Search results

The water industry was one of a number of publicly owned enterprises and assets which were privatized during the 1980s in the UK. The Government justified its privatization programme on a number of grounds. In particular, it claimed that privatization would improve industrial performance by subjecting the nationalized industries to the discipline of the market, and so would yield benefits, via greater efficiency, to the industry, customers and the nation. Examines first the extent to which an accounting model and the financial numbers in the annual reports and accounts can be used to substantiate Government claims, and describe and explain the outcomes. Assesses whether accounting can assume a constructive and emancipatory role, by challenging existing problem diagnosis ‐ public sector inefficiency ‐ and posing alternative questions and solutions. Shows that the financial evidence does not substantiate the Government’s claims. Finds that greater efficiency, meaning lower costs relative to output, did not occur. Significant increases in efficiency had occurred prior to privatization, leaving little room to improve efficiency without jeopardizing levels of service and future service provision. The distribution of the surplus, which is publicly seen as a conflict between consumers and shareholders, is in fact much wider than this. Argues that the surplus has been so distributed that it has not only substantially benefited the shareholders at the expense of other stakeholders, but also has created the conditions whereby the other stakeholders will be disadvantaged in the future. Concludes that the real beneficiaries were largely invisible in the Government’s case for privatization.

Public private partnerships (PPPs) are a recent extension of what has now become well known as the “new public management” agenda for changes in the way public services are provided. PPPs involve organisations whose affiliations lie in respectively the public and private sectors working together in partnership to provide public services. This special issue of the Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal explores this new development, which, in its most advanced form, is contained in the UK’s Private Finance Initiative (PFI) but is now spreading across the world in multiple forms. This introduction provides an overview of this development as well as an outline of the seven papers that make up this special issue. These seven papers are divided into two parts – the first four looking at different aspects of PFI and the latter three providing three country‐based (from the USA, New Zealand and Australia) studies of PFI/PPP. Many questions about the nature, regulation, pre‐decision analysis and post‐project evaluation are addressed in these papers but many research questions remain unanswered, as this Introduction makes plain.

This paper aims to examine empirically whether the system of public expenditure reporting is capable of delivering financial accountability, focusing on the UK government's use of private finance for roads.

Publicly available documents from the public and private sector partners for 11 roads contracts are examined, together with a publicly provided bridge paid for via tolls as a comparator.

Reporting by both public and private sectors is limited and opaque, such that accountability to the public is inadequate. The evidence also shows that the scale of the additional expenditure generated by private finance warrants greater disclosure and scrutiny than is currently the case.

These findings, which occur in the roads sector where projects are large and visible, are likely to be replicated elsewhere in the public sector. Accountability issues may be even more problematic in public bodies where reporting is more diffuse. Furthermore, the proliferation of other forms of private finance increases the problems of reporting clear financial information, the lack of which not only makes informed public debate about public and fiscal policy impossible but also may lead to the wrong policy choice.

There has been little ex post facto examination as to whether extant reporting requirements permit understanding and scrutiny of the cost of private finance. The paper presents a desired list of annual disclosure, highlighting an information gap.

Partnerships are the British government’s preferred method of procuring public sector services, and the policy is usually justified in terms of delivering value for money. Ex ante financial methodologies are prescribed to ensure that decision making is based on a sound appraisal of alternatives and the government has called for an evaluation of implemented projects. This paper seeks to contribute to that evaluative process by exploring ex post facto some of the issues and problems that arose in practice. Using a case study approach, the paper considers two failures of information technology partnerships to examine how risk transfer, which is at the heart of the partnership policy, works in practice. The cases show that the contracts failed to transfer risk in the way that had been expected. The public agencies, not the commercial partner, bore the management risk and costs fell on the public at large and/or other public agencies.

Using the example of capital charging in UK hospitals, this paper shows how new public policy initiatives are justified through forms of persuasion without numbers and can be challenged with empirics. A reading of official and academic texts shows how the official problem definition focuses on poor asset utilisation. Hospital accounts are then reworked to show that, although poor asset utilisation was never a major problem, the introduction of capital charges could disrupt service provision. The conclusion is that the operation of NHS hospitals should be understood in terms of distributive conflict, rather than inefficiency. Through practical demonstration, the authors of this article aim to encourage accounting researchers to use numbers to challenge public policy definitions.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature, roles and dynamics of change of management accounting systems (MAS), in processes of continuous organisational learning and transformation. By studying the interaction between the accounting (and finance) function and the implementation of a Six‐sigma initiative, as the engine for organisational change, the authors seek to uncover the potential of measurement‐based systems of management for aligning business processes with corporate strategies. Such systems sustain continuous processes of transformation by infusing organisational culture with financial and non‐financial metrics of accountability.

The research is based on a longitudinal case study in which one of the authors had the opportunity to exercise what Schein called the clinical perspective; i.e. combining the role of researcher with that of helper‐consultant. There is mutual interdependence in the relationship between the authors' theoretical framework and the authors' longitudinal case study. While, on the one hand, the case research contributed to the search for an institutional explanation of the evidence experienced and collected, on the other hand, the empirical data are illuminated by the theoretical insights gained from that framework.

After first discussing cultural change, the authors rely both on the “clinical” position of one of the authors as researcher/helper‐consultant and on the insights provided by Schein's work on organisational culture and Giddens' structuration theory to develop an institutional framework for interpreting the ways in which routinised systems of accountability bind the ongoing processes of cultural transformation across time and space.

Possible limitations are: the conceptualisation of organisational culture as a shared and institutional phenomenon does not take account of wider anthropological aspects (such as the influence of national culture); the role of helper‐consultant as well as researcher may have influenced some of the authors' interpretations; the authors' analysis does not consider macro‐economic variables; and only a small percentage of shop‐floor workers were interviewed.

The paper sheds light on the role of management accounting within organisational processes of transformation far beyond their mere visible enactment. As a result, the authors develop an institutional framework to interpret the linkages between the cognitive dynamics which characterise organisational culture (viewed as shared cognitive schemas) and the behavioural and structural modalities through which they are drawn upon and reproduced by organisational members.