Search results

This study aims to investigate the impact on organizational members of team marks and peer feedback in a classroom as an organizational setting, where equals were engaged in a hierarchical form of accountability. It uses Roberts’s framework of hierarchical, socializing, and intelligent forms of accountability and discusses the viability of intelligent accountability in higher education, given the accountability structure for academics.

Autoethnography based on excerpts from the lecturer’s diary.

The blurred boundaries of hierarchical and socializing forms of accountability create both tensions and kinships for students, and these two forms of accountability constantly impact on each other. Although the accounting tools have an individualizing effect on some students, several examples of intelligent accountability are uncovered. It is concluded that academia’s audit culture, which focuses on immediate outcomes, and academics’ ever-increasing workloads make successful innovations less likely.

This study contributes to the accountability literature in revealing a constant dynamic between hierarchical and socializing forms of accountability through examination of a unique setting in which the boundaries between the two are completely blurred. By empirically examining how accounting individualizes and how intelligent accountability emerges, this study contributes to the limited empirical literature on the impact of accountability on individuals, and particularly to studies of classrooms as organizations, with implications for education policies.

Motivated to know more about the internal means through which accountability for sustainability takes shape within organisations (in what ways and by whom), this paper aims to explore how accountability for sustainability is constructed within an organisation during a process of establishing a control system for sustainability.

This paper adopts a qualitative case study approach of a decentralised industrial group, operating mainly in Scandinavia, between 2017 and 2020. Both primary and secondary data are used (e.g. document analyses, semi-structured interviews, informal conversations and site visits) to inform the findings and analysis.

The findings reveal a multi-faceted path towards accountability for sustainability that involves several concerns and priorities at organisational and individual levels, resulting in a separate sustainability control systems within each subsidiary company. Although hierarchical structures for accountability exist, socialising accountability activities are needed to (further) mobilise sustainable accounts.

Successful sustainable control systems require employees making sense of formalised accountability instruments (e.g. policies and procedures) to establish their roles and responsibilities in organisations.

This paper proposes socialisation processes as important for driving forward sustainability solutions.

This study elaborates on the internal accountability dynamic for the construction of sustainable accounts. Its novelty is built upon the interaction of hierarchical and socialising accountability forms as necessary for establishing a control system for sustainability. It furthermore illustrates the relationship between the external and internal pathways of accountability.

The relationship between central and sub-national (local) government is contentious around distribution of power and control. There is a specific concern when a (local) place has power devolved, but centralised hierarchical accountability pervades.

This paper addresses that concern by considering recent innovative developments around place-based accountability arrangements in England, through analysis of official reports and news media.

The article illustrates aspirations towards accountability to the local electorate clash with hierarchical accountability that remains an omnipresent mechanism of central control. It is suggested, accountability forums be developed to blend hierarchy and the place leadership role of directly elected mayors. This could enable local accountability to the electorate, whilst taking account of the context of specific regional level complexities.

This is one of the first papers to consider issues of place leadership and place based accountability within the framework of hierarchical accountability for central and local government relations.

This paper aims to better understand how accountability for sustainability takes shape within organisations and specifically, what makes employees act in a Swedish local authority. This aim moves beyond the prevalent external face of accountability in social and environmental accounting research by observing how employees understand and act upon their multiple accountability demands.

This paper adopts a single case study approach within a Swedish local authority, drawing from qualitative data including semi-structured interviews, site visits and governing documents.

Sustainable action is not only the product of hierarchically enforced structural accountabilities and procedures but often must be reconciled with the personal perspectives of the public sector employees involved as part of an accountability dynamic. Additionally, the findings reveal that hierarchical accountability, rather than serving to individualise and isolate employees, acts as a prompt for the more practical and personal reconciliations of accountability with the ethics and experiences of the individual involved.

Greater consideration to employee socialisation processes in public sector organisations should be given to reinforce organisational governance systems and controls, and thus help ensure sustainable behaviour in practice.

Employee socialisation processes are important for the development of sustainable practices both within and beyond organisational boundaries.

This study considers the interrelatedness of hierarchical and socialising accountability measures and contributes towards the understanding of the relationship between these two accountability forms, contrary to previous understandings that emphasise their contrasting nature and incompatibility.

This paper seeks to analyse accountability relationships developed since the introduction of reforms requiring nonprofit primary health organisations (PHOs) to discharge holistic accountability.

Case study data were obtained principally through semi‐structured interviews with PHOs and their key stakeholders, observation of formal and informal meetings, and primary and secondary documents.

While government strategy requires these PHOs to discharge holistic accountability, prior hierarchical‐based practices linger. A major impediment to securing holistic accountability is the failure of the new strategy to define clearly how the funder and provider should share accountability for improving their community's health. The implementation of holistic accountability was retarded when funders' propensity to control outcomes coincided with providers' lack of enthusiasm for embracing a greater range of stakeholders. The history and structure of individual PHOs was a key indicator of whether they discharged hierarchical or holistic accountability.

This case study research is context‐specific and may have limited applicability to other PHOs or jurisdictions. However, the study shows that when funders and providers build trust rather than depending on control, holistic accountability relationships can be developed.

Despite government intention that primary health care relationships will lead to holistic accountability, this will not occur until funders clearly define responsibilities and trust their service providers.

There is a paucity of research into government‐sponsored holistic accountability relationships with local nonprofit service providers. This research provides a unique contextual analysis of the perspectives of funders, providers and a wide group of stakeholders and the operationalisation of two different styles of accountability.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how accounts of collaboration practice were made and used to construct accountability in the empirical context of coordination associations, a Swedish form of collaboration between four authorities in health and social care. They feature pooled budgets, joint leadership and joint reporting systems, intended to facilitate both collaboration and (shared) accountability.

Empirical data were collected in field observations in local, regional and national settings. In addition, the study is based on analysis of local association documents such as evaluations and annual reports, and analysis of national agency reports.

Accountability is constructed hierarchically with a narrow focus on performance, and horizontal (shared) accountability as well as outcomes are de-emphasised. Through this narrow construction of accountability the coordination associations are re-created as hierarchical and accountability is delegated rather than shared.

Features such as pooled budgets, joint leadership and joint reporting systems can support collaboration but do not necessarily translate into shared accountability if accountability is interpreted and constructed hierarchically.

When practice conforms to what is counted and accounted for, using the hierarchical and narrow construction of accountability, the result may be that the associations become an additional authority. That would increase rather than decrease fragmentation in the field.

This research derives from first-hand observations of actor-to-actor episodes complemented with the analysis of documents and reports. It provides critical analysis of the construction and evaluation of accounts and accountability related to practice and performance in collaboration. The main contribution is the finding that despite the conditions intended to facilitate inter-organisational collaboration and horizontal accountability, the hierarchical accountability persisted.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a retrospective and prospective analysis of the themes explored in the 2006 Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal special issue on non-governmental organisation (NGO) accountability.

The paper is a reflective review essay.

The paper outlines how a number of themes in the 2006 special issue addressing downward accountability, hierarchical accountability and management control have been subsequently developed in a selection of papers from the accounting literature. The development of these themes leads to several suggestions for future research in NGO accountability.

The paper offers a systematic, original perspective on recent developments in certain areas of the field of NGO accountability.

The purpose of this paper is to examine changes in accountability as the provision and control of education moved from private nonprofit organisations to a public sector provider.

Analysis of nineteenth century archival documents from significant primary educational providers in a major early New Zealand settlement.

The nonprofit education provider utilised public meetings including public examinations, whose effect was to develop trust based on the education values it shared with its community of stakeholders. It also published financial reports which, along with inspections and statistical returns, were preferred once the government became the education provider. Such publications and inspections indicated bureaucracy and control. Nevertheless, government funding, rather than the nonprofit organisation’s dependence on its community, made education provision sustainable.

It has been suggested that the differences between public sector and private sector accounting and accountability are not always sharply defined (Carnegie and Napier, 2012). However, this case study shows that a change of education provider did lead to a marked difference in accountability. While theory suggests that public sector accountability should enhance democracy, the party best meeting this brief was the nonprofit provider, with the public sector provider preferring hierarchical accountability. It could be argued that funding dependence drove these different approaches as community accountability was traded for financial security.

Distinctive study of accountability practices to external stakeholders, in a mid-nineteenth century education context.

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 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.