Accruals accounting in the public sector: A road not always taken

The move from cash to accruals accounting by many governments is viewed as an aspect of an ongoing New Public Management agenda designed to achieve a more business-like and performance-focused public sector. Proponents argue that accruals accounting provides more appropriate information for decision makers and ultimately leads to a more efficient and effective public sector. The transition from cash to accruals accounting for UK central government departments was announced in the early 1990s and was embedded within approximately ten years. At that time there were clear indications that analogous changes, following a similar timeline, would occur in the Republic of Ireland (RoI). In reality, the changes were significantly less extensive. Utilising document analysis and interviews with key actors, this paper considers why a functioning accruals system was established in the UK whereas in the RoI the change to accruals accounting was a ‘road not taken’.

The Hand of Government in Shaping Accounting and Reporting in the UK Charity Sector

Accounting in the UK charity sector has changed massively over the last 25 years, with various stakeholders influencing what has occurred. Using insights from stakeholder theory, and interviews with a number of key actors, this article focuses on the influence of one definitive stakeholder – government – in developing a regime of quality accounting and reporting in the sector. In particular, the evolution of the Statement of Recommended Practice for charities is explored. It is argued that a much tighter and more meaningful regime of accounting and reporting has been encouraged by government, amongst other stakeholders, and this has led to a more accountable and healthier charitable sector.

Accounting change: Explaining the outcomes, interpreting the process

Purpose: The issue of accounting change, why and how accounting evolves through time and within specific organisational settings, has been addressed by an important body of literature. This paper aims to explain why, in processes of accounting change, organisations confronting similar environmental pressures show different outcomes of change.

Design/methodology/approach: Drawing on archetype theory, the paper analyses the case of two Italian local governments. Comparative case studies were carried out, reconstructing a period of 15 years.

Findings: Although confronted with similar environmental pressures, the two cases show two different patterns of accounting change, where only one case is able to finally reach radical change. Accounting change can be prompted by external stimuli, but, once the change is prompted, the outcomes of the change are explained by the dynamics of intra-organisational conditions.

Originality/value: The study contributes to accounting change literature by adopting an approach (i.e. archetype theory) that overcomes some of the limitations of previous studies in explaining variations in organisational change. Through this, the authors are able to explain different outcomes and paces of accounting change and point out the intra-organisational factors also affecting them in the presence of similar environmental pressures. A specification of the theoretical framework in a particular setting is also provided.

Accounting, Regulation and Profitability: The Case of PFI Hospital Refinancing

The refinancing of PFI (Private Finance Initiative) projects represents one of the most contentious aspects of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in the UK. The negative publicity associated with UK PFI refinancing deals is associated with several factors, including, evidence of massive private sector profit making, the failure of private sector financiers to share refinancing profits and, lastly, private sector frustration of adequate regulatory intervention in this area. Utilising a dynamic model of capital market and state interaction, this paper explains these outcomes as a function of effective private sector lobbying of bureaucratic state agencies to alter the structure of accounting, accountability and regulation with the goal of securing favourable profit and risk outcomes. These dynamics are illustrated with reference to the history of UK PFI refinancing and a case study of one of the projects where these gains reached extreme levels.

Taking pluralism seriously:Embedded moralities in management accounting and control systems

Professor Norman Macintosh has long been a leading, and at times a dissonant, voice in critical accounting studies, exhibiting an intellectual dexterity seldom encountered in the accounting academy. His work ranges from the application of traditional organizational theories within work organizations to poststructural renderings of capital market exigencies. Here, we consider and extend Professor Macintosh's work contemplating the morality embedded within, and propagated by, management accounting and control systems (macs). We begin with Macintosh (1995) employing structuration theory in investigating the ethics of profit manipulation within large, decentralized corporations. The work highlights the fundamental dialectical contradictions within these work organizations, demonstrates the indeterminacy of traditional ethical reasoning, and shows the extent to which macs provide legitimating underpinnings for management action. We propose to extend the conversation using the tools provided in Macintosh's subsequent work: a Levinasian ethic (Macintosh et al., 2009), and heteroglossic accounting (Macintosh, 2002)—both emerging from his poststructuralist predilections. A Levinasian perspective provides an ontologically grounded ethic, and heteroglossic accounting calls for multiple accountings representing alternative moral voices. A critical dialogic framework is proposed as a theoretic for imagining heteroglossic accounting that takes pluralism seriously by recognizing the reality of irresolvable differences and asymmetric power relationships associated with assorted moral perspectives.

Scientific revolutions, progess and accounting research

Thomas Kuhn’s concept of a normal science paradigm has been utilised and criticised across a range of social science fields. However, Kuhn’s aim was to argue that science progresses not in an incremental manner but through a series of paradigms that need a revolution in thought to shift from one to the next. This paper addresses Kuhn’s work focusing on the totality of his model, but recognising the ambiguities concerning paradigm shifts that have led to charges of relativism. To address this weakness an argument is advanced for a political economy analysis of the publication process and the development of critical accounting research centred on human emancipation. The paper concludes with some suggested research agendas particularly relevant to the Irish context.

Perceptions of authorial identity in academic writing among undergraduate accounting students: implications for unintentional plagiarism

The current study explores first, second and third year UK accounting students’ perceptions of authorial identity and their implications for unintentional plagiarism. The findings suggest that whilst all students have reasonably positive perceptions of their authorial identity, there is room for improvement. Significant differences in second year students’ perceptions were reported for some positive aspects of authorial identity. However, results for negative aspects show that second year students find it significantly more difficult to express accounting in their own words than first and third years. Furthermore, second years are significantly more afraid than first years that what they write will look unimpressive. Finally, the results for approaches to writing, which also have implications for unintentional plagiarism, revealed that students across all years appear to adopt aspects of top-down, bottom-up and pragmatic approaches to writing. Emerging from these findings, the study offers suggestions to accounting educators regarding authorial identity instruction.

UK charity accounting: an exercise in widening stakeholder engagement

Given the economic and social impact of the charity sector in the United Kingdom (UK), the importance of good governance has been recognised as a basis for underpinning effective and ef?cient performance, and for ensuring that charities meet the legitimate aspirations of key stakeholders. A major aspect of this is high-quality accounting and reporting. Over the past 25 years attempts have been made to improve this through the medium of successive, evolving versions of a Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP) for charities. As a foundation for the future review of the SORP (expected to be published in 2015), the SORP Committee undertook its largest ever consultation on an accounting pronouncement. This paper presents the ?ndings of that consultation and, analysing them using stakeholder theory, concludes that this ambitious exercise facilitated much wider stakeholder engagement than had been experienced before and has the potential to legitimise further the SORP.