Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the shifting nature of governance reforms, both at global and national levels, in the increasingly commercialised game of cricket. The authors explore the inter-relationship and linkages between governance and commercialism, and in the process, question the contemporary reliance placed on governance as a generic counter-commercialist force and accountability aid.

The analysis is based on a comprehensive analysis of cricketing archives, newspapers and online media. The authors specifically utilise a range of review reports, governance and accounting information from annual reports and websites of the International Cricket Council (ICC) as well as different national cricket governing bodies (NCBs).

The paper vividly demonstrates the importance of recognising the specific significance of different cultural traditions and modes of organising – and not presuming a particular form of impact. The findings highlight that the adoption of a dominant market logic by cricket administrators has resulted in a shift in the balance of power in favour of non-western nations. India has emerged as the clear leader and driving force shaping the way cricket is globally governed. The consequences have been profound but not in terms of delivering, enhanced standards of transparency and accountability. Drawing on institutional theory, the paper argues that the scale of the Board of Cricket Control of India’s financial and operational control over the ICC has not only led to an increasingly commercialised game but engendered divergent and highly questionable standards of governance at the level of NCBs.

Unlike other global games, cricket has an imperialistic root, and has gone through the process of globalisation in relatively recent times. Also, the commercialisation of cricket has resulted in the global economic and power base shifting from the West to the East, giving us the opportunity to study the dynamics between commercialisation and governance in a quite different globalisation context that allows an assessment to be made of the culturally contingent nature of governance as a substantive organising force.

The era of austerity that has followed the outbreak of the global financial crisis has posed a myriad of challenges for public services, with demands for major cuts in government spending, the delivery of balanced budgets and zstrategies for deficit reduction. The purpose of this paper is to consider how public sector accounting and accountability systems are implicated in the development and implementation of austerity policies. Also, it pinpoints a range of issues that accounting researchers need to be contemplating on the subject of accounting for austerity.

Interdisciplinary literature review, coupled with an illustrative discussion of the changing nature of public sector accounting practices under austerity.

Despite the significance and scale of austerity, public sector accounting research on the topic is in its infancy, with the prominent focus being on how accounting technologies are used to manage austerity. There have been few attempts to debate critically the construction of austerity and to provide alternative accounts of austerity. Accounting for austerity, especially in terms of its implications and consequences, is far too complex and challenging to be categorized as simply seeking to “balance the books”.

As an academic community, we need to be developing understanding of public sector accounting research under austerity across different organizational levels and contexts. Also, we should be framing the accounts of austerity in ways that respect and build on a sound understanding of the extensive available interdisciplinary research on this topic. Key research questions to address include: how is accounting shaping constructions of, and impressions, attitudes and behaviors toward, austerity and the status of governments and public service organizations? What do such patterns of development mean for the roles and contributions of public sector accountants under austerity? Are accounting systems destined to be used primarily as vehicles for cost-cutting, or can they be used as engines for growth and for thinking about public service responsibilities in more socially inclusive forms?

Accountings of austerity in the field of public sector accounting research have been worryingly limited. This paper and the papers in this special issue of AAAJ address such failings, revealing a range of critical implications and challenges of austerity policies for public sector accounting research.

The starting point for the paper is an assessment of the impact of a 1993 special issue of Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, which provided an interdisciplinary analysis of the pursuit of accountable management reforms in the UK public sector. From this assessment, the paper offers a set of reflections on the development over the last two decades of “new” public management practice and research, and also indicates some of the obligations and responsibilities of academic researchers and managers alike in the context of a continuing appetite for such reforms.

The paper is written in a reflective fashion, including assessments of: our role as guest editors of the special issue; the continuing pertinence of key messages emanating from the special issue; and broader considerations drawn from our own working experience in managerial roles in universities and personal reflections on the state of the public management literature.

The paper highlights the long‐standing litany of failure attached to such public management reform movements, as well as the limited degree of cross‐disciplinary learning within the field. The paper emphasises that we need to rethink the parameters of “public sector” (accounting) research, and avoid the partitioning of (accounting) research into ever smaller and self‐referential sub‐areas. We need more cross‐national studies. We need to know more about which management practices travel readily, and which travel less easily, and what happens when implementation is problematic. We need also to reinforce the importance of historical analyses, if we are to derive the most benefit from studies of the interrelations among accounting and public management reforms and wider transformations in ways of governing economic and social life. Finally, we need to retain or reinstate curiosity at the heart of our concerns, in order to dispel the self‐evidence or taken‐for‐grantedness of so much of our present.

Personal reflections, while being beneficially close to the subject under consideration, inevitably suffer from claims of bias and a lack of independence. We have sought to control for such risks by drawing on a variety of sources of information with respect to impact, including (albeit ironically) citation counts and an analysis of the writings of individual authors contributing to the special issue.

The paper is novel in that it seeks to combine an analysis of the literature on public sector accounting and management reforms over several decades with our own, multi‐faceted, engagement with public management research and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a personal, reflective analysis of publications over the last decade in Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management (QRAM) and to assess the implications for the future development of the journal, the practice of qualitative accounting research and the broader standing of the accounting discipline.

Reviewing QRAM published papers across a range of themes, including the spirit of generated debate, the representation and classification of qualitative research and the range of contributory authors. Using the review to identify important patterns and trends in the standing and practice of qualitative accounting research.

Highlighting the existence and contribution of numerous carefully crafted, thought provoking papers published in QRAM and drawing on them to present a number of important challenges, priorities and attractive opportunities for the future development of qualitative accounting research. Encouraging greater diversity, flexibility and creativity in the undertaking and utilisation of qualitative accounting research.

Emphasising how thinking differently about the emotions and lived experiences of qualitative accounting research(ers) can serve to inspire theoretical development, enhance trust in researcher judgement, and stimulate more fruitful and intellectually rewarding ways of doing qualitative accounting research.

Reminding of the value of reading papers as compared to relying on formal journal rankings. Revealing residing defensiveness tendencies in the undertaking of qualitative accounting research and arguing that restrictive representations and conceptions of “legitimate” qualitative accounting research are constraining what can be achieved and experienced both by individual accounting researchers and the discipline more generally.

The purpose of the paper is to outline the development of academic research in the discipline of accounting, paying particular attention to the important contribution made by qualitative research projects.

Provision of a historical trajectory based on a review of developments in academic journals, the size and breadth of the academic community and other dimensions of the academic discipline of accounting.

The review indicates that accounting has developed into a pluralist discipline in the UK. Qualitative research features in many sub‐disciplinary areas of accounting.

The paper identifies the sibling discipline of finance as an area where qualitative research has not developed fully. It makes some suggestions and provides some indicators of how qualitative research in the areas of accounting and finance may develop in the future.

The paper provides the only attempt to date to analyse and review developments of qualitative research in accounting.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how management control (MC) within governmental departments is used in times of austerity, and how insights from agency and stewardship theory can enhance the understanding of this issue.

The authors distinguish two types of MC (constraining and facilitating) based on their different assumptions regarding human behavior (agent-like and steward-like). The authors empirically analyze changes in the use of these types of MC in four cases located in two municipalities. The collected data consists of 51 semi-structured interviews, desk research and multiple field observations.

The authors find that MC at the departmental level becomes more constraining in times of austerity. The authors suggest that an overemphasis on constraining MC has negative consequences. It can, for instance, evoke agent-like, opportunistic behavior while it disregards potential steward-like behavior. These negative consequences are less prevalent when there is a simultaneous increase in emphasis on the use of facilitating MC elements.

The authors acknowledge “human ambivalence,” i.e. an employee’s recurring choice between agent-like and steward-like behavior, and illustrate the dangers of overly relying on constraining types of MC. The authors also contemplate alternative strategic managerial responses to austerity in a public sector context.

Conventional texts on research methods research have a tendency to provide acontextual prescriptive accounts of how research should be carried out. The authors of this paper have recently compiled an edited collection of accounts of how qualitative research was carried out in a variety of social and organizational contexts. This paper seeks to convey some of the real life stories behind actual research projects. It explains the motivations for the book, reviews its central themes and documents some of the authors’ personal experiences in compiling the collection.

The auditor′s responsibility with respect to fraud has been one of the issues which has been associated most persistently with questions about the adequacy of audit performance. Examines the way in which the position of the accountancy profession in Britain on this subject developed during the 1980s – a period of considerable professional activity with respect to the issue of the auditor and fraud. While the profession has been persuaded to accept additional responsibilities concerning the reporting of detected fraud, it is argued that no such development has occurred with respect to the auditor′s responsibilities concerning fraud detection. The current nature of the auditor′s duties regarding fraud detection is seen as contestable. While further government action may force the profession to assume additional responsibilities in this respect, any such developments are seen as needing more detailed investigation of the precise capacities of audit practice in detecting (particularly management) fraud.

Seeks to promote discussion of the pursuit of accountable management in public sector organizations by providing a commentary on post‐1979 experiences with such reforms in the UK public sector. Particular attention is given to the nature and impact on the UK public sector of the neoliberal agenda which took particular charge during the Thatcher years, the position of accountable management reforms in this agenda, and some of the factors underlying the promotion, implementation, acceptance and resistance of such reforms. Explores the paradoxical nature of both neoliberalism and the accountable management reforms promoted in its name. Gives consideration to the construction and pursuit of alternative agendas and approaches regarding the provision of public services.

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.