rate of information disclosed about the materiality process can be attributed to the desire of SOEs to create symbolic legitimacy. In a context where the disclosure of sustainability information is mandatory, only few organisations apply the principle of materiality to define the content of their sustainability reports. These results highlight that institutional isomorphism has only had a limited effect on the materiality process.Research limitations/implicationsLimitations associated with the sample size and composition of the sample by sector apply.Practical implicationsThis research shows that generally accepted reporting guidelines constitute a reference framework for sustainability reporting but that the principles underpinning these frameworks are not always implemented.Originality/valueThis study extends the literature on the implementation of the principle of materiality and uses disclosure theories to explain the actual reporting by SOEs of their materiality process.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87928027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-15DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-06-2021-5318
E. Bracci, Iris Saliterer, Mariafrancesca Sicilia, I. Steccolini
PurposeThis paper aims to highlight the importance of (public) value(s) and publicness in accounting and accountability research. It pinpoints a range of issues that scholars need to contemplate when reconsidering publicness in accounting research and practice.Design/methodology/approachThe paper adopts an interdisciplinary literature review associated with a conceptual discussion of the actual and future challenges of public service accounting and accountability in considering public value(s).FindingsThe paper illustrates the centrality of (public) value(s) at the individual, organizational and societal levels in shaping and being shaped by calculative practices, and shows that looking at the interconnections between values and accounting is a fruitful research avenue. Moreover, it highlights the power of embracing interdisciplinary approaches to illuminate these interconnections and relate them to complex and current phenomena.Originality/valueThe paper’s originality lies in the reconsideration of (public) value(s) for public service accounting scholars, providing a critical reflection and setting new research avenues.
{"title":"Accounting for (public) value(s): reconsidering publicness in accounting research and practice","authors":"E. Bracci, Iris Saliterer, Mariafrancesca Sicilia, I. Steccolini","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-06-2021-5318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2021-5318","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to highlight the importance of (public) value(s) and publicness in accounting and accountability research. It pinpoints a range of issues that scholars need to contemplate when reconsidering publicness in accounting research and practice.Design/methodology/approachThe paper adopts an interdisciplinary literature review associated with a conceptual discussion of the actual and future challenges of public service accounting and accountability in considering public value(s).FindingsThe paper illustrates the centrality of (public) value(s) at the individual, organizational and societal levels in shaping and being shaped by calculative practices, and shows that looking at the interconnections between values and accounting is a fruitful research avenue. Moreover, it highlights the power of embracing interdisciplinary approaches to illuminate these interconnections and relate them to complex and current phenomena.Originality/valueThe paper’s originality lies in the reconsideration of (public) value(s) for public service accounting scholars, providing a critical reflection and setting new research avenues.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79169055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-14DOI: 10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4876
N. Moscariello, M. Pizzo
PurposeGrounded in the legitimacy theory and framed within the context of European Union’s (EU's) endorsement process, this paper analyses the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB's) response to the COVID-19 crisis and the impact of its practical expedient COVID-19-Related Rent Concession on the IASB's output legitimacy.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a qualitative process-tracing approach and combines inductive historical narratives and deductive reasoning to draw theoretical implications concerning the COVID-19 crisis' impact on the standard-setting process.FindingsThe paper shows a growing reliance on practical expedients in International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) to maintain the IASB's output legitimacy. While introducing some theoretical flaws, practical expedients increase the standards' flexibility and strengthen the IASB's ability to respond to the European political bodies' concerns. Indeed, an analysis of the IASB's response to the COVID-19 outbreak reveals the role practical expedients might play not only in reducing (ex ante) new IFRS transition costs but also in dealing (ex-post) with the broader economic impact of unexpected systemic crises to limit criticisms and controversies surrounding IFRS.Originality/valueThis study reveals a causal relationship between the rise of the European public good criterion in the EU endorsement process and the wider use of practical expedients in IFRS. An analysis of the latest amendment to IFRS 16 in response to the COVID-19 crisis also confirms the role of practical expedients in strengthening the acceptance of IFRS in an increasingly complex economic reality and sheds some light on the new strategies adopted by the IASB to preserve its legitimacy in the EU.
{"title":"Practical expedients and theoretical flaws: the IASB's legitimacy strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"N. Moscariello, M. Pizzo","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4876","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeGrounded in the legitimacy theory and framed within the context of European Union’s (EU's) endorsement process, this paper analyses the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB's) response to the COVID-19 crisis and the impact of its practical expedient COVID-19-Related Rent Concession on the IASB's output legitimacy.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a qualitative process-tracing approach and combines inductive historical narratives and deductive reasoning to draw theoretical implications concerning the COVID-19 crisis' impact on the standard-setting process.FindingsThe paper shows a growing reliance on practical expedients in International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) to maintain the IASB's output legitimacy. While introducing some theoretical flaws, practical expedients increase the standards' flexibility and strengthen the IASB's ability to respond to the European political bodies' concerns. Indeed, an analysis of the IASB's response to the COVID-19 outbreak reveals the role practical expedients might play not only in reducing (ex ante) new IFRS transition costs but also in dealing (ex-post) with the broader economic impact of unexpected systemic crises to limit criticisms and controversies surrounding IFRS.Originality/valueThis study reveals a causal relationship between the rise of the European public good criterion in the EU endorsement process and the wider use of practical expedients in IFRS. An analysis of the latest amendment to IFRS 16 in response to the COVID-19 crisis also confirms the role of practical expedients in strengthening the acceptance of IFRS in an increasingly complex economic reality and sheds some light on the new strategies adopted by the IASB to preserve its legitimacy in the EU.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90582194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-13DOI: 10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4837
C. Parisi, Justyna Bekier
PurposeThis paper aims to explore the role of performance measurement systems as technologies of government for the assessment and management of the effects of COVID-19 in the context of six cities involved in a large European project.Design/methodology/approachBased on the field study of a large European project, this paper relies on a comparative case study research approach (Yin, 2003). This research design allows insights into the role of central and local key performance indicators (KPIs) in managing the ongoing pandemic.FindingsThis paper explores the role of accounting in the assessment of the COVID-19 pandemic. Its findings illustrate how the “adjudicating” and “territorialising” roles (Miller and Power, 2013) of local and central accounting technologies rendered the COVID-19 pandemic calculable.Originality/valueThis paper connects central and local performance management systems in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. It relies on a governmentality approach to discuss how different programmes and the relative KPIs were impacted by the ongoing global crisis.
本文旨在探讨绩效衡量系统作为政府技术在评估和管理COVID-19影响方面的作用，以参与欧洲大型项目的六个城市为背景。设计/方法论/方法基于对一个大型欧洲项目的实地研究，本文采用了比较案例研究的方法(Yin, 2003)。这一研究设计有助于深入了解中央和地方关键绩效指标在管理当前大流行方面的作用。本文探讨了会计在COVID-19大流行评估中的作用。其研究结果说明了地方和中央会计技术的“裁决”和“领土化”作用(Miller and Power, 2013)如何使COVID-19大流行变得可计算。原创性/价值本文将COVID-19大流行背景下的中央和地方绩效管理系统联系起来。它依靠一种治理方法来讨论当前全球危机对不同方案和相关关键绩效指标的影响。
{"title":"Assessing and managing the impact of COVID-19: a study of six European cities participating in a circular economy project","authors":"C. Parisi, Justyna Bekier","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-08-2020-4837","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to explore the role of performance measurement systems as technologies of government for the assessment and management of the effects of COVID-19 in the context of six cities involved in a large European project.Design/methodology/approachBased on the field study of a large European project, this paper relies on a comparative case study research approach (Yin, 2003). This research design allows insights into the role of central and local key performance indicators (KPIs) in managing the ongoing pandemic.FindingsThis paper explores the role of accounting in the assessment of the COVID-19 pandemic. Its findings illustrate how the “adjudicating” and “territorialising” roles (Miller and Power, 2013) of local and central accounting technologies rendered the COVID-19 pandemic calculable.Originality/valueThis paper connects central and local performance management systems in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. It relies on a governmentality approach to discuss how different programmes and the relative KPIs were impacted by the ongoing global crisis.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91184894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-13DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-05-2021-5279
G. Leoni, A. Lai, R. Stacchezzini, I. Steccolini, Stephen Brammer, M. Linnenluecke, I. Demirag
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the themes emerging from the first studies exploring accounting, accountability and management practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and coming from a diversity of experiences, across countries, organizations and individuals. In so doing, the paper gives an overview of the most recent findings about the role of accounting and accountability in times of crisis that are hosted in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ).Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws together and identifies emerging themes related to the current COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on accounting, accountability and management practices and considers how the studies in this issue extend one’s knowledge of accounting and contribute to accounting research.FindingsThree emerging themes are drawn and their contribution to accounting scholarship is discussed. The first theme deals with the role of accounting and numbers in supporting governmental responses to COVID-19. The second theme considers accounting practices used to make exceptional decisions at the organizational level in times of crisis. The third theme addresses a relevant frontier of research into accounting and inequalities.Practical implicationsIn considering the diverse contributions of this special issue, the paper points out how uncertainty and change can impact the design, use and understanding of accounting, management and accountability practices and can be accepted by scholars and practitioners as part of such practices.Originality/valueThis paper provides a timely and comprehensive picture of the first reflections and research findings on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on one’s interpretation of accounting, accountability and management practices.
{"title":"Accounting, management and accountability in times of crisis: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"G. Leoni, A. Lai, R. Stacchezzini, I. Steccolini, Stephen Brammer, M. Linnenluecke, I. Demirag","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-05-2021-5279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-05-2021-5279","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the themes emerging from the first studies exploring accounting, accountability and management practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and coming from a diversity of experiences, across countries, organizations and individuals. In so doing, the paper gives an overview of the most recent findings about the role of accounting and accountability in times of crisis that are hosted in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ).Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws together and identifies emerging themes related to the current COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on accounting, accountability and management practices and considers how the studies in this issue extend one’s knowledge of accounting and contribute to accounting research.FindingsThree emerging themes are drawn and their contribution to accounting scholarship is discussed. The first theme deals with the role of accounting and numbers in supporting governmental responses to COVID-19. The second theme considers accounting practices used to make exceptional decisions at the organizational level in times of crisis. The third theme addresses a relevant frontier of research into accounting and inequalities.Practical implicationsIn considering the diverse contributions of this special issue, the paper points out how uncertainty and change can impact the design, use and understanding of accounting, management and accountability practices and can be accepted by scholars and practitioners as part of such practices.Originality/valueThis paper provides a timely and comprehensive picture of the first reflections and research findings on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on one’s interpretation of accounting, accountability and management practices.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80538061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-13DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-05-2020-4554
Annette Quayle
PurposeThis paper aims to generate new research directions at the intersection of accounting, whistleblowing and publicness: defined as the attainment of public goals, interests and values.Design/methodology/approachA problematising review is used to challenge and rethink the existing accounting and whistleblowing literature by incorporating readings from the public interest and public value literature. The paper draws on the work of Dewey (1927), Bozeman (2007) and Benington (2009) to open up new ways of theorising relations between accounting, whistleblowing and publicness.FindingsFirstly, the paper develops a public interest theoretical framework which shows whistleblowing is a public value activity that moves organisational wrongdoing into the public sphere where it is subject to democratic debate and dialogue required to reconcile the public's interests with what the public values. Secondly, this framework provides one answer to continuing questions in the literature of how to define accountings relationship to the public interest. Finally, the paper suggests this conceptual framework be used to stimulate debate on whether and how one should expand existing accounting and accountability knowledge boundaries to incorporate the broader social, political and moral concerns highlighted by whistleblowers acting in the public interest.Originality/valueAccounting and whistleblowing research has ignored the theoretical implications of whistleblowing in the public interest. The paper shows how accounting and accountability can respond to the challenges of a shifting and intangible public interest by providing a conceptual framework to guide current and future theoretical questions of how accounting is connected to the public interest.
{"title":"Whistleblowing and accounting for the public interest: a call for new directions","authors":"Annette Quayle","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-05-2020-4554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-05-2020-4554","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to generate new research directions at the intersection of accounting, whistleblowing and publicness: defined as the attainment of public goals, interests and values.Design/methodology/approachA problematising review is used to challenge and rethink the existing accounting and whistleblowing literature by incorporating readings from the public interest and public value literature. The paper draws on the work of Dewey (1927), Bozeman (2007) and Benington (2009) to open up new ways of theorising relations between accounting, whistleblowing and publicness.FindingsFirstly, the paper develops a public interest theoretical framework which shows whistleblowing is a public value activity that moves organisational wrongdoing into the public sphere where it is subject to democratic debate and dialogue required to reconcile the public's interests with what the public values. Secondly, this framework provides one answer to continuing questions in the literature of how to define accountings relationship to the public interest. Finally, the paper suggests this conceptual framework be used to stimulate debate on whether and how one should expand existing accounting and accountability knowledge boundaries to incorporate the broader social, political and moral concerns highlighted by whistleblowers acting in the public interest.Originality/valueAccounting and whistleblowing research has ignored the theoretical implications of whistleblowing in the public interest. The paper shows how accounting and accountability can respond to the challenges of a shifting and intangible public interest by providing a conceptual framework to guide current and future theoretical questions of how accounting is connected to the public interest.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"189 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81064709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-24DOI: 10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324
A. Stafford, Pamela Stapleton
PurposeContemporary organisational landscapes offer opportunities for hybrids to thrive. Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are one thriving hybrid form incorporating the use of resources and/or structures from both public and private sectors. The study examines the impact of such a hybrid structure on governance and accountability mechanisms in a context of institutional complexity.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses an approach that draws on institutional logics and hybridity to examine governance arrangements in the PPP policy created for the delivery of UK schools. Unusually, it employs a comparative case study of how four local governments implemented the policy. It draws on a framework developed by Polzer et al. (2017) to examine the level of engagement between multiple logics and hybrid structures and applies this to the delivery of governance and accountability for public money.FindingsThe Polzer et al. framework enables a study of how the nature of hybrids can vary in terms of their governance, ownership and control relations. The findings show how the relationships between levels of engagement of multiple logics and hybrid structures can impact on governance and accountability for public money. Layering and blending combinations led to increased adoption of private sector accountability structures, whilst a hybrid with parallel co-existence of community and market logics delivered a long-term governance structure.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper examines the operation of hybrids in a complex education PPP environment in only four local governments and therefore cannot provide representative answers across the population as a whole. However, given the considerable variation found across the four examples, the paper shows there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in the same hybrid setting. The paper focuses on capital investment implementation and its evaluation, so it is a limitation that the operational stage of PPP projects is not studied.Practical implicationsThe findings have political relevance because the two local government bodies with more robust combinations of multiple logics were more successful in getting funds and delivering schools in their geographical areas.Originality/valueThe study extends Polzer et al.'s (2017) research on hybridity by showing that there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in what was planned to be the same hybrid setting. It shows how in situations of institutional complexity certain combinations of logics lead to differentiation in governance and accountability, creating fragmented focus on the related public accountability structures. This matters because it becomes harder to hold government to account for public spending.
{"title":"The impact of hybridity on PPP governance and related accountability mechanisms: the case of UK education PPPs","authors":"A. Stafford, Pamela Stapleton","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeContemporary organisational landscapes offer opportunities for hybrids to thrive. Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are one thriving hybrid form incorporating the use of resources and/or structures from both public and private sectors. The study examines the impact of such a hybrid structure on governance and accountability mechanisms in a context of institutional complexity.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses an approach that draws on institutional logics and hybridity to examine governance arrangements in the PPP policy created for the delivery of UK schools. Unusually, it employs a comparative case study of how four local governments implemented the policy. It draws on a framework developed by Polzer et al. (2017) to examine the level of engagement between multiple logics and hybrid structures and applies this to the delivery of governance and accountability for public money.FindingsThe Polzer et al. framework enables a study of how the nature of hybrids can vary in terms of their governance, ownership and control relations. The findings show how the relationships between levels of engagement of multiple logics and hybrid structures can impact on governance and accountability for public money. Layering and blending combinations led to increased adoption of private sector accountability structures, whilst a hybrid with parallel co-existence of community and market logics delivered a long-term governance structure.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper examines the operation of hybrids in a complex education PPP environment in only four local governments and therefore cannot provide representative answers across the population as a whole. However, given the considerable variation found across the four examples, the paper shows there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in the same hybrid setting. The paper focuses on capital investment implementation and its evaluation, so it is a limitation that the operational stage of PPP projects is not studied.Practical implicationsThe findings have political relevance because the two local government bodies with more robust combinations of multiple logics were more successful in getting funds and delivering schools in their geographical areas.Originality/valueThe study extends Polzer et al.'s (2017) research on hybridity by showing that there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in what was planned to be the same hybrid setting. It shows how in situations of institutional complexity certain combinations of logics lead to differentiation in governance and accountability, creating fragmented focus on the related public accountability structures. This matters because it becomes harder to hold government to account for public spending.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73840997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-22DOI: 10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4328
Ida Schrøder, Emilia Cederberg, A. M. Hauge
PurposeThis paper investigates how different and sometimes conflicting approaches to performance evaluations are hybridized in the day-to-day activities of a disciplined hybrid organization–i.e. a public child protection agency at the intersection between the market and the public sector.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a one-year ethnography of how employees achieve to qualify their work as “good work” in situations with several and sometimes conflicting ideals of what “good work” is. Fieldwork material was collected by following casework activities across organizational boundaries. By combining accounting literature on hybridization with literature on practices of valuation, the paper develops a novel theoretical framework which allows for analyses of the various practices of valuation, when and where they clash and how they persist over time in everyday work.FindingsThroughout the study, four distinct registers of valuation were identified: feeling, theorizing, formalizing and costing. To denote the meticulous efforts of pursuing good work in all four registers of valuation, the authors propose the notion of sequencing. Sequencing is an ongoing process of moving conflicting registers away from each other and bringing them back together again. Correspondingly, at the operational level of a hybrid organization, temporary compartmentalization is a means of avoiding clashes, and in doing so, making it possible for different and sometimes conflicting ways of achieving good results to continuously hybridize and persist together.Research limitations/implicationsThe single-case approach allows for analytical depth, but limits the findings to theoretical, rather than empirical, generalizability. The framework the authors propose, however, is well-suited for mobilization and potential elaboration in further empirical contexts.Originality/valueThe paper provides a novel theoretical framework as well as rich empirical material from the highly political field of child protection work, which has seldomly been studied within accounting research.
{"title":"What is good work in a hybrid organization? On the efforts of sequencing registers of valuation","authors":"Ida Schrøder, Emilia Cederberg, A. M. Hauge","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4328","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4328","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper investigates how different and sometimes conflicting approaches to performance evaluations are hybridized in the day-to-day activities of a disciplined hybrid organization–i.e. a public child protection agency at the intersection between the market and the public sector.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a one-year ethnography of how employees achieve to qualify their work as “good work” in situations with several and sometimes conflicting ideals of what “good work” is. Fieldwork material was collected by following casework activities across organizational boundaries. By combining accounting literature on hybridization with literature on practices of valuation, the paper develops a novel theoretical framework which allows for analyses of the various practices of valuation, when and where they clash and how they persist over time in everyday work.FindingsThroughout the study, four distinct registers of valuation were identified: feeling, theorizing, formalizing and costing. To denote the meticulous efforts of pursuing good work in all four registers of valuation, the authors propose the notion of sequencing. Sequencing is an ongoing process of moving conflicting registers away from each other and bringing them back together again. Correspondingly, at the operational level of a hybrid organization, temporary compartmentalization is a means of avoiding clashes, and in doing so, making it possible for different and sometimes conflicting ways of achieving good results to continuously hybridize and persist together.Research limitations/implicationsThe single-case approach allows for analytical depth, but limits the findings to theoretical, rather than empirical, generalizability. The framework the authors propose, however, is well-suited for mobilization and potential elaboration in further empirical contexts.Originality/valueThe paper provides a novel theoretical framework as well as rich empirical material from the highly political field of child protection work, which has seldomly been studied within accounting research.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89683769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-22DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4890
Binh Bui, Olayinka Moses, John Dumay
PurposeThe authors unpack the critical role of rhetoric in developing and justifying the New Zealand (NZ) government's coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown strategy.Design/methodology/approachUsing Green's (2004) theory of rhetorical diffusion, the authors analysed government documents and media releases before, during and after the lockdown to reconstruct the government's rationale.FindingsThe blending of kairos (sense of urgency and “right” time to act), ethos (emphasis on “saving lives”), pathos (fear of disruption and death) and selective use of health-based logos (shrinking infection rates), prompted fast initial adoption of the lockdown. However, support for the rhetoric wavered post-lockdown as absence of robust logos became apparent to the public.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors implicate the role of rhetoric in decision-makers’ ability to successfully elicit support for a new practice under urgency and the right moment to act using emotionalisation and moralisation. The assessment of the NZ government's response strategy provides insights decision-makers could glean in developing policies to tame the virus.Practical implicationsThis study’s analysis demonstrates the unsustainability of rhetoric in the absence of reliable information.Originality/valueThe authors demonstrate the consequences of limited (intermittent) evidence and disregard for accounting/accountability data in public policy decisions under a rhetorical strategy.
{"title":"The rhetoric of New Zealand's COVID-19 response","authors":"Binh Bui, Olayinka Moses, John Dumay","doi":"10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4890","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe authors unpack the critical role of rhetoric in developing and justifying the New Zealand (NZ) government's coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown strategy.Design/methodology/approachUsing Green's (2004) theory of rhetorical diffusion, the authors analysed government documents and media releases before, during and after the lockdown to reconstruct the government's rationale.FindingsThe blending of kairos (sense of urgency and “right” time to act), ethos (emphasis on “saving lives”), pathos (fear of disruption and death) and selective use of health-based logos (shrinking infection rates), prompted fast initial adoption of the lockdown. However, support for the rhetoric wavered post-lockdown as absence of robust logos became apparent to the public.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors implicate the role of rhetoric in decision-makers’ ability to successfully elicit support for a new practice under urgency and the right moment to act using emotionalisation and moralisation. The assessment of the NZ government's response strategy provides insights decision-makers could glean in developing policies to tame the virus.Practical implicationsThis study’s analysis demonstrates the unsustainability of rhetoric in the absence of reliable information.Originality/valueThe authors demonstrate the consequences of limited (intermittent) evidence and disregard for accounting/accountability data in public policy decisions under a rhetorical strategy.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73799025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：