A Critical Theory perspective on the pressures, contradictions and dilemmas faced by entry-level accounting academics

This paper is a study of the accounting academic labour market and workplace conditions. Its particular focus is on the pressures, contradictions and dilemmas experienced by junior (Levels A and B) accounting academics at Australian universities. It is argued that, due to work, personal and family pressures, many junior staff members may struggle to complete their PhD within a prescribed time frame. The reasons for this are discussed, as well as the likely effects. The Marxist concept of “alienation” is explored in detail to explain how a junior staff member's work “product” may take on a life of its own which stands up in opposition to her/him, to accuse her/him. The writings of the first-generation critical theorist, Herbert Marcuse, are used to suggest a radical path forward for the junior staff member. She/he is encouraged to take charge of her/his own destiny from within, value personal relationships, and pursue scholarship for its own sake. Opportunities for resistance are also explored in the paper.     

An institutional analysis of accounting growth and regulation in the United States

The accounting profession in the United States has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades, and growth is likely to continue in the foreseeable future. Although the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission possesses explicit statutory authority to regulate accounting and financial reporting, the profession is largely self-regulated, an arrangement widely supported by the corporate business community. Yet no single current accounting theory provides a full understanding of these two very basic phenomena. This paper examines organizational models based on contractualism (agency theory and transaction cost analysis), hierarchy (radical) and Fligstein's “organizational fields” conception, and evaluates their application to the accounting process. It is proposed that institutions are central to an understanding of accounting growth and regulation. The essay then offers a theoretical critique based on the internal and external aspects of economic organizations.     

Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability…and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet

The emergence of sustainable development as the complex notion through which social and environmental issues must be addressed – whether at policy, personal or organisational levels – has had a growing influence in the accounting literature. In addition to explorations of what sustainability may mean for accounting and finance, we have experienced a growth in both critiques of sustainability reporting (sic) and in experiments and speculations on how accounting for sustainability might advance. This growth – as with social and environmental accounting before it – has very properly attracted critique. One convergent theme in that critique has been a challenge that much of the realist and procedural baggage associated with conventional accounting is no longer apposite when seeking to account for sustainability. What may be required, is a more nuanced understanding of what ‘sustainability’ actually is and how, if at all, it can have any empirical meaning at the level of the organisation. This essay seeks to initiate an auto-critique of accounting for sustainability via an examination of meanings and contradictions in sustainable development which, in turn, leads towards a suggestion for the development of multiple and conditional narratives that whilst no longer realist or totalising, explicitly challenge the hegemonic claims of business movements in the arena of sustainability and sustainable development.     

Towards a political economy of accounting: An empirical illustration of the cambridge controversies

For over a century economics has been dominated by two theoretical positions: classical political economy and the neo-classical economics of marginalism. From these two paradigms have come the major theories of value: the labor theory and the marginalists theory of value. Until recently marginalism has held the center of the stage, however since the Cambridge Controversies and Piero Sraffa's critique of marginalism there has been a revival of interest in classical political economy. One outcome is clear from the Cambridge debates: in so far as accounting relies on marginalism for its theoretical foundations then those foundations are fallacious. This paper reviews some of the controversies and illustrates how accounting ideas are affected by the critique of marginalism. An alternative approach to accounting (based on ideas from political economy) is then explored using evidence from an empirical study of a multinational enterprise.     

Teaching ideas for the commencement of the governmental accounting source

Many undergraduate accounting students enter their first course in governmental accounting with a negative attitude about the subject. This is due, in part, to the fact that after several courses in “accounting,” the governmental course presents methods and procedures which are quite different and are, therefore, suspect. This paper encourages an approach to the course which can overcome this bias by providing an appropriate context from which to commence the course.     

The structure and progressivity of accounting research: the crisis in the academy revisited

Doubts were raised within the accounting research program in the United States in the late 1980s about its progress and future potential. In this paper, we develop criteria for “good” scientific conversation, which leads to progress (defined as innovation and relevance). The key to this process is critical evaluation of background assumptions. The structure of scientific conversation in accounting and economics, whose theories and practices accountants adopted, are examined. We conclude that structural barriers result in a lack of adequate transformative critique, which contributes to the lack of progress in the accounting research program.     

Accountability and the New Commercial Agenda

Accountability is examined in the light of an emerging commercial agenda. Specific to this agenda are new business strategies which involve a loosening of accounting controls. It is this loosening of accounting controls which presages some shift away from hierarchical accountability and opens up the opportunity for lateral accountability. However, the authors show how hierarchical accountability orientates managers towards surveillance of "decisions" within a dyadic structure of superior-subordinates. It is argued that, given this orientation, managers are likely to subvert practices which develop in the name of lateral accountability into acting as a "supplement" for more intensive surveillance. To guard against this danger the authors explore an "image" of business drawn from concepts of community, affiliation and self-audit to replace the prevailing "stakeholder-decisions" model.     

Accounting for People: A real step forward or more a case of wishing and hoping?

In principle, the Accounting for People initiative announced by the UK government in January 2003 held out the possibility of a real step forward in promoting the interests of employees. Despite its distinctly managerialist discourse, the initiative acknowledged that having now recognised that ‘people are our greatest asset’, employers should begin to consider how to report on their people management activities in financial statements. After more than three and a half years of consultation, debate and deliberation, larger UK quoted companies are now charged with providing only a minimal level of general information on their employees. Whatever promise may have been evident to wishful thinkers in the early months of the initiative, this outcome confirms that there is little possibility for progressively ‘accounting for people’ as long as such practices are shaped by powerful sectional interests. The purpose of this paper is to subject the initiative to critical scrutiny. The paper seeks to document how the Accounting for People initiative was quickly and effectively emasculated as a consequence of the power and influence wielded by the UK accountancy profession, identified as a key agent of capital. Additionally, attention is drawn to a number of contemporary developments, largely and perhaps knowingly ignored in the course of the Accounting for People debate, that may yet inform and energise a more radical approach to accounting for people.     

The evolution of management accounting routines in small businesses: a social construction perspective

This paper explores the development of management accounting in small firms through a social construction perspective. Taking Dirsmith’s (1998) (Dirsmith, M. W. 1998. Accounting and control as a solution to technical problems, political exchanges and forms of social discourse: the importance of substantive domain, Behavioural Research in Accounting, 10 (Supplement), 65–77) lead we examine the evolution of control and decision-making processes within four growth-orientated service sector businesses. Key to the perspective is the notion of the owner–manager and his/her employees as creators of management accounting routines that form through a cycle of action, externalization and habitualization. These routines still remain in the control of the originator and are flexible in nature. As the business grows these routines may become objectified into localized management accounting ‘facts’ and they may also be challenged by externally imported accounting conventions. This paper explores the creation of idiosyncratic accounting knowledge and the effects of its transmission over the history of the businesses.     

On the Myth of “Anglo-Saxon” Financial Accounting

The term “Anglo-Saxon accounting” (ASA) is used by a number of academic writers on the subject of International Accounting to refer to an approach to financial accounting and reporting that is supposedly common to the UK and Ireland, the USA and other English-speaking countries including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. While most of the writers we cite as using this term are continental Europeans, they also include an Englishman, J. Flower. The term is typically used to imply not just similar conceptual and technical approaches, but also a hegemonic alliance in the international politics of accounting regulation.This article seeks to establish that ASA in this sense is a myth. We do this first by critically examining four putative commonalities that are frequently attributed to the UK and USA approaches to financial accounting and that form the basis of the myth, and second by indicating the unfeasibility of such a hegemonic alliance within the IASC. A myth may have some factual foundations, but belief in it rests also on bases that are non-factual. So it is with ASA. In particular, analysis of the terms “true and fair view” (TFV) and “fair presentation (FP) in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)” shows that, far from their possessing a semantic equivalence that constitutes a commonality between UK and US financial reporting, their interpretation indicates a profound difference between the UK and US approaches. What UK and US financial reporting have historically shared is a micro- and capital market orientation that lends itself to international accounting regulation in a context of global capital markets. But with such an orientation now being generally accepted internationally, the differences between UK and US financial reporting are taking on an increased significance that this article seeks to highlight.     

Bridging the divides of online reporting

This paper looks at the possibilities of improving online reporting by closing the ‘digital divide’ through a ‘digitalised revolution’ and by narrowing the ‘accounting divide’ through the sharing of power and the expansion of membership in the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). Paradoxically, whilst the IASB may have contributed to the ‘accounting divide’ it may very well possess the potential to close it and thus improve online reporting. The potential to bridge the ‘accounting divide’ rests with the greater participation by developing country members to exert influence and ownership of the accounting standards setting process.     

Further Evidence on Accounting Choices: The South of Scotland Electricity Board, 1978–1988

This study augments Mclnnes (1990) by investigating the effects of a small number of accounting procedures which were chosen by the management of a state-owned enterprise. It focuses on those accounting choices in the South of Scotland Electricity Board's (SSEB) set of accounting choices which were subject to criticism in a Price Commission report published in 1978. In spite of this criticism SSEB management continued to use these accounting procedures in their main set of financial statements, although in recent years some of these procedures have been changed. Estimates are provided of the multi-period and cumulative decreasing effects of the accounting procedures criticised by the Commission on the net income reported by the SSEB. The possible incentives that SSEB management may have had for continuing to use these accounting procedures in their main set of financial statements after they had been subject to criticism are identified and explored.     

Social accounting's emancipatory potential: A Gramscian critique

At the heart of the social accounting project lies a radical and emancipatory intent. Yet social accounting practice, in the form of corporate self reporting, has systematically failed to open up organisations to substantive critique. Rather than rendering transparent the contradictions within capitalism, corporate social accounting primarily obfuscates these. Through corporate social accounting business expresses Moral and Intellectual Leadership, further entrenching its hegemony. This paper offers a theoretical explanation for why this is the case, drawing upon the work of Antonio Gramsci. Corporate social accounting serves a regressive role because it is closely tied to the economic base of society. An emancipatory social accounting would operate relatively autonomously from the economic base and actively expose the contradictions of the current hegemony. Such an accounting could be, indeed is, practiced by civil society. This paper goes further than merely critiquing corporate social accounting and draws attention to some of the different types of social accounting that are practiced by civil society organisations. In drawing attention to these civil society accounts the paper suggests that the social accounting project's emancipatory intent can still be realised although this would require a reassessment of the faith that has hitherto been placed in the corporation as an emancipatory change agent.     

No one is perfect: The limits of transparency and an ethic for ‘intelligent’ accountability

This paper draws on the work of Butler [Butler, J. (2005). Giving an account of oneself. New York: Fordham University Press] to develop a critique of the operation and adequacy of transparency as a form of accountability. The paper begins with an exploration of accountability as subjection explored through Lacan’s account of the social dynamics of recognition, and Freud’s account of guilt. This analysis then informs an exploration of what is argued to be our typically ambivalent embrace of transparency as a form of accountability. The final section of the paper investigates the potential for a more ‘intelligent’ form of accountability, grounded in an ethic of humility and generosity, made possible by a conscious acknowledgement of the ways in which I can never quite know what it is that I am doing.     

Accounting, post-productivism and corporate power in UK food and agriculture

‘In modern capitalism purchase and sale of manufactured foods is as fundamental to social existence as the exchange of a whole gamut of other commodities’ [Giddens, A. The constitution of society. US: University of California Press; 1984, p. 259]. Behind the production of food are networks of people, transactions and accounting that have rarely been examined by accounting researchers. The ‘agri-food’ sector is conflict-ridden and affects all but a very few of the world's population. This paper examines one segment of the industry – the UK – and explores certain elements that impact on the accounting environment of that industry. These are the move towards so-called post-productivist approaches by agricultural businesses and the considerable, yet not always obvious, influence of large agri-food corporations. The shifting asymmetries of power in the sector, which covers farmers, Government and an extensive service sector as well as corporations, are explored using aspects of domination in structuration theory, to elucidate the difficulties faced by farmers that force them to engage with accounting.     

An institutional theory perspective on the DRG framework, case-mix accounting systems and health-care organizations

Case-mix accounting systems have been advanced as both reflecting the economic reality that underlies a hospital's various “product lines”, as defined by DRG prospective payment categories, and facilitating rational decision making regarding resource acquisition, deployment and use. This article uses the institutional perspective to extend this conceptualization of case-mix accounting systems. The institutional perspective proposes that many elements of organizational structure, like case-mix accounting systems, reflect as much a need to conform to societal expectations of acceptable practice as the technical imperative of fostering rationality. This article also extends institutional theory regarding the issues of power and decoupling by considering institutionalization to be an unfinished process in the health-care context, wherein the active agency of individuals and organizations is subjected to systematic examination. In this specific context, case-mix accounting may play a significant role in establishing and perpetuating — not merely supporting — the very social structure of legitimacy, and may consequently be considered an interest-oriented activity having the potential to penetrate and alter the internal operating processes of financially strained hospitals.     

Objectivity in accounting

This paper defends the possibility of objectivity in accounting. The views presented are shaped by the antirepresentationalist philosophy of Donald Davidson, and in particular by the conviction that objectivity can and must be founded upon intersubjectivity. A critique of Shapiro’s [Shapiro, B. (1997). Objectivity, relativism and truth in external financial reporting: What’s really at stake in the disputes. Accounting Organizations and Society, 22(2), 165–185; Shapiro, B. (1998). Toward a normative model of rational argumentation for critical accounting discussion. Accounting Organizations and Society, 23(7), 641–664] essentially representationalist analysis of the presuppositions of financial reporting, and an exploration of the metaphor of accounting as a language, are used to elucidate the antirepresentationalist view of accounting advanced in the paper. The elucidation continues through a reconsideration of the question of presuppositions of accounting, and the issue of the politicization of accounting: it is concluded that accounting has no philosophical presuppositions, and that the difference between desirably objective and politically distorted accounts essentially lies in the practices carried out in the name of each.     

A writing intervention for the accounting classroom: dealing with the problem of faulty modifiers

Good communication skills continue to be viewed as critical for success in accounting. This paper demonstrates a writing-skills “intervention” that deals with faulty modifiers, a grammatical problem that can inhibit accounting students and professionals from achieving the clarity and conciseness widely regarded as essential in the accounting profession. The intervention consists of a handout distributed to students – fashioned to sensitize them to the pervasiveness of faulty modifiers and help them avoid the problem – and an in-class discussion of the handout. By design, this intervention is both inexpensive and unobtrusive. For the accounting instructor, we provide in the body of the paper a technical, but unpedantic and informal, analysis of faulty modifiers, including numerous examples of the problem, accompanied by alternative corrections. To date, few papers in the accounting education literature that deal with writing problems present direct assessment evidence. To assess the efficacy and perceived value of our learning intervention, we collected assessment data – both direct (i.e., a set of three diagnostic tests) and indirect (i.e., feedback from a student questionnaire) from two institutions at which our learning intervention was tested. These data suggest than an intervention of the sort described here can be valuable in remedying discrete weaknesses of student writing. In a larger sense, we believe our paper can be used as a model for the development of similar “interventions” that cover other grammatical problems, and that can serve either as stand-alone entities (similar to the method proposed by Reinstein and Houston (2004) [Using the Securities and Exchange Commission’s “plain English” guidelines to improve accounting students’ writing skills. Journal of Accounting Education, 22, 53–67]) or as complementary resources to more comprehensive and formal writing programs.     

Exploring (false) dualisms for environmental accounting praxis

This paper focuses on the political nature of the linguistic dualisms or ‘false antinomies’ that inhere in environmental accounting practice and environmental accounting research. These dualisms, ‘subject–object,’ ‘man–woman,’ ‘mind–body,’ and ‘culture–nature,’ the paper argues, need to be ‘ambiguized’ if the politics inherent in these dualisms are to be resisted. Two strategies for the ‘ambiguization’ of these dualisms are suggested: ‘performative parody,’ which is a strategy intended for environmental accounting practitioners, and ‘democratic reflexivity,’ which is a strategy intended for environmental accounting researchers. In taking this linguistic focus, the paper challenges common sense constructions of the environment and the potentially elitist and anti-democratic nature of environmental accounting research. By offering these two strategies, the paper provides a means of environmental accounting praxis, or means of resisting global ‘environmental’ domination.