Search results

This paper aims to investigate the extent to which accounting standards for social impact reporting are in the public interest. This study aims to explore what the public interest means for social impact reporting by charities; and assess the extent to which the accounting standardisation of social impact reporting supports the public interest so defined.

This study conducts a case study of how stakeholders in Australian charities conceptualise the public interest when discussing accounting standardisation. This paper distinguishes three concepts of the public interest from prior research, namely, aggregative, processual and common good. For each, this paper analyses the implications for accounting and how accountants serve the public interest, and how they align with stakeholder views.

Stakeholder views align with the aggregative and processual concepts of public interest, however this was contested and partial. Accounting standards for social impact reporting will only serve the public interest if they also capture and implement the common good approach.

Clarifying how key stakeholders interpret the public interest can help standard-setters and governments design (or withhold) accounting standards on social impact reporting. This paper also distinguishes different practical roles for accountants in this domain – information merchants, umpires or advocates, which each public interest concept implies.

This paper extends prior research on accounting for the public interest to social impact reporting. The paper empirically demonstrates the salience of the common good concept of public interest and demonstrates the diversity of views on the standardisation of social impact reporting by charities.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

National Health Service (NHS) managers as change agents have been given the responsibility for the implementation of the NHS reforms and their views, beliefs and attitudes are therefore paramount to the effective and successful implementation of the reforms. A total of 28 managers from two acute care and one community care NHS Trusts in London were interviewed, after completing questionnaires, with a view to understanding their perceptions of the NHS managerial culture and also what they believed to be their public image. It appeared that managers generally believed that all NHS workers share altruistic core values and they thought that these core values had remained unchanged despite the previous and present reforms. The managers generally saw the recent NHS reforms as being compatible with this pan‐organisational altruistic culture; this should contribute positively towards their successful implementation. The managers, however, believed that the public did not see managers as being a part of this altruistic culture but at the same time they felt that this public view was misguided and unfair. Furthermore the managers do not appear to have allowed their perceived negative public perception to influence or shift their commitment to their altruistic values and ethos.

A circular letter addressed by the Local Government Board on the 27th October, 1913, to Authorities administering the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, is printed as an Addendum to a recently issued Report by DR. MACFADDEN, on the work of the Board's Inspectors of Foods during the year 1913–14. This letter relates to the administration of the “Public Health (Milk and Cream) Regulations, 1912,” and points out that by these Regulations “ a definite restriction ” has been placed on the use of preservatives by producers, retailers and others concerned in the milk and cream trade, that no preservative is to be added to milk in‐any case, that no preservative is to be added to cream which is sold as cream, and that the Regulations do not prohibit the sale of cream containing boric acid, borax, or a mixture of these preservative substances, or hydrogen peroxide, provided (1) that it is sold not as cream, but as preserved cream, and (2) that the vessel in which it is sold bears a declaration in the prescribed form, showing the amount and nature of the particular preservative added, the addition to cream of any other preservative substances than those mentioned being prohibited. It is further stated that the object of the Regulations in regard to cream is to secure that preserved cream sold in compliance with the Regulations shall be distinguished at all stages of sale from cream to which no preservative has been added, and that this distinction is important in the interests of the public generally, and particularly in the interests of children and invalids. The italics are ours. In view of this pronouncement by the Board it is pertinent to enquire as to the fate of the extraordinary recommendation made in one of the Board's recent official reports to the effect that a much larger maximum amount of preservative should be allowed in cream during the six warmer months of the year than during the other six months. If a maximum limit is fixed for any period it is plain that the presence of an amount of preservative in excess of that limit is regarded by the Board as capable of rendering the cream injurious to health—at any rate in so far as children and invalids are concerned. It follows, therefore, that the adoption of the recommendation referred to would result in the sale of cream which, on the Board's own showing, must be injurious to health, during the warmer months of the year. The recommendation in question has been put forward as an argument for the defence in cases of prosecution for the adulteration of cream with preservatives, and in view of its official or semi‐official nature, has created unnecessary difficulties for the prosecuting Authorities. It is true that in the Sessions Appeal case of Whale v. Bennett, the character of this recommendation was thoroughly exposed and that the proposal was effectively disposed of, but it is none the less serious and inconvenient that such a suggestion should have been allowed to appear in a Government Report. We hope that we may now be permitted to congratulate the Board on the fact that they have officially repudiated the recommendation in question. The circular letter urges Local Authorities administering the Food and Drugs Acts to see that the “Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912,” are enforced in their districts “by the administrative procedure authorised under the Regulations, and, should necessity arise, by the institution of proceedings under the public health enactments referred to in the note appended to the Regulations.” It is, however, admitted by the Board in this letter that the action taken under the Regulations is independent of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts and does not affect the action which may be taken under those Acts and that it is open to the Authority “ on consideration of the report of a Public Analyst on a sample of milk or cream to take action either under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts or under the Regulations,” but the Board considers that “it is generally desirable that in cases in which it appears that the Regulations have been infringed, such action as may be necessary should be taken under the Regulations rather than under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.” We are unable to agree with this view. The appeal cases of Cullen v. McNair and Whale v. Bennett have resulted in the decisive establishment of the fact that the presence of boric preservatives in cream to the extent mentioned in those cases renders the adulterated cream injurious to health, and, in all cases where samples of cream are found to contain such amounts of this adulterant, Local Authorities will be well advised to institute proceedings under the Third Section of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1875. The Sixth Section of the Act of 1875 has been shown to be useless by the decision in the Sessions appeal case of Williams v. Friend, whereas under the Third Section notification of the presence of the amount of the adulterant affords no protection to the adulterator, and the law in this respect is not and cannot be over‐ridden by the “ Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912.” The principal blot on the Milk and Cream Regulations, 1912, is that under these Regulations any amount of an injurious preservative may be added with impunity to cream so long as the cream is sold as “ preserved cream ” and the amount of the preservative present is stated on the label—provisions which are perfectly worthless so far as the protection of the ordinary purchaser is concerned.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and explore the possible underlying reasons for the differences in approaches adopted by organisations regarding the inclusion or exclusion of explicit statements in relation to the personal commitment and contribution of their employees within their publicized CSR strategies.

The approach is based on a longitudinal study involving interviews with 47 UK National Health Service (NHS) managers between 2000 and 2009. Theoretical frameworks and literature related to CSR, organisation culture and institutional theory are drawn upon in an integrated manner to analyse and discuss the findings.

Although the majority of NHS managers report holding core altruistic values they believe the general public does not recognize this and views them negatively. It is suggested that a combination of direct and indirect strategies aimed at highlighting the socially responsible role of NHS managers and their overall commitment and contribution to the NHS would help challenge the existing negative public image of NHS managers.

The study is based on a relatively small number of London based NHS managers consisting mainly of managers occupying senior and middle management positions and who may not necessarily represent the views of all managers nationally.

Whilst issues related to CSR are of concern to a wide range of organisational stakeholders, there appears to be relatively limited research undertaken in the context of directly exploring issues of concern from the employee stakeholder perspective. Within the context of the aims of this paper, this paper addresses this relative gap. The paper is of interest to a wide range of readers including NHS and non‐governmental organisation (NGO) policy formulators and practitioners; academics and students.

The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of a study that examined the development of an assessment framework for public involvement.

The paper has adopted a multi‐method approach that includes: a focused review of literature relating to tools that might be used to provide valid and reliable assessments of public involvement; key informant interviews with people with experience from various perspectives of efforts to involve the public in the planning and development of health services; and a detailed study of a specific public involvement initiative involving a range of “stakeholder” interviews.

The paper finds that there are uncertainty and a lack of consensus about how assessment of public involvement should be undertaken. The findings emphasise the need to recognise the diverse nature of public involvement, which may require assessment to be employed flexibly at each individual NHS Board level.

The paper is a small‐scale study, in which it was only possible to probe a limited number of stakeholders' views due to practical and time restrictions.

The paper adds value to the discussions taking place at Scottish Government level as to the best approach in assessing public involvement in health service decision making.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the factors that may influence support of public-private partnerships (PPPs) by government employees potentially involved in designing and implementing cross-sectoral collaborations.

Based on an original survey of government employees in the USA, this study explores the impact of individual, organizational and environmental factors on their support for PPPs by employing ordinary least squares regression.

Among the individual factors, involvement in PPPs and concerns for efficiency have been identified as factors having positive impact on government employees’ support for PPPs. Male government employees seem to be less supportive of PPPs than female government employees. Environmental factors such as public opinion and appointed agency heads positively influence government employees’ views of PPPs. No evidence for the significant impact of organizational factors on government employee perceptions of PPPs was found.

Factors influencing government employees’ attitudes may also have an effect on employees’ behaviors when involved in PPPs. Further studies may clarify how attitudes are translated into behaviors and how they influence the performance of PPPs. Investigations into government employees’ views of PPPs before and after their actual involvement in partnerships may allow for identifying changes in employees’ support for PPPs and their possible causes.

This study investigates the impacts of individual, organizational and environmental factors on government employees’ support for partnerships with the private sector that remain under-researched in the literature.

This paper takes a long-term view of how the US public and private sectors have been viewed in relation to each other. It notes that since the time of approximately the Nixon Administration, each sector has not been viewed favourably by the public. Over the past 40 years, the private sector has been perceived as being run by the unscrupulous and the public sector by incompetents. The essay argues that Donald Trump was able to exploit these circumstances to win the 2016 election.

This paper presents a polemic. It relies on archival research and data to create a new view of historical eras in US business history. The object of analysis is the idea of relative legitimacy, the public image of the State vis-a-vis business and business managers.

Although the paper addresses business history, a novel argument is presented about the 2016 US Presidential election. It is proposed that Trump took advantage of unique historical circumstances; therefore, his win had more to do with the moment than with him personally.

The paper interprets the 2016 Presidential race as the end-point of a 250-year journey. It sets a new agenda, in that previous analyses have mostly viewed the ascendancy of Trump as pertaining to distinctively post-industrial twenty-first-century phenomena.

In analysing the 2016 Presidential race, the emphasis is largely removed from issues of personality or partisan politics.

The paper takes a view of the 2016 election which has not hitherto been adopted. It proposes a new concept – relative legitimacy – as having a substantial explanatory value.

Seeks to illustrate areas of overreach and commonality between public relations and marketing, more specifically the confusion and ambiguity characterizing the role of both communication functions in modern business organizations. Describes the evolution of marketing and public relations to provide a view of why a closer integration between the two may be desirable. Explores different functional perspectives on their interaction and concludes that these represent “ideal types” rather than organizational realities. Foresees developments in terms of integration between public relations and marketing but dependent on the dynamics of organizational cultures and served markets and on research output from both sides of the academic divide.

The purpose of this paper is to further extend research (Fan et al., 2012a) examining the attitudes of Chinese certified public accountants with respect to independence aspects of their professional codes of conduct and their influence on ethical judgement. These attitudes are compared with those of Australian public accountants Particular attention is given to refining a pre-existing instrument to determine measurement invariance.

A field survey of 81 Australian and 516 Chinese public accountants was conducted including the distribution of a questionnaire. Statistical analysis included confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance.

An analysis of data established the existence of a stable model for identifying the dimensions of independence of mind and independence in appearance within the context of the codes of conduct relevant to both cultures. Chinese accountants demonstrated significantly less concern about audit-client relationships affecting independence in appearance compared to their Australian counterparts. Interestingly, independence of mind was found to positively influence ethical judgement for both groups taken together, although Chinese accountants were the significant contributors to this model outcome.

The relatively small sample of Australian accountants drawn from a limited population base could influence the quality of data analysis. This paper provides a further research direction for re-examining the relationship between Australian public accountants’ attitudes towards their code of professional ethics and their ethical judgements in a significantly larger sample.

This paper is particularly useful to the profession in that it will provide members with better insights into how accountants in different cultural settings view audit independence issues and their relationships with audit clients. Second, this study offers a scale for measuring attitudes towards codes of professional ethics for further cross-cultural studies.

An exploratory research exercise that indicates that accounting practitioners in divergent cultures demonstrate similar concerns about independence issues, although it is believed that guanxi is likely to explain why Chinese accountants are less concerned with independence of appearance issues. The research also presents a validated instrument for examining attitudes towards codes of ethics.