Search results

The paper aims to use a neoliberal ideology to frame an analysis of how the power of ideas can be used to maintain a failed corporate governance model based on stockholder primacy.

The paper employs the concept of corporate hegemony to provide an understanding of the conditioning environment in the USA in the 1990s. It examines the tactics that neoliberals used to gain consensus for their ideology and to skillfully deflect criticism in the face of significant policy failures that have had a global impact.

The paper highlights the power of ideology to create a desired outcome. It finds that Sarbanes‐Oxley represented a neoliberal victory in that it legitimated shareholder primacy and continued use of a failed corporate governance model.

Sarbanes‐Oxley did not address the systemic problems associated with deregulation; it will not resolve the basic problem of how to prevent corporate malfeasance in an economic environment that rewards arbitrage capitalism, high risk and a focus on short‐term profits.

If shareholder primacy weakens accountability, as the paper suggests, then accounting researchers need to develop models that focus on deregulation rather than on regulatory capture and the use of state power to promote private interests. Accounting academics need to assume the role of public intellectuals and to reject Milton Friedman's focus on negative freedom as the sole objective of economic activity and examine economic well being in terms of positive freedom.

This paper aims to identify and analyze the neoliberal, Anglo-American corporate governance mechanisms which embed shareholder value in Nigeria, and assess how they constitute major “practical barriers” to effective corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the country. While some of these mechanisms operate internally – performance-related pay (executive remuneration) – the use of non-executive directors – others operate externally – the markets for corporate control and the stock markets.

The paper adopts the doctrinal approach through a critical evaluation of concepts. Using existing literature in the subject area, it evaluates the nature of these mechanisms and argues that their operations amount to “practical barriers” to effective CSR in the country.

The paper finds that the existence of these mechanisms incentivizes corporate managers to maximize shareholder value and raise the share price of corporations as high as possible. It also leads to the financialization of corporate governance, rent seeking and the pursuit of short-term profits by corporations. In this context, within the Nigerian corporate governance framework, the existence and operations of these mechanisms amount to “practical barriers” to effective CSR.

The paper offers a fresh insight into the existence and operations of the neoliberal corporate governance mechanisms which embed shareholder value. By critically assessing the operations of these mechanisms in the Nigerian situation, it extends the body of knowledge in this area by showing how they amount to practical barriers to effective CSR in the country.

This paper aims to investigate the extent to which the ideology of shareholder value is compatible with that of transformative corporate social responsibility (CSR). It traces the transformation of corporations from quasi-public institutions at inception to purely private enterprises beginning from the middle of the nineteenth century and attempts to locate the ideology of CSR within the wider viewpoint of shareholder value.

This paper adopts a doctrinal approach through a critical evaluation of the nature and implications of the shareholder value ideology. Using existing literature in the area, it traces the evolution of the shareholder value ideology and how it is antithetical to any meaningful CSR regime.

The paper finds that there is a fundamental tension between ideas about the desirability of effective CSR and the belief that it is to the benefit of society as a whole for corporations to be run solely in the interest of their shareholders and for managers to seek to maximize shareholder value. This ideological tension renders contemporary CSR ineffective.

The paper offers a fresh insight or analysis into the transformation of corporations from quasi-social institutions to purely private enterprises in the middle of the nineteenth century. It does this by engaging in a historical narrative of the evolution of the corporate form and how contemporary ideas of shareholder value have resulted in the emergence of a contemporary CSR devoid of the radical spirit of CSR in the 1950s and 1960s.

This paper aims to examine the current financial crisis, suggesting that most analyses have attributed the crisis to a lack of business ethics, the rise of greed and lax regulation. Prescriptions offered to address this crisis draw accordingly on the need for greater regulation of market behaviour, business practices and boardroom pay. Whilst these reforms are necessary, they fail to recognise that such business practices have their roots in an extreme political and economic ideology – neoliberal market fundamentalism. This paper seeks to suggests that a greater appreciation of the nexus between politics, philosophy and economics is critical in order to develop a different practice. As such, the author provides a socio‐historical and political context for understanding the present crisis before offering a critique and reform of the business educational agenda. The author argues that such a context would engender greater understanding of business practices and systems for both students and practitioners and would go some way in enabling them to fashion a more critical reflexive and engaged practice.

The paper draws on a critical‐historical review of the literature on the crisis. In so doing, the paper opens up the analysis to philosophical and political approaches to understanding financial crises.

The paper finds that explanations for the crisis can be found through a critical appreciation of philosophical and political texts. This finding also suggests that current business and management education and practices can benefit from an incorporation of these historical strands of thought.

In drawing on various strands in philosophy, politics, economics and sociology, the paper finds that a singular account for the crisis is flawed. The paper also finds that a richer and deeper appreciation of the crisis can be found through a critical‐historical positioning of the crisis. This necessitates an understanding of politics and philosophy in business practices and education.

In explaining the crisis, the paper suggests that many of the current financial “innovations” are problematic and a more critical approach is needed to engage with these “new” innovations.

The paper seeks to open up new vistas for business education and practices. Through a critical‐historical interrogation of the crisis, the paper opens up new spaces for understanding international economics and business practices. This reflexivity is often missing in international business studies and most management practices.

The barrage of corporate scandals has become pervasive such that it collapsed high-profile organizations worldwide. Prior studies show that reporters of corporate scandals encounter a number of challenges which discourages them from disclosing wrongful acts to appropriate authorities to effect action. Thus, this study aims to examine the remediation of the challenges of reporting corporate scandals in governance.

The study used cross-sectional survey design. Primary data was obtained from 400 employees of selected organizations and analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation and regression techniques in Statistical Package of Social Science.

The results confirm that reporters of corporate scandals are confronted with challenges such as victimization, fear, suspension/dismissal, sideline and high power distance. However, these challenges can be remediated through award, code of conduct, free expression, participation/consultation and safeguard regulations to encourage and protect reporters of corporate scandals.

The findings imply that there should be an award scheme for reporters, and this must be made known to all employees. Furthermore, code of conduct for employees should include reporting of scandals together with its associated benefits and sanctions. Also, organizations would have to practice consultative/participatory governance system to minimize the effect of high power distance. Finally, regulations should be enacted and enforced to safeguard reporters of corporate scandals.

This research consolidated the challenges associated with reporting corporate scandals and provides remedies to curtail such challenges so as to encourage employees to report corporate scandals.

The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct the development of industrial relations (IR) in Germany since the end of the Second World War and discusses the current challenges posed by economic globalisation und European integration.

Combining a political economy, identifying Germany as a coordinated market economy (social market economy), and actor-centred historical institutionalism approach, outlining the formation and strategies of the main social actors within a particular institutional setting, the paper draws on the broad range of research on IR in Germany and its theoretical debates, including own research in the field.

The legacy of the key institutional settings in the post-war era – primarily the social market economy, co-determination at supervisory boards, works councils and sector-based non-ideological unions with their analogously organised employer counterparts, as well as the dual system of interest representation – has shaped the German IR and still underlie the bargaining processes and joint learning processes although trade unions and employers’ associations have been weakened because of loss of membership. In consequence the coverage scope of collective agreements is now somewhat reduced. Despite being declared dead many times, the “German model” of a “conflictual partnership” of capital and labour has survived many turbulent changes affecting it to the core.

The paper presents an original, theoretical informed reconstruction of the German IR and allows an understanding of the current institutional changes and challenges in the light of historical legacies. Additionally the theoretical debates on path dependence and learning processes of collectivities are enriched through its application to the German case.

This paper aims to examine the recent evolution of the regulation of statutory auditing since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the USA by comparing the regulatory structures for auditing in the USA, France and Canada.

Using publicly available documents, the paper seeks to understand how the regulatory structures for statutory auditing have changed in the period since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The USA, France and Canada were chosen for analysis because prior to Sarbanes-Oxley the regulatory structures of these three countries were relatively distinct, whereas subsequent to the Act they appear to be becoming similar.

The authors interpret the increasing apparent similarity in the regulatory structures for statutory auditing in these three countries to be the result of external pressures from global capital markets for standardized regulatory practices. However, this apparent similarity may also be a form of “decoupling”, whereby actors in the institutional field of professional regulation, under pressures from powerful external forces, seek to enhance their legitimacy while maintaining internal flexibility and a certain capacity for resistance against external pressures in the institutional field.

The paper relies on a qualitative analysis of regulatory structures based on a review and analysis of publicly available documents and legislation. As such, it has limitations similar to other qualitative studies.

The regulation of statutory auditing is important to society both to assure the proper functioning of capital markets and to provide reliable information to the general public. Gaining a better understanding of the regulatory structures for statutory auditing advances the public interest.

There have been few prior research efforts that have examined the regulation of statutory auditing through the lens of new institutional theory.

This paper aims to examine the nature and role of contemporary CSR in the current neoliberal age. It offers an insight into the tension that exists between the ideologies of “neoliberal” shareholder value and that of “effective” CSR, and argues that both ideologies are fundamentally antithetical. It aims to identify and analyse the inter-connected but distinguishable barriers (ideological, practical and political) that militate against the realization of effective CSR.

The method applied is a critical evaluation of concepts and a thorough review of existing literature on neoliberalism, shareholder value and contemporary CSR. It uses existing literature to highlight the inability of contemporary CSR to transform into an effective mechanism for development.

The paper emphasizes the failure of contemporary CSR to equate to a successful mechanism for development. It concludes that the existence and operations of these barriers militate against the realization of an effective CSR regime capable of leading to development.

Given the current dominance of the “maximizing shareholder value” model of corporate governance internationally, it appears unreasonable to pin too much hope on contemporary CSR as a mechanism for development, especially in emerging economies. Neither the culture of corporations nor the pressures to which they are currently subjected encourage socially responsible behaviour.

The paper extends the body of knowledge in the area of contemporary CSR, by identifying and analysing the inter-connected but distinguishable barriers that render the CSR practices of corporations ineffective.

This paper draws on the concepts of biopolitics and neoliberal governmentality to provide a sociological analysis of the strategic turn in management accounting.

This conceptual and review paper addresses four interrelated questions: How can the early history of management accounting be revisited from a biopolitical angle? How has strategising been linked to the neoliberal evolution of capitalism? How has this neoliberal connection transformed management accounting into its new form of strategising? What are the implications of this transformation for future research and pedagogical practices in management accounting?

Management accounting is strategised in four interrelated directions: by absorbing the jurisdictional and veridictional roles of the market into the calculative practices of management accounting; by transforming management accounting's centripetal hierarchical order of calculations to a centrifugal order the neoliberal governmentality demanded; by re-calculating the point of production as a site in which labour now takes the form of entrepreneurs of the self, performing not only material but also immaterial elements of managerial labour; and by rescoping management accounting to address issues the “fourth or the global age of security” brought, including the social and the environmental ones.

The research expands the existing frames of reference for exploring contemporary calculative practices in neoliberal governmentality.

Strategic turn in management accounting implicates in issues of security, governance and ethics and offers “new opportunities” for expanding management accounting's relevance beyond economic enterprises to various civil society and political constituencies.

This paper makes a theoretical contribution to management accounting's contemporary developments by demonstrating how it moves into biopolitical circulation.

The paper aims to address the recent debate over the “relevance lost” of business school research and points to the establishment of neoliberal economic policy during the past three decades as an example of social change that has not been thoroughly theorized in business school research.

The literature on neoliberalism is reviewed and, more specifically, its implications for the financialization of industry and the widespread use of financial theory in corporate governance. The paper outlines some of the consequences of neoliberalism, pointing out the connections between the growth of the finance industry and the 2008 financial crisis.

The paper demonstrates that the financialization of industry and the institutionalization of finance theory, as the guiding corporate governance model used in the new millennium, have led to a concentration of capital in the finance industry. As a consequence, other productive investments have been postponed. Despite such shifts in corporate governance and economic policy more broadly, neoliberalism is a relatively marginal topic of discussion in business school research.

The study stresses the need for broadening the scope of business school research and addressing more long-term institutional changes in economic policy and corporate governance.

The paper emphasizes the need, not only for promoting practitioner relevance in business school research, but also for enacting an ambitious research agenda of broader social relevance.