Search results

This paper seeks to explore the way charity accountants understand, interpret and legitimate or delegitimate the introduction of accounting and reporting changes (embedded in the extant charity statement of recommended practice), before these are actually implemented.

Drawing on 21 semi-structured interviews with accountants in large UK and Republic of Ireland charities, the manner and extent to which forthcoming changes in charity accounting are legitimated (justified) or delegitimated (criticised) is explored.

Acceptance of accounting changes in the charity sector by formal regulation may not be necessary for future required adjustments to practice to be legitimated. Using interviews carried out before the implementation of required changes, the results suggest that other factors, such as national culture, identity and mimetic behaviours, may play a major role in the homogenisation and acceptance of accounting and reporting rules. In particular, it is argued that mimetic pressures can be much more influential than regulative pressures in legitimating change in the charity sector and are more likely to lead to the embedding of change.

The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it explores rhetoric and legitimation strategies used before changes are actually implemented. Second, it contributes to filling a gap in charities’ research related to intra-organisational legitimation of managerial and accounting changes, illustrating institutional-field identity at work to preserve shared organisational values and ideas. Finally, the research illuminates the importance of particular contextual pressures and individual legitimation arguments during accounting-change processes.

Drawing on an accountability framework developed for social enterprise organizations (SEOs), this paper examines the annual report disclosure practices of SEOs in the United Kingdom in order to investigate the types of accountability disclosed by SEOs.

After developing a SEO database, and utilizing a bespoke document coding checklist, the annual reports of 129 SEOs were examined.

The results indicate that while SEOs would be expected to account in line with normative stakeholder theory, many do not provide constructive and voluntary accountability information to their stakeholders, at least through the annual report, and that their focus is on satisfying legal obligations.

In response to calls for research to better understand accountability in new organizational contexts, this paper makes two contributions: firstly, by extending prior accountability research in the NFP sector to consider organizational hybrids, it raises questions about organizational accountability and how it is discharged in situations where an organization operates as a business and yet is accountable for its social mission; secondly, assuming these organizations are driven by their business and social logics, the findings suggest that SEO accountability disclosure practices are inconsistent with the social objectives on which they are based.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how localized (organization-level) actors of policy initiatives that are inspired by neoliberal ideologies use management accounting and control practices. Specifically, it addresses the operational stages of a case study Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract within the United Kingdom's (UK's) transport sector of roads for embedding government objectives in the underlying project road.

This paper adopts Dean's (2010) analytics of government to unpack the accounting-based control practices within the case study contract in order to articulate how, at the micro level, the government's objective of improving road-users' safety is enacted, modified and maintained through such regimes.

Drawing on a content-based analysis of UK government PFI policy and extensive case study-specific documents, together with interviews and observations, this research provides theoretical insights about how control practices, at a distance without direct intervention, function as forms of power for government for shaping the performance of the PFI contractor. The authors find that the public sector's accounting control regimes in the case study project have a constraining effect on “real partnership working” between the government and private contractors and on the private sector's incentive to innovate.

By analyzing a single road case study PFI contract, the findings may not be generalizable.

This paper provides significant theoretically informed insights about how public service delivery that is outsourced to private contractors is controlled by government at a distance within complex organizational arrangements (e.g. PFI).

Using Dean's (2010) analytics of government, this research explores how regimes of governing practices are linked to the underlying policy rationalities in dealing with the UK government's COVID-19 testing policies as a strategy for governing at a distance, including how targets were set and operationalized.

This paper draws on the UK government's policy documents, other official publications (plans) and parliamentary discourse, together with publicly available media information related to its COVID-19 policies.

This research reveals that, with respect to the governance of COVID-19 in the UK, testing has the dual role of inscription for the government's performance and classification for the pandemic risks. The analysis illustrates that the central role of testing is as a technology for classification for identifying and monitoring the virus-related risks. Moreover, our discourse analysis suggests that initially COVID-19 testing was used by the UK government more for performance communication, with the classificatory role of testing and its performativity as a strategic device evolving and only being acknowledged by government gradually as the underlying testing infrastructure was developed.

This paper is based upon publicly available reports and other information of a single country's attempts to control COVID-19 over a relatively short period of time.

This paper provides a critical understanding of the role of (accounting) numbers in developing an effective government policy for governing COVID-19.

The purpose of this paper is to explore accountability from the perspective of charity donors.

The research utilises semi-structured interviews with a range of donors. In addition, it summarises the main findings from key related research (that uses document content analysis and questionnaire surveys) as a basis for better appreciating donor engagement.

This research offers evidence that while donors are viewed as the key stakeholder to whom a charity should be accountable, the relevance of the information commonly disclosed in formal charity communications is questionable. This is viewed as significant in terms of small dependent donors, although less critical in the case of non-dependent large donors who have power to demand individualised information. However, although all donors do not particularly engage with these formal communications, they are viewed by them as having significance and their production and publication serves as an important legitimising tool in the sector (enhancing trust and reputation).

This research is based on semi-structured interviews with individual small donors and large institutional donors to large UK charities and therefore any generalising of the conclusions beyond large charities, and beyond the UK, should be undertaken with care. In addition, it focuses solely on the perceptions of donors, and other stakeholder groups are also important in this process.

Despite the widespread acceptance that charities have a duty to discharge accountability to their stakeholders, there is limited knowledge of their information needs and whether the performance information currently being disclosed fulfils them. This study provides a unique insight into the perspective of a key stakeholder group (donors) with respect to accountability.

This paper aims to examine the accountability practices of large United Kingdom (UK) charities through public discourse.

Based on the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the paper develops a framework for classifying not‐for‐profit (NFP) accountability and analyzes the content of the annual reports and annual reviews of a sample of large UK charities using this framework.

The results suggest that contrary to the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the sample charities' accountability practices are motivated by a desire to legitimize their activities and present their organizations' activities in a positive light. These results contradict the raison d'être of NFP organizations (NFPOs) and the values that they espouse.

Understanding the nature of accountability reporting in NFPOs has important implications for preparers and policy makers involved in furthering the NFP agenda. New research needs to examine shifts in accountability practices over time and assess the impact of the recent self‐regulation developed to enhance sector accountability.

This paper contributes to the NFP accountability literature by: first, developing a framework of NFP accountability through public discourse using the ethical model of stakeholder theory; and second, advancing the understanding of the accountability practices of large UK charities.

Social enterprise organisations (SEOs) operate across the boundaries of the public, private and not‐for‐profit (NFP) sectors in delivering public services and competing for resources and legitimacy. While there is a rich literature on accountability in the private and public sectors, together with the wider NFP sector, SEOs have received comparatively little attention and remain a relatively under‐researched organisational form. Drawing on accountability, legitimacy and user‐needs theories, the purpose of this paper is to develop a practical framework which can be used to explore how accountability within SEOs is constructed and discharged.

This paper draws on user‐needs, accountability, legitimacy and impression management theories expounded in relation to the private, public and NFP sectors.

A framework to better understand how accountability can be discharged by SEOs is developed and discussed.

While a framework for better understanding SEO accountability is presented, it is not empirically tested. However, the framework has the potential to facilitate a deeper appreciation of the theory and practice of accountability within SEOs and, notwithstanding the inherent difficulties in measuring and managing accountability, could be used to stimulate practitioner involvement.

As little is known about the current extent of SEO information disclosure or accountability relationships, the framework could be used to assess the discharge of accountability by SEOs, with the findings informing future developments. This should provide useful insights into internal processes and organisational views on accountability bases and mechanisms and can then be used to inform the debate on how SEOs can best discharge their duty to account.

Understanding the nature of SEO accountability reporting has important implications for those involved in advancing the SEO agenda. At a time of public sector cutbacks, and with the government searching for new and more effective ways of delivering services, the role of SEOs in this process is likely to receive greater attention and scrutiny.

SEOs have grown extensively in size and prominence in recent years and policymakers have come to embrace the role that they play in societal development. This paper responds to a gap in the theoretical literature and contributes to the debate by developing a framework which can be empirically tested. Moreover, it can be used to prompt practitioner involvement and facilitate a better understanding of the complex issues surrounding accounting and accountability in this under‐researched area.

This research explores the use of the internet, a mechanism that provides the opportunity to reach vast audiences efficiently and cost effectively, by United Kingdom (UK) charities to discharge accountability.

This research combines a content analysis of the web sites of large UK charities and semi-structured interviews with key charity personnel responsible for the formulation and dissemination of information to stakeholders.

The results indicate that, in most cases, charity web sites, as accountability mechanisms, appear to play a wide role, being directed at both upward and downward stakeholders. However, while the web sites are usually professionally created with appropriate web site presentation and page design, the discharge of fiduciary accountability via the internet is not universal.

This research focuses on large UK charities. This, together with the nature of the items captured by the content analysis checklist and the semi-structured interviews, inevitably affects its generalisability.

Accepting that charities have a duty to account to their stakeholders, and that the input of accounting practitioners is vital in this process, this research extends our understanding of how the internet is employed by charities to fulfil this duty.

The charity sector has grown extensively in size and prominence in recent years and policymakers have come to embrace the role that charities play in societal development. This paper provides a crucial insight into the discharge of accountability by charities through the internet.

This paper seeks to examine how Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) have been affected by the global financial crisis (GFC). After briefly discussing PPPs and the GFC, the paper considers whether the latter has been a contributing factor in the declining number of projects reaching financial close.

The paper employs document content analysis to compare the time between notification of a project in the Official Journal of the European Union and its financial close in order to assess whether this period has increased since the beginning of the GFC. Two case studies are also presented.

Apart from a very small number of projects, the time between official project notification and financial close is lengthening, with the case studies providing some possible explanations for this.

Whilst Burger et al. provide some general statistics on the impact of the GFC on PPPs in a number of countries, this paper examines over 600 PPPs in the UK and supplements this analysis with two case studies, in order to assess whether the GFC has led to delays in projects reaching financial close.

Utilising concepts drawn from the governmentality literature, the purpose of this paper is to examine the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) in the UK’s devolved administrations of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales in order to assess why they were adopted and how their introduction has been governed.

This research applies a combination of three different approaches, namely: a content analysis; an anonymous online questionnaire; and semi-structured interviews.

These include: the transition has had minimal impact upon policy setting and the information produced to aid budgeting and decision making; IFRSs are not entirely appropriate for the public sector; the time, cost and effort involved outweighed the benefits; public sector accounting has become overly-complicated; and the transition is not perceived as part of a wider privatisation programme.

As this study focuses upon the three UK devolved administrations, the findings may not be applicable in a wider setting.

Public sector change must be adequately resourced, carefully planned, with appropriate systems, trained staff and interdisciplinary project teams; accounting change should be based on value for money; and a single, coherent financial regime for the way in which government uses budgets, presents estimates to Parliament and publishes its resource accounts should be implemented.

This study highlights that accounting change is not just a technical issue and, while it can facilitate a more business-like environment and enhance accountability, all those affected by the changes may not have the requisite skills to fully utilise the (new) information available.