Search results

The purpose of this paper is to add to our understanding of how external factors such as funding and external accountabilities affect the organisational inner workings, especially identity issues.

The paper is based on a comparative case study of two professional chamber orchestras, one in Sweden and one in the UK. The two orchestras had significantly different funding conditions and had different relations with funders and were thus exposed to different kinds of accountability dilemmas. The two organisations were studied using and ethnographically inspired approach. The developments of various parts of the organisations were studied, such as funding, management, strategy, management control and identity issues.

The paper illustrates how the solution to accountability dilemmas in an organisation can, over time, result in the protection or the dilution of a perceived organisational core and thus in an identity struggle. Especially, management has to deal with the balance between financial and operational accountability, where organisational members could perceive the decisions to be confirming or rejecting what they perceived as being the higher purpose of their work.

This paper may help managers become more aware of the long ranging consequences of managerial decisions and how such decisions may affect the identity orientation of organisational members.

The paper combines the concept of identity with the concept of accountability, something that has not been done to a large extent in previous research.

This study offers a critical inquiry into accountability vis-à-vis organizational identity formation. It investigates how accountability evolves in the transformation of an NGO operating in the field of migration management from an informal grassroots group into a fully-fledged organization.

The paper is the outcome of a participatory action research project on Welcome Refugees (WR), a UK-based NGO. The project involved documentary analysis, focus group and semi-structured interviews, field notes, and participant observation. The analysis draws from poststructuralist theorization to explain the interplay between organizational identity and different forms of NGO accountability over time.

The study shows how different forms of accountability became salient over time and were experienced differently by organizational members, thus leading to competing collective identity narratives. Organizational members felt accountable to beneficiaries in different ways, and this was reflected in their identification with the organization. Some advocated a rights-based approach that partially resonated with the accountability demands of external donors, while others aimed at enacting their feelings of accountability by preserving their closeness with beneficiaries and using a need-based approach. These differences led to an identity struggle that was ultimately solved through the silencing of marginalized narratives and the adoption of an adaptive regime of accountability.

The findings of the case are of practical relevance to quasi-organizations that struggle to form and maintain organizational identity in their first years of operation. Their survival depends not only on their ability to accommodate and/or resist a multiplicity of accountability demands but also on their ability to develop a shared and common understanding of identity accountability.

The paper problematizes rather than takes for granted the process through which organizations acquire a viable identity and the role of accountability within them.

The purpose of this paper is to explore why different directors feel different levels of accountability toward board tasks.

The paper employs a reflexive three wave data and analysis process culminating in a rich data set of 49 interviews with Australian directors and 15 h of boardroom observations.

Differences in role identification lead directors to perceive their accountability differently resulting in wide variation in levels of firm specific knowledge, eventually affecting their breadth of contribution to board tasks.

Researchers should question the application of traditional governance theory (such as agency theory) if it fails to account for individual differences in intrinsic self-interest.

Selecting board members for their functional knowledge alone may not always produce optimal outcomes for the board and firm. Board induction processes and ongoing director training are important tools to inform and remind directors of their role and accountabilities on a board.

This paper establishes that the strength of directors' identification with either the director role or expert role affects what they feel accountable for, the development of firm specific knowledge and long-term efficacy as a director.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a staged theoretical argument regarding whether non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) can be considered responsible and accountable for the direct and indirect consequences, on a wide range of stakeholders, flowing from their advocacy activities.

The paper is primarily theoretical and conceptual, developing a structured, conditional and staged model illustrated with empirical examples.

The paper finds depending upon the theoretical arguments accepted at each stage of the model, the advocacy activities of an NGO may be considered to cause a widespread and often unintended negative impact upon the lives of many stakeholders who are either close to, or remote from, the NGO. Also, that depending upon the theoretical position taken regarding the scope of accountability, all entities – including NGOs – may be regarded as responsible and accountable for the impacts which their activities directly and indirectly cause to a broad range of stakeholders.

The model is primarily theoretical, so it can benefit from empirical studies to assess its applicability in practice. It also has the scope to be applied in assessing the responsibility and accountability of a range of other entities for their advocacy – such as businesses, religious bodies, political parties, and academics.

The paper presents a ontribution to the growing debate on NGO accountability.

The paper uses the synthesis of various philosophical positions to develop a conditional, staged model which may be used to establish whether NGOs (and other organisations) can be regarded as having responsibilities and accountabilities for the direct and indirect impacts of their advocacy activities on a broad range of stakeholders.

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 investigate disaster accountability process, and it seeks to advocate for involvement of victims as salient stakeholders in the accountability process.

The authors adopt a case study of the 3rd June, 2015 flood disaster and fire that occurred in Accra, Ghana and draw mainly on interviews, as well as observations and a review of publicly available documents.

Several actors are involved in disaster management in Ghana. These actors play several roles as part of the disaster management process. Coordination is observed among some governmental actors. However, there is a little collaboration among these actors. There are, therefore, no clear accountability relationships between the actors. Moreover, the forms of accountability process are largely upward and internal. So, although we find the victims as salient stakeholders, their perspectives are not prioritised as part of the accountability process.

As a result of less engagement with victims in the accountability process, a central accountability concern, outcomes, namely, benefits for victims in terms of changes in their knowledge, status, attitudes, values, skills, behaviours or conditions were not promoted. Downward accountability should be encouraged to promote better outcomes.

Although some studies on accounting for disasters have been undertaken, there is none in our local context, and also this study has been able to uncover under-representation of victims in the accountability process using adaptive accountability lens.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the relational view of unethical pro-organisational behaviour (UPB) to explain interpersonal paths of influence on employees’ engagement in UPB. The proposed relational view of UPB is grounded in Darwall’s second-person philosophy.

This research design involves two quantitative studies – a pilot study with 340 subjects and the main study with 310 employees. The structural equation modelling data analysis was conducted using the R language software.

The findings provided initial support for the relational view of UPB. Study 1 revealed that employees’ accountability (perceived as personal obligation) influenced their engagement in UPB. Furthermore, Study 2 strengthens the theory and findings from Study 1 that employees’ moral organisational identification influences their engagement in UPB over the influence of employees’ identification with the organisation.

The findings extend the nomological network of UPB and extant theoretical knowledge on the moral self by uncovering how moral accountability and personal obligation have a “dark side”.

The findings indicate that practitioners should address the impact of employee interpersonal relationships on their perceived obligation to engage in UPB.

The authors provided an original use of Darwall’s second-person standpoint as the philosophical foundation to integrate accountability and identity theories, to explain interpersonal influences on employees’ engagement in UPB.

This paper examines the contested value of healthy life and wellbeing in a context of severe austerity, exploring how the value of “Public Health” is constructed through and with material-discursive practices and accounting representations. It seeks to explore the political and ethical implications of constructing the valuable through a shared consensus over the “facts” when addressing complex, multi-agency problems with long time horizons and outcomes that are not always easily quantifiable.

The theorisation, drawing on science and technology studies (STS) scholars and Karen Barad's (2007) agential realism, opens up the analysis to the performativity of both material and discursive practices in the period following a major re-organisation of activity. The study investigates two case authorities in England and the national regulator through interviews, observations and documentary analysis.

The paper demonstrates the deeply ethical and political entanglements of accounting representations as objectivity, consensus and collective action are constructed and resisted in practice. It goes on to demonstrate the practical challenges of constructing “alternative accounts” and “intelligent accountabilities” through times of austerity towards a shared sense of public value and suggests austerity measures make such aims both more challenging and all the more essential.

Few studies in the accounting literature have explored the full complexity of valuation practices in non-market settings, particularly in a public sector context; this paper, therefore, extends familiar conceptual vocabulary of STS inspired research to further explore how value(s), ethics and identity all play a crucial role in making things valuable.

This paper aims to analyse the role of communication in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines.

Conceptual elements of the theory of communicative action and the literature on routines were used to conduct a field study in two hospital districts in Finland, from 2009 to 2015. Data were based on interviews, document analysis, observed meetings and repeated contact with key informants.

The findings explain how accountability routines take different forms – weak or strong – in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels. Differences depend on the generative structures and mechanisms of the communicative process – relational and normative – used to give and ask information to and from organisation members involved in accountability relationships. An explorative finding is that discourse-based communication plays an important role in bridging the gap between weak and strong accountability routines. The main theoretical contribution is to conceptualise and show the role of communicative rationalities in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines.

The implication for practitioners and policymakers is to show to what extent the organisation policies and communicative rationalities used in accountability have potential to improve or not to improve the practices of accountability routines. Mutual understanding, motivation and capacity of organisation members to do as expected and agreed upon without pressure improve accountability routines.

The value of this study is to explain how accountability routines take different forms in practice (weak or strong) in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels, depending on the generative structures of the communicative process used in practicing accountability routines.

This paper examines the recordkeeping governance requirements of the childhood out-of-home Care sector, with critical interlaced identity, memory, cultural and accountability needs. They argue that as we enter a new era of participation, new models for governance are required to recognise and dynamically negotiate a range of rights in and to records, across space and through time. Instead of recordkeeping configured to support closed organisations and closely bounded information silos, there is a need for recordkeeping to reflect, facilitate and be part of governance frameworks for organisations as nodes in complex information networks.

The paper reports on a key outcome of the Setting the Record Straight for the Rights of the Child National Summit held in Melbourne Australia in May 2017, the National Framework for Recordkeeping in Out-of-Home Care, and the research and advocacy agenda that will support its development.

The authors argue that as we enter an algorithmic age, designing for shared ownership, stewardship, interoperability and participation is an increasing imperative to address the information asymmetries that foster social disadvantage and discrimination. The authors introduce the concept of participatory information governance in response to social, political and cultural mandates for recordkeeping. Given the challenges associated with progressing new participatory models of recordkeeping governance in the inhospitable environment of existing recordkeeping law, standards and governance frameworks, the authors outline how these frameworks will need to be re-figured for participatory recordkeeping.

The National Framework for Recordkeeping for Childhood Out-of-Home Care seeks to address the systemic recordkeeping problems that have been most recently highlighted in the 2013-2017 Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

The National Framework for Recordkeeping for Childhood Out-of-Home Care will also address how a suite of recordkeeping rights can be embedded into networked socio-technical systems. This represents an example of a framework for participatory information governance which can help guide the design of new systems in an algorithmic age.

The proposed National Framework represents a new model for recordkeeping governance to recognise and enact multiple rights in records. Designed to support the lifelong identity, memory and accountability needs for those who experience childhood out-of-home Care, it aims to foster the transformation of recordkeeping and archival infrastructure to a participatory model that can address the current inequities and better enable the design and oversight of equitable algorithmic systems.