Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore how an accounting association and its key members define, control, and claim their knowledge; adopt a closure and/or openness policy to enhance their status/influence; and respond to structural/institutional forces from international organisations and/or the state in a particular historical context, such as a globalised/neo-liberalised setting.

The authors draw on Pierre Bourdieu’s theoretical tools (field, capital, habitus, and doxa) to understand how public sector accrual accounting was defined, and how the Korean Association for Government Accounting was formed and represented as a group with public sector accounting expertise. The research context was the implementation of accrual accounting in South Korea between 1997/1998, when the Asian financial crisis broke out, and 2006/2007, when accrual accounting was enforced by legislation. The authors interviewed social actors recognised as public sector accounting experts, in addition to examining related documents such as articles in academic journals, newsletters, invitations, membership forms, newspaper articles, and curricula vitae.

The authors found that the key founders of KAGA included some public administration professors, who advocated public sector accrual accounting via civil society groups immediately after Korea applied to the International Monetary Fund for bailout loans and a new government was formed in 1997/1998. In conjunction with public servants, they defined and designed public sector accrual accounting as a measure of public sector reform and as a part of the broader government budget process, rather than as an accounting initiative. They also co-opted accounting professors and CPA-qualified accountants through their personal connections, based on shared educational backgrounds, to represent the association as a public sector accounting experts’ group.

These findings suggest that the study of the accounting profession cannot be restricted to a focus on professional accounting associations and that accounting knowledge can be acquired by non-accountants. Therefore, the authors argue that the relationship between accounting knowledge, institutional forms, and key actors’ strategies is rich and multifaceted.

The purpose of this study is to apply the dominance effect theory and postcolonial notions of “otherness” to critically study the enactment of mimicry at IndianBread, an Indian fast-food chain that has adopted work practices typically found in US fast-food multinational enterprises (MNEs).

The authors used an interpretive sensemaking case study approach and collected qualitative data drawing on observations, notes from the company policy manual and in-depth interviews with eight staff at an IndianBread outlet. Data were also collected during informal interactions with staff at three other IndianBread outlets. The analysis focused on the enactment of mimicry and studied the postcolonial dynamics between managers and migrant workers to explain their resistance to the adoption of US work practices.

Work practices of US fast-food MNEs such as the standardization of workers’ appearance and basic “Englishization” such as greeting customers in English had been adopted at the IndianBread outlet. However, migrant workers resisted enforcement by contesting the superiority and relevance of these US work practices. The workers’ resistance was accommodated by local managers to pacify and retain them.

The analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of the dynamics of resistance to the dominant influence of US work practices in emerging market firms. It expands current notions of “otherness” by presenting the perspective of “local” managers and migrant workers. The authors show how worker resistance embedded in their “identity work” involves contesting notions of “inferiority” of local work practices and selves. In the case of managers, accommodating resistance maintains their “legitimacy of dominance”. To that end, the study explains how the need to mimic US work practices is enforced, contested and ultimately diluted in competitive local firms in rising India.

The organizationally grounded data show how managerial accommodation of workers’ resistance to US practices creates a more flexible working environment that dilutes migrant workers’ sensitivity to their exploitation at the fast-food outlet.

The findings identify the link between mimicry and resistance by the “other,” the ambivalence of the colonizing agent and the ongoing material exploitation within emerging economies.

To that end, the study explains how the need to mimic the US work practices is enforced, contested and ultimately diluted in the context of the competitive local firms in India.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and reflect on the mobility of ideas between multinational corporation (MNC) headquarters and subsidiaries. Does it always represent (positively perceived) knowledge transfer or can it sometimes constitute (negatively perceived) intra-corporate plagiarism? What are antecedents and consequences of negatively perceived mobility of ideas?

The authors conceptualise inter-unit knowledge transfer in MNCs without recognition of originators as an act of intra-corporate plagiarism. The conceptualisation is informed by theoretical perspectives in the literature and indicative data emerging unexpectedly from a study designed to examine knowledge transfer in MNCs. These illustrate the concept, point to factors affecting the propensity to plagiarise, and provide preliminary insight on both negative and positive consequences. Aiming to build theory, the authors offer propositions for further research.

The conceptualisation suggests that adopting units lose access to the original sources of ideas as plagiarism victims may establish defensive strategies. Originators of ideas may experience loss of trust, be unsupportive of implementation and erect barriers to future mobility. There is risk of reputation loss and rejection of ideas and practices from other units. However, the conceptualisation also suggests that, ironically and counterintuitively, plagiarism may increase the mobility of ideas within MNCs.

The authors do not test hypotheses and make no claims from the data about statistical validity or prevalence of the phenomenon. As the emergent data are not longitudinal, and specific to human resource management practices, the authors cannot empirically establish all antecedents and consequences of intra-corporate plagiarism. Hence, the theorisations primarily rely on perspectives in the literature. The study merely offers the theoretical conceptualisation of the phenomenon and propositions for future research.

Drawing on theoretical perspectives in the literature at the country level (ethnocentrism, dominance effects, legitimacy, capability) and organisation level (not-invented-here syndrome, micro-politics), the study indicates consequences that MNCs may wish to consider in their knowledge management.

The first contribution is the conceptualisation of inter-unit knowledge transfer in MNCs without recognition of originators as an act of intra-corporate plagiarism. Second, the authors point out that knowledge transfer directionality reported in other research may be based on intentional or unintentional misrepresentation. Third, the authors theorise intra-corporate plagiarism as potentially useful in mitigating ethnocentrism, country-of-origin dominance effects and perceptions about legitimacy and capability.

Critical and justice-oriented approaches to leadership are incomplete without attention to racism and racialization. This study employed basic qualitative inquiry to examine racialized legitimation within student affairs leadership education through lenses of whiteness as property and legitimacy. Findings detail how leadership educators sought to gain and/or maintain legitimacy and the ways racialization is embedded in these processes through professional experiences, leadership knowledge, and identity. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

This paper explores the communication of legitimacy in the annual reports of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), focusing specifically on the function of images. The visual mode of discourse and meaning construction has to date only scarcely been explored in legitimacy research, especially in the NGO context.

Distinguishing between normative, regulatory, cognitive and outcome legitimacy, the paper inquires into the kinds of legitimacy that NGOs communicate to their constituents and the claims that predominate. Turning to research on impression management, the paper explores whether and how organizations use images as symbolic mechanisms of legitimacy. Finally, the paper considers the socio-cultural implications of these legitimation strategies for beneficiary groups, donor communities and the organizations themselves.

A qualitative content analysis of images in the reports of the eight influential members of the US-based Global Emergency Response Coalition confirms the widespread presence of legitimacy claims in NGO visual communications, with normative (especially need) and output (especially implementation) categories predominating. However, these practices are potentially contradictory; measures to increase legitimacy to and of donors result in forms of beneficiary exclusion and reduction. Strategies of impression management, namely self-promotion, ingratiation and exemplification, appear to shape these NGO representative logics.

The results of this study extend prior research into legitimacy, legitimation and impression management in and beyond the non-governmental sector by differentiating among categories of legitimacy and incorporating images as the object of analysis. In this capacity, they also support and augment the emerging literature on imagery use in NGO annual reports.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the contributions made to the social and environmental accounting literature by papers that comprised a 2002 Special Issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) entitled social and environmental reporting and its role in maintaining or creating organisational legitimacy. This paper will also provide insights into the origins of legitimacy theory as used in the social and environmental accounting literature as well as providing reflections about the strengths, and shortcomings, of the theory. Suggestions are made with respect to the ongoing application, and development, of legitimacy theory.

As a commentary, this paper utilises a review of the social and environmental accounting and institutional literature across a number of decades to reveal insights about the development and use of legitimacy theory as a basis to explain social and environmental reporting practices. Citation data are also used to indicate the potential impact that the papers in the 2002 Special Issue had upon subsequent research.

This commentary shows that the 2002 Special Issue is the most highly cited issue in the history of AAAJ. It also shows that individually, some of the papers in the Special Issue represent some of the most highly cited papers in the social and environmental accounting literature. The commentary provides arguments to suggest that the development of legitimacy theory is in need of further refinement, and suggests a way in which this refinement might take place.

This paper is largely based on the opinions of one researcher, and the evidence presented in the paper is selected on the basis that it is deemed sufficient to support the opinions being projected. The paper also relies on citation data as an indicator of “impact”. The implication of the research is that it identifies a “way forward” for the development of theory applicable to the understanding of organisational social and environmental reporting practices.

The study provides evidence to show that the 2002 Special Issue was significant within the context of AAAJ, and also within the context of the evolution of the social and environmental accounting literature. The description of the history of the development of legitimacy theory, and of the theory’s subsequent application, provides a solid impetus for future refinements to the theory.

Despite its envisaged benefits, integrated reporting (IR) has yet to achieve its “breakthrough”, especially among small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This study aims to discern SME leaders’ attitudes toward IR, and thereby to reveal managerial perceptions of both the potential benefits and the challenges that actually prevent them from embarking on IR.

This explorative study is grounded on semi-structured interviews with 16 managers of large German SMEs, which yet do not apply IR but are potential candidates to implement it in the future. The engagement with non-preparers is expected to paint a more representative picture of actual reasons for IR (dis-)engagement compared to prior studies that address the few firms that have adopted IR and overcome its challenges. Applying Brown and Fraser’s (2006) conceptual landscape, results are presented analogous to a business case-, stakeholder accountability- and critical theory dimension.

Contrary to prior studies, which identified stakeholder accountability endeavors as kindling SME managers’ interest in voluntary reporting initiatives, managers regard IR primarily as a business case, serving to achieve legitimacy, improve corporate image, reach out to professional investors and assist in employee recruitment. However, they refrained from actually adopting the novel reporting medium, which suggests that decision-makers might not believe the business case to be as unproblematic as claimed by the proponents of IR. This was traced back to three major impediments that currently inhibit SMEs from reporting in an integrated way, namely, a perceived lack of interest by the relevant publics, infeasibility of the IR concept to meet user needs and preparation costs. These drawbacks resemble those of earlier voluntary reporting experiments, calling into question the “revolutionary” character of IR. The study critically concludes that the future development of IR depends on addressing these barriers.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first explorative study to deliberately engage with IR non-preparers to draw conclusions on impediments to IR. The identification of relevant incentives and disincentives for IR among SME managers at first hand not only adds to the small extant IR research body and provides valuable insights for research, practice and standard setting but also contributes to the contemporary debate about dominant legitimacy-based explanations in the broader domain of social and environmental accounting and reporting.

The paper seeks to adopt an institutional view of legitimacy to examine how a sample of French companies reacted to the introduction of the “New Economic Regulations” in French law in 2001 requiring that publicly listed companies disclose environmental information.

The approach used in the paper is both quantitative and qualitative. A content analysis of environmental disclosure provided in annual reports, environmental reports and web sites by 26 French companies listed in the CAC 40 is performed throughout the period 2001-2011.

The findings of this study show a significant and enduring improvement in the quality and quantity of environmental disclosure from 2001 to 2011. Even in the absence of penalties for non-compliance, the NRE law stimulated a stark and positive lasting change in the way that French companies account for their environmental information. These findings are consistent with the institutional view of legitimacy theory whereby legislation provides corporate managers with a representation of relevant audiences' perceptions about social and environmental reporting, prompting them to comply with the law to ensure organizational legitimacy.

Social and environmental reporting studies generally adopt a strategic view of legitimacy to examine how organizations use social and environmental reporting to respond strategically to legitimacy threats. This study provides early empirical evidence about the relevance of institutional legitimacy theory in explaining environmental reporting.

Based on the social dominance theory, this study aims to theorize the moderating effect of power disparity in the impact of team knowledge variety on team creativity and further to verify team open communication as the mediating mechanism of the aforementioned interactive effect.

The multisource (team members and their team leaders) and longitudinal (separated by four months) survey data were collected from 67 research and development teams in China to test the research model. The authors used multiple regression analyses to validate all the proposed hypotheses.

Results reveal that team knowledge variety has a more positive impact on team creativity when teams have lower power disparity. Besides, team open communication is significantly and positively related to team creativity and mediates the interactive effect of team knowledge variety and team power disparity on team creativity.

This study reconciles the mixed findings in the previous study and provides new insights regarding the functionality of team knowledge variety. By identifying team power disparity as a moderator in shaping the effects of team knowledge variety, the authors extend the research that explores the moderators of the team knowledge variety–team creativity relationship, and make comprehensive consideration of the coexistence of multiple diversities within teams (i.e. knowledge variety and power disparity) and their joint effects on team creativity. Besides, this research identifies team open communication as an important underlying mechanism in transmitting the interactive effects of two different types of diversities on team creativity, thus offering new insights on how teams can perform creatively.