Search results

This research paper comparatively reviews online accountability practices in public, private and nonprofit organizations, using the hospital industry as a case of analysis.

The authors conducted a quantitative content analysis of 240 US hospital websites, sampled from the 2016 American Hospital Association (AHA) database. Online Accountability Practices (OAP) instrument was utilized, and it included five dimensions as follows: accessibility, engagement, performance, governance and mission.

There were statistically significant differences in online accountability practices among the three sectors. Nonprofit organizations were leading the way in their overall online accountability practices. They were more likely to score higher on engagement, performance and mission dimensions. We explain this finding through the prism of multiple accountabilities, guided by the stakeholder theory. Private organizations had the lowest scores on every online accountability dimension, except for accessibility. Consistent with previous literature, private organizations were more likely to make information accessible in the online sphere, but not necessarily meaningful or reliable for evaluating organizational performance. Public organizations had the strongest scores within the governance dimension, placing importance on disclosing organizational leadership and sharing information on their governance structures.

This project contributes to theory building on accountability in the online environment. It argues that the distinction between two forms of accountability (functional and holistic) is applicable in the online environment, while accessibility and performance dimensions of online accountability closely align with the functional (hierarchical) form of accountability, and a more holistic approach to accountability includes dimensions like engagement, governance and mission. In addition, this project is the first of its kind to apply the stakeholder theory to accountability practices in three sectors of the economy and how the stakeholder theory provides guidance as a basis of understanding the forms of accountability (functional and holistic) that are most likely aligned with organizations in three sectors of the economy.

The results of this study point to a number of implications for hospital patients, families, hospital administration, healthcare professionals and policymakers. These implications can be broadly divided into two groups as follows: policy implications and management implications. Policy implications pertain to the national dialog and interorganizational deliberations of sector-wide policy to enrich accountability practices; while management implications are concerned with local, intraorganizational discussions among administrators and organizational leaders on formulating specific strategies and tactics.

This research paper contributes to empirical studies on organizational accountability in the online environment. It enriches our understanding of how organizations in different sectors present themselves to the public.

This article sets out to examine the common organizational problem of inadequate tracking and follow‐through of cross‐functional corrective actions and strategic objectives. Various solutions were tested to develop a “best practice” for improving the effectiveness and accountability of implementing action plans.

Program audits were conducted on the tracking and effectiveness of strategic objectives and corrective action plans at 24 aerospace‐related companies (e.g. Northrop, Allied Signal) in the USA.

Generally, strategic objectives and correction actions are performed adequately and on‐time within an organization's function (e.g. engineering). The adequacy of cross‐functional actions, however, was a completely different story. Typically, these actions were delayed past the “need by dates” and often failed to satisfy the internal customer's need. Several solutions were examined and “the dynamic stringing” method proved to be the most effective.

Future studies need to focus on additional methods to insure accountability of cross‐functional requirements to include incentives.

This study presents the basis for a “best practice” that could help solve inefficiencies and delays in completing cross‐functional actions. The core concept of “paper and string” can easily be upgraded to computerized project management systems. The key, however, is not to lose the power of “visibility.”

This is the only study that has examined the chronic problem or “dirty little” secret of poor cross‐functional support in numerous organizations. The value is to managers that need to insure the accomplishment of strategic objectives and corrective actions.

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 purpose of this paper is to explore how hierarchical accountability can be enacted and accounting control systems mobilized in a way that promotes a sense of felt responsibility.

The paper draws on interviews, shadowing and observations to explore the implementation of a strategy for “increasing accountability” in a Norwegian Oil Company. The case provided an opportunity to explore the dynamics of hierarchical accountability and felt responsibility, and in particular Roberts (2009) concept of “intelligent accountability”, in an empirical context.

The case study explores how the strategy of increasing accountability at OilCo was enacted around three operational issues; the control of costs, roles and relationships in the complex matrix structure, and the operation of the management system. It traces how the long history of Beyond Budgeting practices and philosophy in OilCo resulted both in an explicit recognition of the incompleteness of accounting numbers, and trust-based practices which avoided many of the dysfunctional individual and organizational effects typically associated with the exercise of hierarchical control.

The paper explores empirically how OilCo’s embrace of Beyond Budgeting practices and philosophy had created the conditions under which a more intelligent form of accountability could emerge. As a European case study, it calls into question the Anglo-American tradition of accounting research which suggests that externally imposed accountability within a hierarchy mitigates against employees’ felt responsibility.

This paper aims to examine how managers use planning meetings to coordinate their actions in light of an uncertain future. Existing literature suggests that coordination under uncertainty requires a “dynamic” approach to planning, which is often realized in the form of rolling forecasts and frequent cross-functional exchange. Not so much is known, however, about the micro-level process through which coordination is achieved. This paper suggests that a sensemaking perspective and a focus on “planning talk” are particularly helpful to understand how actors come to a shared understanding of an uncertain future, based upon which they can coordinate their actions.

This paper builds upon a qualitative case study in the Austrian production site of an international manufacturing company. Drawing on a sensemaking perspective, the paper analyses monthly held “planning meetings” in which sales and production managers discuss sales forecasts for the coming months and talk about how to align demand and supply.

The authors show how collective sensemaking unfolds in planning meetings and highlight the role that “plausibilization” of expectations, “calculative reasoning” and “filtering” of information play in this process. This case analysis also sheds light on the challenges that such a sensemaking process may be subject to. In particular, this paper finds that competing hierarchical accountabilities may influence the collective sensemaking process and render coordination more challenging.

The paper contributes to the hitherto limited management accounting and control literature on operational planning, especially its coordination function. It also extends the management accounting and control literature that draws on the concept of sensemaking. The study shows how actors involved in planning meetings create a common understanding of the current and future situation and what sensemaking mechanisms facilitate this process. In this respect, this paper is particularly interested in the role that accounting and other types of numbers can play in this context. Furthermore, it theorizes on the conditions that allow managers to overcome concerns with hierarchical accountabilities and enact socializing forms of accountability, which is often necessary to come to agreements on actions to be taken.

The purpose of this study is to use empirical findings to identify the different forms of accountability practices existing in Cameroon microfinance institutions (MFIs) and explore how such practices have evolved and institutionalised within the microfinance sector in Cameroon through time.

This study is designed to investigate if the institutionalised accountability practices within the microfinance sector in Cameroon are a cure or a curse for poverty alleviation. This study is based on the new institutional sociology (NIS) and on a case study approach and combines in-depth interviews and secondary data sources.

This study identifies three principal forms of accountability practices common with MFIs in Cameroon: dysfunctional, manipulative and dribbling accountabilities.

This paper is novel because it extends the NIS into the microfinance sector and explains how conflicting institutional pressures resulting from differences of accountability practices can be resolved and also exposes the unintended consequences of both resistance and passive actions of local actors on microfinance, the poor and poverty alleviation.

The purpose of this article is to develop a nonprofit integrated social accounting (NISA) model that takes into account the particular objectives of nonprofit organizations (achieving their mission and remaining viable as an organization), their specific characteristics (e.g., the engagement of volunteers), and their economic, social and environmental impacts. The conceptual framework includes defining social accounting, setting the boundaries of the reporting entity, identifying the objectives of nonprofit reporting, identifying the users of the accounts and their information needs, and considering the questions that have to be answered in order to know if the organization is achieving its goals. From the conceptual framework, the NISA model is developed, incorporating four elements: (1) economic and human resources; (2) economic, social and environmental value creation; (3) internal systems and processes; and (4) organizational learning, growth and innovation. Overall, the model provides a mechanism to address both functional and strategic accountability concerns of the organization, its effectiveness and efficiency, and to drive behavior through feedback and readjustment. In this way, accounting plays an important role in shaping the ‘reality’ of the organization.

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 paper explores environmental accountability and downward accountability role of nongovernmental organisations (henceforth NGOs) under Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) in the food and beverage industry of Nigeria. The paper relies on empirical data gathered from qualitative interviews of three stakeholders – accountants, Corporate Social Responsibility Officers (CSROs), CEOs and NGO CSROs. It employed theoretical conceptualisation of environmental accountability and NGO's downward accountability. Analysis shows that despite the existence of attributes of environmental accountability such as sense of responsibility on the part of corporations and citizens' rights to demand for and enforce accountability, passivity of citizens' right caused by vulnerability prevails. The finding also shows that downward accountability roles of NGOs in the industry have been framed as that of enhancing activities in the value chain. Part of this is RecyclePay project that funds education for the poor. Thus NGOs' downward (environmental) accountability in Nigeria has potential to promote environmental well-being, beneficiary's economic empowerment and education for the poor, thereby simultaneously addressing vulnerability. It shows that vulnerability may induce a different conceptualisation of environmental accountability than that of a normal democratic setting where the citizens are deemed to have right to demand and enforce (environmental) accountability. This paper contributes to our understanding of (environmental) accountability and downward accountability role of NGOs within an emerging market context.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of accountability as it relates to a non-governmental organisation (NGO) evolving through a period of considerable change in Sri Lanka.

An in-depth single case study of a large NGO working in Sri Lanka is presented. Data collection involved conducting semi-structured interviews with a range of NGO employees and stakeholders, undertaking participant and non-participant observation and document analysis.

This paper shows how accountability is a contested notion that is shaped by struggles among stakeholders within a field. The authors explore how the “widespread field” consisting of the aid context in Sri Lanka and internationally is rapidly shifting. This creates unique pressures within the “restricted field” of the case NGO and its constituents. These pressures are manifested in the contest between the different capitals held by various stakeholders to shape the NGO. The nature of access to these capitals is important in the way that the NGO is shaped by external forces, and also by the individuals within it.

This study adds fresh perspective to the growing body of work in NGO accountability. The paper highlights the tensions NGOs face through a holistic application of a Bourdieusian conceptual framework. The authors show how the habitus of the organisation is shaped in such a way that conceptions of accountability were captured by powerful external and internal constituencies. Ultimately, the nature of an organisation’s agency is questioned.

The authors present a more nuanced understanding of forces which shape accountability in an NGO setting which is of practical relevance to NGOs and their stakeholders. The authors highlight the struggle for an NGO to maintain its agency through resisting external forces that impact on its operations.

This study presents a comprehensive and holistic application of Bourdieu’s concepts and their interactions in an organisational setting. The struggle to harness various forms of capital in the field, shapes doxa and the habitus of NGO actors, illuminating the role of symbolic violence in the creation of an organisational identity.