Search results

Choice deferral (making no choice at all) is a common phenomenon, especially when individuals face a difficult decision. This is further exacerbated in the presence of negative incidental emotions which can have a wide-ranging influence on various aspects of decision-making. Previous research suggests that process (vs outcome) accountability might be more effective at mitigating the effect of irrelevant factors. This paper aims to examine whether accountability attenuates emotion effects on choice and examines the differences in the efficacy of the two accountability types.

The paper uses the appraisal tendency framework to propose differences between same valenced emotions on choice deferral and predicts the moderating role of process versus outcome accountability. Two experiments are conducted to test the predictions and the results analyzed using logistic regression.

The authors find that outcome and process accountability have different moderating effects on emotion and choice deferral relationship: under outcome accountability, angry individuals are more likely to defer choice while under process accountability, differences in choice across emotion conditions are attenuated. As predicted, differences between anger and fear on the certainty appraisal and thereby information processing, mediate the effects of emotion on choice deferral in the outcome (but not process) condition.

This research studies the intersection of two developing research streams, affect and accountability, by focusing on specific affective states (anger and fear) and specific accountability types (outcome and process) in the important context of decision avoidance in consumer behavior. Thus, theoretical understanding in both domains is advanced and the benefits of specific accountability types clarified. Key implications for consumers and future research directions are also discussed.

Accountability is ubiquitous in social systems, and its necessity is magnified in formal organizations, whose purpose has been argued to predict and control behavior. The very notion of organizing necessitates answering to others, and this feature implies an interface of work and social enterprises, the individuals comprising them, and subunits from dyads to divisions. Because the nature of workplace accountability is multi-level as well as interactive, single-level conceptualizations of the phenomenon are incomplete and inherently misleading. In response, this chapter sets forth a meso-level conceptualization of accountability, which develops a more comprehensive understanding of this pervasive and imperative phenomenon. The meso model presented integrates contemporary theory and research, and extends our perspectives beyond individual, group, unit, or organizational perspectives toward a unitary whole. Following this is a description of challenges and opportunities facing scholars conducting accountability research (e.g., data collection and analysis and non-traditional conceptualizations of workplace phenomenon). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed, as are directions for future research.

Research has shown accountability can produce both positive and negative outcomes. Further, because of inherent environmental uncertainty, perceptions of organizational politics often interact with accountability to produce negative effects. However, using uncertainty management theory, the purpose of this paper is to argue that employees can use proactive voice to exercise control in the ambiguity of highly accountable and political environments.

This two sample study of graduate school alumni (n=211) and insurance employees (n=186) explored the three-way interaction of felt accountability×politics perceptions×proactive voice on work performance, job satisfaction, and job tension.

As hypothesized, high levels of felt accountability and politics were most strongly associated with favorable outcomes when coupled with increased voice behavior. Conversely, felt accountability and politics were related to negative outcomes in settings associated with low proactive voice. Results supported in Sample 1 were then constructively replicated in Sample 2.

All employees are held accountable to some degree, and all work in potentially political settings. Often, these environmental features are dictated to employees, leaving only employee reactions in direct control. One possible response is voice. As demonstrated in the present research, employees who engage in proactive voice appear to exercise some degree of control over their environment, resulting in more positive outcomes than their less active counterparts.

The present research extends understanding regarding the effects of accountability in organizations by demonstrating that contextual factors (e.g. politics) and individual difference variables (e.g. in levels of proactive voice) differentiate favorable vs unfavorable outcomes 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.

Combining early and untested accountability perspectives with stress research, the authors examined the degree to which employees perceive workplace accountabilities as either worthy challenges to be overcome or potential threats to be avoided.

The authors utilized structural equation modeling to evaluate our hypotheses and tested them across two data samples, using two different sampling techniques collected four years apart.

Employees' individual differences of attribution style, negative affectivity and core self-evaluations influenced how subjects approached accountability pressures in their workplace, which in turn, was associated with job satisfaction and turnover intentions.

By examining how employees evaluate accountability pressures, this investigation advances existing research by exploring the different ways in which employees perceive workplace accountabilities.

Despite the importance of accountability for the oversight of projects, few studies have directly examined accountability mechanisms at the project level. While the literature already provides descriptions of governance and mechanisms of accountability, the purpose of this paper is to examine how project managers view their accountability relationships within their organizational context.

The study is guided by critical realism as a philosophy of science. The authors interviewed 15 project managers from 12 organizations and analyzed the transcripts in the light of existing project management accountability literature.

The authors observe the practice of socializing accountability through face-to-face negotiation and symmetries of power due to interdependencies happen to some extent in management of projects. This suggests ambidexterity in accountability in project-based organizations. Therefore, the current models of project accountability and governance that are solely based on the agency theory are not sufficient to explain the accountability relationships in such organizations.

Accountability arrangements happen within a system for steering projects. Managers should be aware of how project managers view their accountability and how socializing practices of accountability can help the project’s management and the organization’s management interact in order to transform organizational systems by regulating issues of project concern and defining the process and direction of how project deliverables are produced, introduced, absorbed and used within the organization.

“Theory driven” interviews and analysis are used to confirm or refine conceptualization of accountability in management of projects. Most models of project governance are based on the agency theory or governability theory. The authors have demonstrated that socializing practices of accountability should be included in investigating project governance. The authors observe that project managers are often concerned with the interdependence with their principals and the socializing processes of accountability that arise from this interdependence.

In 2015 the Conservative led government announced their plan to increase the number of young people participating in apprenticeship to three million by 2020. As part of this plan there is to be an expansion of the number of degree-level apprenticeships, with the government suggesting that these should be seen as a real alternative to university. Despite the government’s propaganda of an alternative to university, higher education institutions have a pivotal role to play in both the development and delivery of degree-level apprenticeships. However, the accountability for the success of degree-level apprenticeships remains unclear. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The paper provides an analysis of current notions of outcome-based accountability contextualised through the degree apprenticeship programme.

The paper illustrates that outcome-based accountability frameworks do little to support the delivery of degree-level apprenticeships. Instead there needs to be a shift to a holistic approach to accountability where student success form just one element of an accountability framework. It concludes that current accountability frameworks may result in an unnecessary confusion around the roles and responsibilities of individual actors associated with degree apprenticeship delivery resulting in a missed opportunity to maximise the value arising from the tri-partite delivery relationship.

This paper provides an original perspective involving accountability associated with degree apprenticeship programmes in the UK.

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.

This study aims to understand how project leaders' interactive use of the project management control systems (MCS) impact IT project performance, by examining the mechanisms through which this relationship is enacted.

Data were collected from a cross-sectional survey of 109 IT project managers working in Canadian and USA-based organizations. A moderated mediation model was analysed by hierarchical component reflective-formative measurement modelling using PLS-SEM.

Results suggest that the leader's interactive use of project MCS is associated with IT project performance, and this relationship is partially mediated by team learning behaviour. In addition, the relationship between the interactive use of project MCS and team learning behaviour is moderated by the organization's emphasis on process accountability, with the effect being stronger under the conditions of higher emphasis on process accountability.

This study contributes to the literature on the use of controls in the IT project-based business environments by explaining how the project leader's style of use of controls influences project team learning behaviour that in turn impacts project performance. Additionally, this study extends the project governance and accountability literature by identifying and empirically examining how the perceptions of project leader's institutionalized organizational accountability arrangements moderate the impact of the interactive use of control systems on team learning behaviour. A methodological contribution of the study is the scale development to measure leader's perceptions about the organization's emphasis on process accountability.

Accountability within distributed leadership (DL) is critical for DL to drive positive outcomes in health services organizations. Despite this, how accountability emerges in DL is less clear. This study aims to understand how accountability emerges in DL so that distributed leaders can drive improvements in healthcare access – an increasingly important outcome in today’s health services environment.

The authors use an instrumental case study of a dental institution in the USA, “Environ,” as it underwent a strategic change to improve healthcare access to rural populations. The authors focused on DL occurring within the strategic change and collected interview, observation and archival data.

The findings demonstrate accountability in DL emerged as shared accountability and has three elements: personal ownership, agentic actions and a shared belief system. Each of these was necessary for DL to advance the strategic change for improved healthcare access.

Top managers should be cognizant of the emergence processes driven by DL. This includes enabling pockets of employees to connect, align and link up so that ideas, processes and practices can emerge and allow for shared accountability in DL.

The overarching contribution of this research is identifying shared accountability in DL and its three elements: personal ownership, agentic actions and a shared belief system. These elements serve as a platform to demonstrate “how DL works” in a healthcare organization.