Search results

The paper explores the process of construction of the “accountable self”, particularly as this process engages with the spirituality of the self. This study examines the “space of accountability” within which the accountable self constructs itself as such and investigates how different accounts of the self are drawn upon in the making of this space, both defining and transcending it.

The paper relies upon archival material concerning accounting and accountability practices about the project for building the altar of St. Ignatius in the Church of Gesù, Rome, Italy (1691–1706). This study examines calculative and narrative accounts about the project from the perspective of the superintendent, who was the sole person accountable for the building works.

Whereas calculative accounts enabled the self to account for actions within the specific space of accountability of the project, narrative accounts opened up this space, providing for a testimony of actions and a gift of accountability towards future indefinite others. This process was prompted by the spirituality of the self and the narcissistic gratification of fulfilling this spirituality.

The paper adds to the literature on the accountable self and to theological perspectives into accountability. This study suggests exploring how different accounts of the self engage with each other through testimony, gift, narcissism and spirituality in the construction of the accountable self, providing for a “transcendent” space of accountability. This research also adds to studies on narrative accounts by showing that they are drawn upon alongside calculative accounts in the construction of the transcendent, accountable self.

Accountability is ubiquitous in social systems, and its necessity is magnified in formal organizations, whose purpose has been argued to predict and control behavior. The very notion of organizing necessitates answering to others, and this feature implies an interface of work and social enterprises, the individuals comprising them, and subunits from dyads to divisions. Because the nature of workplace accountability is multi-level as well as interactive, single-level conceptualizations of the phenomenon are incomplete and inherently misleading. In response, this chapter sets forth a meso-level conceptualization of accountability, which develops a more comprehensive understanding of this pervasive and imperative phenomenon. The meso model presented integrates contemporary theory and research, and extends our perspectives beyond individual, group, unit, or organizational perspectives toward a unitary whole. Following this is a description of challenges and opportunities facing scholars conducting accountability research (e.g., data collection and analysis and non-traditional conceptualizations of workplace phenomenon). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed, as are directions for future research.

The study explores the role of accounting technologies of government (ATGs) associated with UK Tax Credits and their impact on claimants' motivations, behaviour and identities. The aim of this study is to deepen empirical and conceptual understandings of how ATGs of tax authorities transform claimants into “entrepreneurs of the self”.

The authors approach Tax Credits (TC) as a case study to examine how ATGs articulate and operationalise neoliberal ideology through a complex network of inscription devices, expertise and locales. They adopt an ethnographic approach based on interviews, archival data and field notes to gain a deep understanding of citizens' lived experiences of ATGs when claiming Tax Credits.

The authors find that ATGs play a key role in transforming TC claimants into self-disciplined “citizen-subjects” whose decisions are informed by market logic. When claiming TC, citizens interact with ATGs and are transformed into “entrepreneurs of the self” who internalise neoliberal ideology and associated beliefs and assumptions of poverty, work and the welfare state. In this process of subjectification, ATGs (re)construct their identities from welfare recipients to “responsible” and “accountable” hardworking individuals and families. However, ATGs perversely disempower claimants who lack the required human capital for becoming responsible for their own welfare, and thus ultimately maintain socio-economic inequality.

Participants were drawn from a relatively narrow geographic area.

The authors reveal how accounting as a technology of government (dis)empowers individuals vis-à-vis the state and spurs inequality dependent on personal circumstances and calculative skills.

The authors contribute to the accounting literature by showing how neoliberal ideology is articulated, operationalised and reinforced by dynamic and repetitive interactions with ATGs of the UK TC scheme. The study helps deepen the understanding of the processes through which socially and economically disadvantaged individuals are transformed into self-governing economic agents responsible for their own welfare.

This article of exploratory research provides a critical perspective on accountability, focusing on three characteristics: transparency, asymmetry and individual agency. An experimental method is developed, calling for an ethics of accountability.

Four entrepreneurs have given accounts of themselves and their projects in life cycle interviews. This article applies Devereux's approach (1967), which allows for opacity (the “unconscious”) to oneself and to others with symmetry between analysts and analysed, and a lack of demarcation between the observer and the observed.

A tragic entrepreneurial accountability trap of continuous self-justification was discovered, which pertains both to the entrepreneurs and the researchers. Nonetheless, the researchers as inspired by Devereux's method were able to realize a form of accounterability.

This article shows that the demands for transparent, asymmetrical and agentive accountability call for ethical reflection. The request for accounts, as resulting in the accounts given and the research conducted into accountability, are all sources of constraints. Differing the accountability situation may lessen the constraints.

This study introduces Devereux's method as an investigative tool in accountability research, opening up new perspectives on communication and analysis. This article shows the researcher as situated both inside and outside of the accountability mechanisms. This article explores a singular form of accountability; that of entrepreneurs who seemingly only account for the future, thereby disconnecting them from others.

Worker participation is suddenly a household word. It is being written about in the media and used in speeches as if it were a new piece of equipment, like a computer, that can be installed easily in any work organization. The impression gained is that to have worker participation, one need only have workers participate in management meetings. The purpose of this paper is to propose a method of implementing change which can cope with the difficult problems faced when implementing worker participation.

This paper explores why and how, and in what context, individuals' accounting of self, ethics and morality and self-knowledge of the limits of accountability can frame their account giving and judging in an organisational formal performance evaluation process.

Building upon the Butlerian notions of accountability as advanced by Messner (2009) and Roberts (2009), the authors conducted a qualitative field study at a Vietnamese public university, involving face-to-face interviews, observation of performance evaluation meetings and examination of archival documents.

The authors found that individuals experience conflicting ethical and moral values when they rely on their self-knowledge of accountability (the ability to self-account) in their account giving and judging in the university's formal academic performance evaluation process. In addition, the authors found that when individuals want to provide the best account to the account demander, their understanding of their ability to self-account and the formal organisational accountability process influence their views on what authentic account giving means. As a result, enhanced ethics-to-others has the potential to be an ethical burden and may not lead to authentic or beyond minimum accounting of “self”. Yet, in the Vietnamese socio-cultural and political context within which the university operates, and in the situation of ethical and moral conflicts in self-accountability, the authors found evidence of individuals' self-accountability behaviours that is based on the co-existence of a sense of responsibility to others and self-knowledge of the limits of accountability.

Although this study was limited to one Vietnamese public university, its findings enhance the knowledge about how individual ethical and moral values, self-knowledge of the limits of accountability and the formal organisational accountability process connect with each other in the socio-cultural and political context within which an organisation operates.

The study highlights the role of the context of local socio-cultural norms and values and of physical social interaction in developing the sense of connection to others, which influences the way individuals' ethical and moral values are mobilised to shape account-giving and judging behaviours.

The emphasis on the role of the sense of connection to others on personal accountability and the emphasis on physical, face-to-face interaction in developing sense of connection to others leads to an interesting issue regarding the sense of connection in the virtual social interaction setting, which has become increasingly popular globally, especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and its implication for the use of personal ethical and moral values in organisational accountability practices.

Adding to the conversation on how a formal organisational accountability process can be effective, this study identified (1) the unpredictable outcomes of using ethics as rules for accountability practices due to potentially conflicting ethical values; (2) the diverse understandings of self-accounting, leading to different ideas of authentic accounting; and (3) the possibility of moral accountability behaviours based on the co-existence of a sense of connection to others and an understanding of the limits of accountability.

The purpose of this study is to examine how accountability is constructed for blockchain systems. With the aim of increasing knowledge on accountability across three different types of blockchains (public, private and consortium), the researchers ask: how do blockchain systems construct accountability?

This study draws on theorising in the accountability literature to study how blockchains relate to our construction and understanding of accountability. A qualitative field study of the Australian blockchain technology landscape is conducted, with insights garnered from 18 blockchain experts.

Findings reveal that different types of blockchains employ different forms and mechanisms of accountability and in novel ways previously less acknowledged in the literature. Importantly, this study finds that accountability does not require a principal–agent relation and can still manifest in less pure applications of blockchain technology across a wide range of stakeholders, contrary to that espoused in earlier exhortations of blockchain use in interdisciplinary literature. This study also finds that similar subtypes of accountability operate very differently across public, private and consortium blockchains and there exists an inverse relation between trust and consensus building through transparency as blockchains progress from public to private types. Overall, this study offers novel explanations for the relevance of greater accountability in blockchains, especially when the assumptions of public blockchains are softened and applied as private and consortium blockchains.

This study contributes to the accountability literature by addressing how different blockchain systems reshape the understanding of traditional accounting and accountability practices. This study questions the very need for a principal–agent relation to facilitate accountability and offers an additional perspective to how trust and transparency operate as key mechanisms of accountability.

The No Child Left Behind Act (2002) and Race to the Top (2009) led to the highest rate of standardized-state testing in the history of the United States of America. As a result, the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) aims to reevaluate standardized-state testing. Previous research has assessed its impact on schools, educators, and students; yet, youth’s voices are almost absent. Therefore, this qualitative analysis examines how youth of color perceive and experience standardized-state testing.

Seventy-three youth participated in a semistructured interview during the summer of 2015. The sample consists of 34 girls and 39 boys, 13–18 years of age, of African American, Latino/a, Jamaican American, multiracial/ethnic, and other descent. It includes 6–12th graders who attended 61 inter-district and intra-district schools during the 2014–2015 academic year in a Northeastern metropolitan area in the United States that is undergoing a racial/ethnic integration reform.

Youth experienced testing overload under conflicting adult authorities and within an academically stratified peer culture on an ever-shifting policy terrain. While the parent-adult authority remained in the periphery, the state-adult authority intrusively interrupted the teacher-student power dynamics and the disempowered teacher-adult authority held youth accountable through the “attentiveness” rhetoric. However, youth’s perspectives and lived experiences varied across grade levels, school modalities, and school-geographical locations.

In this adult-dominated society, the market approach to education reform ultimately placed the burden of teacher and school evaluation on youth. Most importantly, youth received variegated messages from their conflicting adult authorities that threatened their academic journeys.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how external auditors communicate with audit committees (ACs).

A total of 53 interviews were conducted with participants in the ACs of 22 French companies listed in the CAC 40 index, including external and internal auditors, CFOs, AC chairpersons, and members.

In multiple accountability relationships, external auditors sit in the middle. They therefore use impression management (IM). While AC members expect them to be transparent, they are also expected to preserve managers’ “face” by sustaining impressions of consistency. The construction of impressions of consistency and transparency takes place mainly backstage, through time-consuming teamwork shared by auditors and CFOs. External auditors have power to make things transparent, but the use of such power is tricky, because it can damage relationships with CFOs. External auditors have a difficult “discrepant role” (Goffman, 1959) to play.

This study provides insights into what occurs behind the scenes with ACs, which can help regulators think deeper about relationships between external auditors and ACs.

This research makes contribution to governance, IM, and AC literature. It analyzes the AC process from external auditors’ – rather than AC members’ – points of view. Highlighting the AC process backstage, it shows that IM can be carried out collectively toward an internal rather than external audience and demonstrates that external auditors practice rather than limiting IM.