Search results

As has been pointed out throughout this edition the whole concept of financial control in the literature has been treated in rather a narrow, confused way. The purpose of this present article is not to repeat these arguments but rather to highlight a major omission in the literature and this edition — the whole idea of what could be called “external” financial control.

Accounting systems find their meaning and nature in the historical and social context of the organisations of which they are part. These social and technical aspects are amplified and their interrelationships traced through a specific study of the accounting systems in the Church of England. Although many of the insights are situation specific to this institution, some more general points are raised.

There has been considerable interest in the theory and practice of organisation change. Similarly there has been a great deal of attention given to the processes that lead to and result from accounting change within organisations. There has also been a more limited interest in the interaction and interrelationship between these two literatures. In this paper we explore these different literatures and provide a perspective on this extensive research. The contents are not intended to be a systematic summary of this voluminous literature but rather a recounting of our own views on how we have engaged with this material, as a precursor to thoughts on a future research agenda for these important issues. The paper starts by posing four questions related to organisational and accounting change, the answers to which circumscribe how these themes can be approached theoretically and empirically. Based on our answers to these questions we then move into perspectives on understanding organisations, understanding organisational change and understanding accounting change within an organisational change context. From this analysis the paper concludes with some suggestions on a possible future research agenda on these important organisational issues.

This paper offers a critique of the sacred and secular dichotomy, a theoretical framework recently introduced into the accounting and accountability literature primarily by Laughlin and Booth. The divide has been used to interpret the ambiguous roles of accountants and accounting practices within religious organizations.

The present paper examines the divide by drawing on H. Richard Niebuhr's narrative theology, and in particular, the distinction that he draws between “internal history” and “external history”. Niebuhr's discussion of internal/external history and his typology of social action are used to demonstrate the many ways that religious communities balance faith and social practice.

The paper argues that the activities and contributions of accountants and accounting practices are not by virtue of their secularity antithetical to the values of religious organizations. It contends that within many religious settings, secular activities, such as accounting, often co‐exist, promote and are used to support religious beliefs and practices.

The paper challenges the dominant paradigm by highlighting the importance of adopting flexible theoretical frameworks.

It will be of value to accounting and accountability researchers who are seeking to gain a better understanding of the fit between accounting practices and the internal histories of religions.

This chapter examines organisational change processes that occur when accountability demands from powerful external stakeholders change. It investigates, firstly, whether these external accountability demands impact on the performance management systems of two different types of organisations. Secondly, it considers whether the goals for improved performance contained within the external accountability demands are realised. The chapter derives its primary insights from analysing in-depth interviews with managers working in a private sector company and in public sector organisations. The analyses reveal complex organisational responses. In the public sector case study, the organisations tended to reorient their performance management systems towards the external accountability demands; whilst in the private sector organisation, pressures from falling share prices forced managers to focus their decision making on the preferred performance measures contained in shareholders’ accountability demands. However, whilst there is some evidence of performance management system changes, the desires for improved performance subsumed by the external accountability demands are not necessarily realised through the performance management system changes.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the sociology‐of‐science type of accounting literature, addressing how accounting knowledge is established, advanced and extended.

The research question is answered through the example of research into linkages between accounting and religion. Adopting an actor‐network theory (ANT) approach, the paper follows the actors involved in the construction of accounting as an academic discipline through the controversies in which they engage to develop knowledge.

The paper reveals that accounting knowledge is established, advanced and developed through the ongoing mobilisation of nonhumans (journals) who can enrol other humans and nonhumans. It shows that knowledge advancement, establishment and development is more contingent on network breadth than on research paradigms, which appear as side‐effects of positioning vis‐à‐vis a community.

The originality of this paper is twofold. First, ANT is applied to accounting knowledge, whereas the accounting literature applies it to the spread of management accounting ideas, methods and practices. Second, an original methodology for data collection is developed by inviting authors from the network to give a reflexive account of their writings at the time they joined the network. Well diffused in sociology and philosophy, such an approach is, albeit, original in accounting research.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a response to a comment written by Richard Laughlin on a previous paper by the authors, which appeared in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Volume 23 Number 6.

The paper addresses three issues central to the analysis of the comment on their past paper.

In addressing each of the issues in turn the authors clarify their analysis.

The paper provides an argument for the development of a paradigm for accounting practice derived from the use of pragmatic constructivism.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the origins and development of the “Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal (AAAJ) Community”, a flourishing international interdisciplinary accounting research community. This scholarly community has emerged over some 30 years from the publication in 1988 of the inaugural issue of AAAJ under the joint editorship of James Guthrie and Lee Parker. This historical account discusses the motivation for establishing the journal and the important publishing initiatives, developments and trends across this period. The study positions the journal as a key thought leader, the catalyst for other Community activities such as the Asia-Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting conference.

The investigation involved a selective review of the contents of AAAJ, particularly the annual editorials published since inception, and other relevant literature, analysis of the main research themes and the most cited papers, and oral history interviews with the joint editors. The future prospects for the AAAJ Community are addressed.

The AAAJ Community has shaped and led developments in interdisciplinary accounting research. Recognised for innovation and with a reputation for nurturing scholars, AAAJ continues to grow in stature as one of the world’s leading accounting journals, challenging the status quo and fostering inclusive scholarship.

The study does not examine the journal’s publication patterns nor assess in detail the research studies that have been published in the journal.

The study recognises AAAJ as central to the development of an interdisciplinary accounting research community, firmly located in the sociological, critical and interpretative tradition also associated with some other leading accounting journals.

Engages with the call for more case study research and provides an example of a methodology informed by a Habermasian approach. Seeks to clarify the methodology and the methods adopted and provides an example of “middle range” thinking (Laughlin, 1995). Extends the insights provided by Laughlin (1987) in his argument for the adoption of critical theory and can be seen as entering into a discourse with this earlier work. Located in the context of an ongoing programme of research in the UK public sector, seeks to provide an exemplar of the application of a Habermasian discourse‐based approach, as well as providing an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the approach in practice. In the spirit of “middle range” thinking appears to use the frameworks provided as a foundation from which to commence the research process, yet use the experiences gained in undertaking the research as a way to develop the frameworks themselves.

The “new public management” (NPM) “reforms” have been extensive in the public sector in the UK. The paper’s primary focus is on the managerial and organizational effects of these accounting and finance‐led changes in the specific context of schools and GP practices. Central to the paper’s analysis and conclusion is the way that, in both these areas, many of the changes are perceived as unhelpful, intrusive and potentially dangerous for the nature of the core activities and values which underlie these organizations. The organizational effect of this dominant attitude is to develop appropriate “absorbing” mechanisms to “manage” these changing “disturbances” so that core activities and values remain unaffected. The paper develops, in two ways, the published analyses of these absorption processes: first, by providing a comparison over time of these absorption processes in schools and GP practices using a wider data set and second, by extending the analysis to show how these processes change as the nature of the “disturbances” shift and develop over time. The paper ends with a call for a wide‐ranging evaluation of the merit and worth of these “reforms” both generally and in the specific context of schools and GP practices.