Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the complexity of the network governance setting affects accountability practices. The authors pay particular attention to the organizational characteristics that may enable a common understanding of multiple accountability relationships, or lead to problems in reconciling competing forms of accountability, thereby appearing as blame game-type behavior.

The authors conducted a case study with 31 semi-structured interviews in a Finnish health care organization (FHC) that offers basic public health care services. The organization represents a co-operative arrangement with the main city and three smaller municipalities. The FHC has faced difficulties in balancing budget constraints with the provision of statutory care to citizens. This case is analyzed with the help of theories relating to accountability, the blame game, and dialogue.

The authors found that in the FHC operating under austerity constraints, attempts to reconcile financial, professional, and democratic accountability were made but, instead of dialogue and consensus, the different stakeholder groups resorted to defensive tactics in order to protect their resources, position, or sense of professional obligation. The authors suggest that in a context of network governance, accompanied by an increasing emphasis on financial accountability, organizational practices are susceptible to conflicting accountabilities and behavior characterized in this paper as a blame game.

The study contributes to the empirical studies on accountability in the new public governance context by analyzing the complex accountability relations between stakeholder groups with different agendas. The authors suggest organizational characteristics that may exacerbate conflicts between different stakeholder groups and prevent constructive dialogue. Furthermore, the study analyzes the composition of democratic accountability within the studied organization.

Political parties frequently engage in exclusionary narratives resulting in a game of blame-shifting. While this is understandably part of political life, claiming responsibility is decreasing and blame attribution is increasing in times of crisis as political actors seek to minimise political cost and rally supporters. Crises also create fertile ground for polarisation as affected citizens look for quick solutions and are driven to the extremes of the political spectrum. That effect has been demonstrated in Greece (Capelos & Exadaktylos, 2017; Vasilopoulou et al., 2014): political parties in the first years of the Greek financial crisis (2009–2012) engaged in an endless game of blame-shifting and exclusion, which was replicated within opinion pieces within mainstream press. This resulted in the polarisation of society with new political cleavages emerging, most notably on the pro/antiausterity divide. Within the context of this divide populist rhetoric assisted exclusion as the two sides tried to demarcate boundaries, identify allies and enemies and reinforce a ‘Them’ vs ‘Us’ dichotomy to consolidate their identities.

This chapter assesses how embedded this divide has become in setting up the electoral campaigns for the 2019 General Election between the two main contenders, Syriza and New Democracy in the way they projected their political narrative in the public sphere. Using substantive content analysis of framing, this chapter collected opinion pieces written from the day the election was announced (26 May) to day after the result (8 July) in two newspapers: New Democracy–leaning Kathimerini and Syriza-leaning Avgi. This chapter identified the blame frames of the two sides and assessed polarisation by coding for the tone of references using an exclusivity index as developed by Vasilopoulou et al. (2014). The findings suggest that both newspapers engaged in a race of blame, bringing the political debate to the forefront and ensuring that polarisation was transferred into the public sphere, consolidating the ‘them’ vs ‘us’ divide.

The study examines how calculative practices and accountability appear in a rural community of marginalised people in Egypt who depend on jasmine plantations that contribute to the production of global essences.

The data were collected from various sources, namely conversations with villagers, documents and relevant videos and news available on social media and the Internet. This study draws on the concepts of social accountability, the politics of blame avoidance and using calculative practices as a language to explain accountability in context.

The author found a lack of accountability on the part of the government and business owners, with serious implications for the livelihoods of people in a community that has been wholly dependent on jasmine plantations for a century. Power holders have deployed a blame-shifting game to avoid social responsibility. In response, calculative practices rather than advanced accounting tools are used by the poor in the community to induce power holders to be accountable.

The findings of this study show that authorities need to take proactive steps to address the disadvantaged position of powerless people in the lower echelons of society, recognising their accountability for those people.

This paper enhances the understanding of the status of calculative practices and accountability in a community of marginalised people who contribute to the production of global commodities. The paper also enhances the understanding of what goes on behind the scenes with popular and prestigious commodities, whose development is initiated in poor countries, with the end product marketed in rich Western countries.

The purpose of this paper is to explore general practitioners' (GPs') and psychiatrists' views and experiences of transparent forms of medical regulation in practice, as well as those of medical regulators and those representing patients and professionals.

The research included interviews with GPs, psychiatrists and others involved in medical regulation, representing patients and professionals. A qualitative narrative analysis of the interviews was then conducted.

Narratives suggest rising levels of complaints, legalisation and blame within the National Health Service (NHS). Three key themes emerge. First, doctors feel “guilty until proven innocent” within increasingly legalised regulatory systems and are consequently practising more defensively. Second, regulation is described as providing “spectacular transparency”, driven by political responses to high profile scandals rather than its effects in practice, which can be seen as a social defence. Finally, it is suggested that a “blame business” is driving this form of transparency, in which self‐interested regulators, the media, lawyers, and even some patient organisations are fuelling transparency in a wider culture of blame.

A relatively small number of people were interviewed, so further research testing the findings would be useful.

Transparency has some perverse effects on doctors' practice.

Rising levels of blame has perverse consequences for patient care, as doctors are practicing more defensively as a result, as well as significant financial implications for NHS funding.

Transparent forms of regulation are assumed to be beneficial and yet little research has examined its effects in practice. In this paper we highlight a number of perverse effects of transparency in practice.

Drawing upon new institutional theory and blame avoidance theory, this paper aims to examine how stakeholder pressure has an impact on the implementation and use of risk management practices in public administrations. Furthermore, this paper investigates whether top management support mediates this proposed relationship.

This paper is based on a survey among public financial managers of German municipalities and federal agencies. Data from 136 questionnaires were used to evaluate the model.

The results indicate that top management support fully mediates the relationship between stakeholder pressure and risk management practices. This finding suggests that top management support is crucial for the successful implementation of accounting techniques, such as risk management, in public administrations.

This study is based on subjective answers by public financial managers. Moreover, this study is based solely on German data. Hence, future research could use a mixed-method approach and data from other countries.

This paper examines whether stakeholder pressure exerts an impact on the sophistication of public risk management practices.

An essential part of any customer experience management strategy is providing a seamless experience. One of the roadblocks, often a recurring barrier, is the presence of silos. Many people see corporate silos as a function of the organisational structure. But that is only one part of the problem. Influencing siloed mindsets across the length and breadth of the organisation is probably a more significant challenge. The siloed structure and mindset together impact the culture of the organisation that, in turn, affects their quality of customer experience management. This chapter covers the essential aspects of understanding the meaning of silos, including a historical, cultural and organisational perspective on what creates silos. While silos are inevitable, their adverse consequences are not. This chapter provides directions on how to overcome the adverse aspects of silos, thereby enabling better management of customer experiences. Multiple examples, from a customer as well as an organisation point of view, are used to highlight this dimension. The chapter also covers the role of a leader in breaking a silo culture and enabling successful application of various strategies for customer experience management.

Evaluation in general and performance indicator systems in particular play an increasing role in society. We do not have a long historical set of experiences which helps us understand what exactly happens when, say, performance data for schools are made public on the internet and in news, because the emerging rules of the game in what some observers call the “knowledge society” (Stehr, 1994, 2001) and “reflexive modernization” (Beck, 1997a, 1997b) have inaugurated new relations between evaluation and performance data on the one hand and political, organizational and practical realities on the other.

This paper aims to clarify the potential to use data on doctors and fitness to practise (FTP) cases held by the UK General Medical Council (GMC) for wider regulatory purposes, such as identifying risk factors. The paper aims to concentrate on how data are shaped by the GMC's functions and organisational concerns, and by the configuration and use of their electronic database.

The GMC provided samples of their data, access to documentation surrounding the configuration and use of the database, and meetings with staff able to provide background on the database, GMC procedures, and the GMC as an organisation.

The FTP database is designed to process cases within complex legal rules, and to provide for accountability. The database and its use are adapted to these purposes. Attempts to use it for other purposes are likely to find it difficult to use, the scope and quality of data uneven and some codes unsuitable. The register data are very narrow in scope. While combining register and FTP data to identify risk factors is by itself of limited value, the database can contribute to closer study of risks to patient safety from poorly performing doctors.

The research was exploratory. It provides initial insights and the basis for further research.

The data have potential policy use for the GMC, but it is essential to understand the limitations.

The paper examines previously unanalysed influences on the GMC's data. It also develops new angles on questions in the regulation literature about organisational risks and the creation of risk data.