Search results

This paper explores the impact of contemporary calculative practices, termed “accountingisation”, on Australian accounting academics' values. Also, it seeks to understand the rationale underlying the development of various university performance measurement systems (PMSs), and their implementation and evaluation.

A case study approach uses accounting academics' responses to an online survey and also semi-structured interviews with senior research-related leaders in a group of Australian universities. This is supplemented by document analysis. A narrative story-telling approach explores and presents the combined data observations, over the period 2010–2018, of two characters: a “typical” accounting academic and a “typical” vice-chancellor.

The study contributes to the literature on PMSs in understanding “accountingisation”, the rationale behind the development, implementation and evaluation of performance metrics by senior management and its impact on accounting academics. It juxtaposes and unpacks the complexities and nuances of PMSs and provides empirical evidence by highlighting the perceptions of both the Australian accounting academics and senior university management. The findings demonstrate a level of discontent among accounting academics in reconciling the expectations of increased “accountingisation” within university PMSs. These are juxtaposed against the views of senior university leaders who are influential in determining PMSs.

This paper is novel in considering the implications of “accountingisation” in a contemporary setting, focusing on accounting academics, values and individual PMSs within business schools.

As accounting academics, the authors know that performance measurement is well-trodden ground in the literature. Yet rarely have they turned their gaze inwards to examine the performance controls which they are subject to in the own everyday working life. Over the past 40 years, the rise of the New Public Management paradigm and neoliberalism has intensified changes in the way universities, disciplines and individual academics justify the quality of their work. This paper aims to explore the impact of accountingisation on the field and the Australian public sector higher education sector.

The perceptions of accounting academics in Australia’s 37 business faculties and schools were collected via an online survey. Additionally, a document analysis of annual reports, internal reports, strategy documents and other confidential material were also used.

The changes have included the use of corporate and individual research metrics aimed at increasing institutional status, brand reputation and revenue generation. These changes have transformed business schools and universities into commercial enterprises and commoditised education. What this analysis demonstrates is the apparent relationship between various government agendas, the commercialisation of universities and the distortion of the research activities by individual academics. For increased profits and efficiencies, individual scholars have paid the highest price.

If the accounting discipline is to be sustainable in the long term, business schools in Australia must reconfigure their performance measurement systems.

To date, research on “accountingisation” has previously been primarily conducted in the health and social services sectors. This research raises rarely heard voices to expose the actual social and human costs of accountingisation in Australia’s higher education sector.

The Australian higher education sector faces severe risks from the consequences of COVID-19. This paper aims to explore these risks, their immediate impacts and the likely future impacts. The authors specifically focus on the institutional financial and social risks arising from the global pandemic.

The authors collect data using the 2019 annual reports of the 37 Australian public universities and relevant media contributions. The findings of identified sector change are interpreted through Laughlin’s organisational change diagnosis.

The sector confronts significant financial and social risks because of its over-reliance on income from fee-paying onshore overseas students resulting in universities primarily undertaking morphostatic changes. These risks include job losses, changing employment conditions, mental health issues for students, scholars, other staff, including casual staff, online learning shortfalls and the student expectations of their university experience. The study reveals how many of these risks are the inevitable consequence of the “accountingisation” of Australian public universities.

Despite material exposure, the universities provide only limited disclosure of the extent of the risks associated with increasing dependence on overseas student fees to 31 December 2019. The analysis highlights fake accountability and distorted transparency to users of audited financial statements – a major limitation of university annual reports.

Research on the Australian higher education sector has mainly focussed on the impact of policies and changes. The public disclosure of critical risks taken by these universities are now addressed.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the perceptions of academic human capital (HC) towards a university’s research performance measurement system (PMS), in response to a national research assessment exercise (RAE).

This paper draws on a subset of the data from a large mixed method case study research project about the impact of ERA on an Australian public sector university.

The findings reveal that the research PMSs were designed, implemented and used as a tool to measure and manage the research performance of HC within the university. The case study university performed well in the RAE. However, this also led to several unintended consequences in the form of fear and anxiety, gaming and strategic initiatives, a focus on quantity and not the quality of research, and increased workload, which led to a loss in the stock of HC.

This empirical evidence can inform governments and policy makers of the unintended consequences of government research evaluations on academic HC. University managers could improve the design of HC management systems by not only measuring academic HC performance, but also providing training and resources to enhance, support and maintain the overall well-being of academics.

This study provides insights regarding the connection between a university’s PMS and academic HC and contributes to the academic literature on intellectual capital and PMSs.

The purpose of this paper is to examine prominent issues and knowledge contributions from research exploring measurement and assessment of accounting research, impact and engagement. This paper also provides an overview of the other papers presented in this AAAJ Special Issue and draws from their findings to scope out future impactful research opportunities in this area.

Consists of a review and examination of the prior literature and the other papers published in this AAAJ Special Issue.

The paper identifies and summarises three key research themes in the extant literature: research productivity of accounting academics; the rise of the “Corporate University” and commodification of research; and, the benefits and limitations of Research Assessment Exercises. It draws upon work within these research themes to set out four broad areas for future impactful research.

The value of this paper rests with collating and synthesising several important research themes on the nature and impact of measurement and assessment of accounting research, impact and engagement, and in prompting future extensions of this work through setting out areas for further innovative research in the area.

The research examined in this paper and the future research avenues proposed are highly relevant to university academics, administrators and regulators/policymakers. They also offer important insights into matters of accounting measurement, accountability, and control more generally.

This paper adds to vibrant existing streams of research in the area by bringing together authors from different areas of accounting research for this AAAJ Special Issue. In scoping out an agenda for impactful research in the nature and impact of measurement and assessment of accounting research, impact and engagement, this paper also draws attention to underexplored issues pertaining to areas such as the “lived experience” of academics in the corporatised university and envisioning what a future “optimal” system of measurement and assessment of research quality might look like?

This study explores the reactions of different categories of actors within a university setting (academics, administrative staff, governance members, and students) to implementing performance management system (PMS) changes. The paper aims to understand how these actors dealt with PMS change by discursively reconstructing their roles and positions at institutional and individual levels.

The authors use Foucault's (1972/1989) conceptualisation of regimes of truths to analyse the case of an Italian university. Interviews with individual actors took place in the period 2012–2020. The data were contextualised with other data from publicly available reports, internal documents, and archival material.

The paper identifies the challenges actors face dealing with contrasting discourses and draws attention to the paradoxical changes triggering resistance. However, the findings show that when circumstances allow a generative resistance, dissent can be progressively replaced with a commitment on the part of actors, achieving alignment with organisational strategy.

The study challenges the commonly held view of resistance as a dysfunctional force that impedes change. It emphasises the importance of focusing on actors to make resistance a generative force shaping change towards more negotiated and agreed positions. This has implications for academics and practitioners seeking to implement PMSs.

The purpose of this study is to examine the COVID-19 pandemic risk disclosures in a sample of annual reports of Australian public universities. These universities rely heavily on fee-paying onshore overseas students. Analysing these risk disclosures is essential to understanding the COVID-19 crisis and the implications for organisational change.

Document analysis and content analysis of the 2019 annual reports of all Victorian public universities were undertaken to identify the disclosure of COVID-19 risk impacts. Applying Laughlin's Habermasian insights of change, the study explores the pathways of change adopted by universities to overcome the risk impacts. However, financial risk disclosures about income from this source were virtually non-existent.

Any risk associated with COVID-19 disclosed was minimal in a qualitative, neutral and constant format. The quality of disclosures was low. Media statements, however, pointed to significant income loss and suggested a strategy of substantial cost-cutting, including employee redundancies, which we identified as morphostatic changes of universities to overcome the risk impacts.

The study reveals the risk associated with sector's aggressive growth strategy, jeopardising their financial viability and quality of teaching and research.

The findings provide insights to the Australian higher education sector. The low quality of external risk disclosures of these universities suggests an urgent need for transformation.

Australian public universities play a crucial role in society. This role will be diminished by a failure to disclose and manage significant risks adequately.

Given the importance of interdisciplinary research in addressing wicked problems, this paper aims to explore the development of and prospects for interdisciplinary research through evidence gained from academic accountants in Australia.

Extant literature is complemented with interviews of accounting academics in Australia to reveal the challenges and opportunities facing interdisciplinary researchers and reimagine prospects for the future.

Evidence indicates that accounting academics hold diverse views toward interdisciplinarity. There is also confusion between multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity in the journals in which academic accountants publish. Further, there is mixed messaging among Deans, disciplinary leaders and emerging scholars about the importance of interdisciplinary research to, on the one hand, publish track records and, on the other, secure grants from government and industry. Finally, there are differing perceptions about the disciplines to be encouraged or accepted in the cross-fertilisation of ideas.

This paper is novel in gathering first-hand data about the opportunities, challenges and tensions accounting academics face in collaborating with others in interdisciplinary research. It confirms a discouraging pressure for emerging scholars between the academic research outputs required to publish in journals, prepare reports for industry and secure research funding, with little guidance for how these tensions might be managed.

This paper explores how neoliberalism restrains the ability of governments to respond to crises through budgetary action. It examines the immediate budgetary responses to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Australian government and explores how the conditions created by prior neoliberal policies have limited these responses.

A review and examination of the prior literature on public budgeting and new public management are provided. The idea of a “neoliberal straitjacket” is used to frame the current budgetary and economic situation in Australia.

The paper examines the chronology of Australia's budgetary responses to the economic and health crisis created by COVID-19. These responses have taken the form of tax breaks and a temporary payment scheme for individuals made unemployed by the pandemic.

The insights gained from this paper may help with future policy developments and promote future research on similar crises.

The analysis of Australia's policies in dealing with the pandemic may offer insights for other countries struggling to cope with the fiscal consequences of COVID-19.