Search results

Through an in-depth case study, this paper aims to investigate how workplace struggles can meaningfully change management accounting practices.

This is an archival study drawing on 10 years of governmental documents, news media and a court case. The theoretical notions of framing and overflowing are used to investigate how a calculative change was introduced, problematized and reverted.

An initiative to increase care quality through the empowerment of care recipients led to a calculative change and to an intensification of work, which union representatives turned into a health and safety complaint. “Seizing” the overflow from the calculative change and “redirecting” it into the health and safety arena allowed the unions to draw support from the national work health and safety agency. In response, the organization rolled back the calculative change.

This paper introduces the notions of seizing and redirecting overflows. When combined with conduits of overflows, a part of Callon’s (1998) conceptual apparatus that previously has received little attention, these notions constitute a framework that helps identify conditions that make emancipatory uses of accounting and control outputs possible.

This paper seeks to explore the necessary considerations in assessing and improving board performance in a Fortune 50 organization facing complex strategy execution challenges.

Face‐to‐face interviews with all non‐executive directors, the CEO and other senior executives were used to conduct a detailed evaluation of board performance, so as to highlight any potential areas of execution or governance risk and underperformance arising from gaps in competence, process or culture. In addition, analysis was carried out of overall board effectiveness and of individual board member contribution using detailed 360‐degree and aggregate questionnaires completed by board and key members of the management team. Further insight was gained from detailed benchmarking against global peers.

The work highlights that for a board to be a valuable differentiating asset to a company it is vital to balance the governance and oversight role of the board with a supportive and partnering relationship with executive management. This requires that a board should possess the necessary depth and breadth of experience to gain the respect and trust of the executive; that the chairman and CEO should define a contract that describes the nature of the relationship and the division of responsibilities between executive and board; and that the chairman should strive to create an open and challenging dynamic and constantly seek to improve board behaviors and interaction.

It sets out clear objectives in building boards with complementary skill sets and experience and in embedding a culture of continuous self‐assessment and improvement.

Strategic HR practitioners are encouraged to consider the value of the board to management as a differentiating asset for the organization.