Search results

This paper aims to argue for the need of beneficiaries’ involvement in matters impacting them. The current effort to improve waqf management and the trend of waqf studies seems to focus on waqf financing/investment using sophisticated financial tools and inviting participation from business entities. There was no conscious effort to engage the beneficiaries/public as the means to inform and improve the way waqf properties are managed despite it being, arguably, the primary stakeholder.

This is a qualitative study informed by the concept of downward accountability. Interviews with staff involved in managing waqf properties are conducted. Data is interpreted, resulting in emerging themes.

This paper argues that the way waqf entity is structured and the staff’s value is important in determining whether benefit accrues to beneficiaries. Grounded on Islamic ethos, the values of individual staff is imperative in ensuring downward accountability is discharged. The closeness and empathy between staff and beneficiaries contribute towards a meaningful operationalisation of downward accountability.

Because of the nature of methodology focusing on specific waqf practices in two specific waqf settings, the result must be interpreted within its context.

Waqf entity needs to have a structure where beneficiaries are meaningfully involved.

This paper argues that the benefit of waqf establishment may not accrue to beneficiaries if it is undertaken without their engagement.

This paper raises the importance of engaging beneficiaries as one of the approaches in serving them. Any future project involving the targeted beneficiaries should involve them in some capacities.

This study aims to investigate how non-government organisation (NGO) managers balance accountability to donors and beneficiaries and the role of felt responsibility in this process.

Using concepts of accountability theory, practices of microenterprise development NGOs are examined in two countries – Bangladesh and Indonesia – through interviews with managers of 20 NGOs and analysis of NGOs’ publicly available data.

Findings show a shift in emphasis from a vertical view (upward to donors and downward to beneficiaries) to a horizontal view of NGO accountability. Under this view, a selective approach to donors whose mission and approaches to poverty alleviation aligned with those of the NGOs played an essential role in supporting NGOs’ internal accountability. Further, felt a responsibility to beneficiaries is identified as an important mediator balancing both upward and downward accountability. While accountability to donors and beneficiaries was interrelated, accountability to donors was considered a short-term objective and accountability to beneficiaries was considered a long-term and overriding objective.

Findings contribute a further understanding of the role of felt responsibility to beneficiaries as a mediator for balancing upward and downward accountability based on the perspectives of NGO managers. Reframing accountability through a horizontal view helps to balance multiple directions of NGO accountability: to self, donors and beneficiaries.

The purpose of this paper is to describe two recent investigations of social services nonprofits (SSNs) in Japan and UK shed light on the subject of autonomy in relation to accountability.

This is effected through an exploration of questions such as: to what extent can we say that SSNs operate “autonomously” in Japan and UK? How do executives in these agencies perceive their own statutory organisation (SO)? To whom exactly are the SSNs accountable? What accountability mechanisms are in effect? How much time do these agencies spend on meeting the requirements of these accountability measures? Do SSN executives consider that accountability demands enhance or inhibit the ability of their organisation to fulfill its mission?

A close relationship is found between the way in which executive directors view downward accountability demands (accountability to clients or society at large) and the way they perceive SOs. From the discussion of the findings, it became apparent that Japanese executives, who approached downward accountability from its external dimension (i.e. the community at large), appeared to experience a more positive relationship with SOs than their British counterparts, who approached downward accountability almost exclusively from its internal dimension (i.e. in terms of their organisation's users), resulting in their perception of statutory accountability demands as a positive or negative influence on their organisation's mission.

This research makes an important contribution to the understanding of collaborative relations between government and nonprofits, as well as providing meaningful insights in the search for an alternative governance system for the provision of social services under a post welfare‐state regime.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the evolving nature of the accountability relationship between a group of Irish non‐governmental development organisations (NGDOs) and their primary governmental funder.

The examination is undertaken in the context of a unique funder‐led initiative to instil a broad social accountability focus among NGDOs while re‐orienting the NGDO‐funder accountability dynamic towards a partnership‐based approach – whereby the accountability entity would effectively be a supra‐organisation comprising the funder and the NGDOs. The empirical content of the paper is derived from a series of in‐depth interviews with senior individuals working within the Irish NGDO sector, along with a comprehensive analysis of documentary sources.

The partnership rhetoric central to promoting the enhanced focus on social accountability across the “virtual” accountability supra‐organisation has not been transformed into reality, and the NGDO‐funder accountability relationship within the supra‐organisation remains centred on control and justification. A lack of resources, organisational commitment, guidance, and expertise from the governmental funder has contributed to an attitude of scepticism among many NGDOs towards both the partnership rhetoric and the accompanying adoption of the central tenets of social accountability, particularly downward accountability to beneficiaries.

The research is based on a detailed analysis in a specific context which may limit its wider applicability. Nevertheless, it adds insights to the developing academic literature on NGO accountability, with particular reference to their broader social accountabilities.

Although highly context‐specific, the findings of the study will be useful to researchers and policy makers interested in understanding how NGDO‐funder accountability relationships can move towards mutual accountability and genuine partnerships focused on promoting social accountability.

Very few in‐depth academic examinations of the evolving nature of NGDO‐funder accountability relationships in specific NGO contexts have emerged in the accountability literature. Many of the insights in this paper are derived from individuals inside organisations in the NGDO sector who are regularly addressing issues of accountability, both social and otherwise. This provides in‐depth, highly‐informed insider perspectives on the evolving nature of these relationships, especially in the context of attempts to promote more partnership‐based approaches to the delivery of development aid.

The COVID-19 global pandemic has caused significant disruptions to the non-profit sector, highlighting the issues that the narrowly focused, traditional conception of governance fails to address. The purpose of this paper is to propose a contingency-based framework with its theoretical underpinnings in the existing literature, in order to support future empirical research on non-profit governance and accountability practices.

From a theoretical perspective, this paper synthesizes relevant existing literature and proposes a contingency-based accountability and governance framework in the non-profit sector. This paper draws on Ostrower and Stone’s (2010) contingency-based framework on boards and Hyndman and McDonnell’s (2009) conception of governance systems. This paper engages with the New Zealand and Australia context while reviewing relevant literature and relevant regulations.

The global pandemic has caused severe worldwide disruptions both socially and economically. There have been dramatic changes to the ways in which non-profit organisations (NPOs) operate. There is an urgent need to understand how such changes in the external environment impact on NPOs’ governance and accountability practices. In this context, the contingency-based accountability and governance framework proposed in this paper has important implications for non-profit research, while opening up an avenue for future research in this field.

This paper does not involve empirical analysis.

This paper contributes by facilitating better understanding on how external contingencies like the COVID-19 global pandemic affect the external and internal environment of an NPO, how they impact on stakeholders and their interplay with an NPO’s governance and accountability systems. It also suggests that regulators of the non-profit sector, umbrella support organisations, and funders proactively encourage and guide NPOs to embrace a wider scope of governance and strengthen the level of governance in the sector.

This paper contributes to the literature by proposing a contingency-based accountability and governance framework in the non-profit sector to support future research in this field. It also sheds light on competing theoretical debates relating to the conceptualisation and operationalization of accountability and governance.

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.

Informed by the critical perspective of dialogic accounting theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore the use of evaluation as a means of enhancing accountability to beneficiaries within nonprofit organisations (NPOs). As a stakeholder group frequently marginalised by traditional accounting practices, the participation of beneficiaries within a NPO’s accountability structure is presented as a means of increasing social justice.

The research design used case studies involving two NPOs, examining documents and conducting interviews across three stakeholder groups, within each organisation.

Findings reveal that when viewed on beneficiaries’ terms, accountability to beneficiaries, through participative evaluation, needs to consider the particular timeframe of beneficiary engagement within each organisation. This temporal element positions downwards accountability to beneficiaries within NPOs as multi-modal.

The research poses a limit to statistical generalisability outside of the specific research context. However, the research prioritises theoretical generalisation to social forms and meanings, and as such provides insights for literature.

In acknowledging that beneficiaries have accountability needs dependent upon their timeframe of participation, NPOs can better target their downwards accountability structures. This research also has practical implications in its attempt to action two of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals.

This paper makes a contribution to the limited research into nonprofit accountability towards beneficiaries. Dialogic accounting theory is enacted to explore how accountability can be practised on beneficiaries’ terms.

This study aims to present an effort to construct a measurement instrument to capture Islamic accountability from “accountability for what” aspect. These measurement instruments are developed by considering both social and economic natures in Islamic organisations.

This study defined the concept of Islamic accountability from the perspective of “accountability for what”. It is decomposed into specific items that suit an Islamic social enterprise (ISE). Next, these items are operationalised into scale items and re-composed empirically through factor analysis on data obtained from ISE stakeholders in Malaysia.

This study successfully developed an Islamic accountability measurement instruments from the “accountability for what” perspective for ISE. A total of 25 items are recognised and validated under four accountability dimensions, namely, accountability for input, accountability for output, accountability for procedural and accountability for Islamic principles and values.

Not all measurement instruments are fit for every Islamic organisation type because of the different characteristics of Islamic organisations.

Developed items can be used as part of Islamic accountability index, especially by ISE and other similar organisations to measure their accountability practices. Besides, these developed items can also be adopted for reporting purposes. In the case of Malaysia, respective government agencies, such as the Companies Commission of Malaysia , the Registry of Society, the Ministry of Entrepreneur Development as well as the Malaysia Institute of Accountant, should have a look at the developed items to be considered into their respective guidelines or standards.

This study is believed to be a pioneering study in developing measurement instruments of Islamic accountability specific for ISE. It proposes measurement instruments of Islamic accountability that can be re-used for future research and is among the few studies of ISE.

This paper aims to explore social enterprise accountability with respect to their dual social and financial objectives. Drawing on theories of accountability, stakeholders and institutional logics, this paper examines to whom and how social enterprises are accountable, focusing on the potential differences in accountability where social enterprises have a dominant versus a diversified commercial customer base.

Case studies on four work integrated social enterprises are analysed. Primary data include interviews with general managers of each social enterprise. Secondary data include social media, websites and internal and external reports.

Findings reveal accountability is largely influenced by dominant stakeholders (dominant commercial customers and parent organisations). Further, a connection between to whom and how social enterprises are accountable was noted, with formal accountability directed to the main stakeholders of the social enterprises, while less formal types of accountability were directed to less powerful stakeholders.

The integrated nature of the social enterprises facilitated complementarity rather than conflict among their commercial and social logics. While formal accountability was directed to those with power, expectations of these stakeholders ensured social and commercial logics were balanced, highlighting the importance of powerful stakeholders supporting both logics for social enterprises to effectively manage their hybridity. Conclusions consider the importance of social enterprises’ reporting practices.

The aim of this paper is to contribute to a greater understanding of non-profit organization (NPO) management control systems (MCS) and accountability in organizations providing support service for capacity constrained service users. Specifically, the paper examines the role of MCS and accountability in supporting mission realization in NPOs providing services to people with intellectual disabilities and reflects on this in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The research comprised a case study of four NPOs providing services to people with intellectual disabilities in Ireland conducted prior to the global COVID-19 pandemic. The study probed management's perceptions of stakeholders and examined the manner in which the design and use of MCS and accountability processes supported mission realization.

Service users were regarded as the least powerful stakeholder and consequently the least attended to in terms of MCS and accountability processes. The absence of relational and dialogical accountability with service users is not only central to maintaining this power asymmetry but also poses a threat to mission realization. These deficits can be addressed through the integration and monitoring of internal advocacy activities into MCS and accountability processes, which, on reflection, may also mitigate some of the negative consequences for service users of isolation from external support networks in times of crisis.

This research has opened up an area for enquiry – internal advocacy – heretofore not addressed in the management accounting literature, opening up a novel vein for future research. Such research could further examine the role of internal advocacy, drawing from and adding to the research in other support service domains. A number of objectives and questions might be considered: (1) probing the level of management recognition of the role of direct engagement in advocacy activities in supporting service user agency; (2) identifying with service users and management the nature and attributes of effective advocacy activities and practices; (3) questioning how such advocacy activities and practices might be reflected in MCS; (4) identifying what service user stakeholders regard as effective accountability to them in relation to their needs and objectives; and (5) assessing the impact on service user experience and on NPO mission realization of internal advocacy activities and the monitoring and review thereof through MCS. These suggestions for future research draw attention to aspects of support service delivery that have the potential to be profoundly influential on service outcomes.

A performance management model reflecting the identified need to incorporate internal advocacy mechanisms into organizational management control systems is proposed in an effort to increase accountability of NPOs to their core mission stakeholder – service users. This model may be of value to NPO management as they move from a medical-model of care to a rights-based model for service delivery in care settings.

The paper reflects the importance of listening to the voice of vulnerable service users in NPO care settings and proposes a mechanism for embedding internal advocacy in formal management control systems and accountability processes.

In proposing an “agency” supportive relational and dialogical accountability logic for such organizations, underpinned by “internal advocacy”, this research provides theoretical and practical insights for accountability processes and the design of MCS. The findings contribute empirically, not just to the NPO management and MCS literature but also to understanding the relational interaction of service users with service organizations, and what this means in supporting service user objectives and realization of organizational mission.