Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPalermo, Tommaso
dc.contributor.authorPower, Michael
dc.contributor.authorAshby, Simon
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-12T13:21:36Z
dc.date.available2022-10-12T13:21:36Z
dc.date.issued2022en_US
dc.identifier.issn0823-9150
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1911-3846.12800
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12127/7110
dc.description.abstractThis study develops a process model of how accounting may come to an end. Grounded in a longitudinal study of a risk culture survey, this model focuses on the dynamics that underpin the repetition of accounting practices, and sheds light on two boundary conditions of successful repetition and continuation, which are in tension with each other. On the one hand, there are pressures for repetition that preserves continuity and comparability. On the other hand, there is the ongoing organizational need to adjust accounting practices. Iterating between the case study findings, social studies of accounting, and the sociology of replication in scientific practice, the model shows how moving too close to either boundary increases the risk that repetition undermines the accounting practice being repeated: “perfect repetition” may be perceived as uninteresting and decision-irrelevant; very “imperfect repetition” may be perceived as something too different and idiosyncratic, and hence also decision-irrelevant. As a result, the analysis extends a rich literature that has examined empirical instances of failure of the conditions that sustain the repeatability of accounting practices. Via the theory of “self-undermining repetition,” this study shows how the possibilities for accounting's ending are paradoxically inherent in the very act of repetition. This notion of “self-undermining repetition” is deepened by a discussion of how it may be affected by four contingencies: task ambiguity, organizational politics, organizational actors' reflexivity, and external networks of support. Overall, the analysis of the self-undermining dynamics of repetition and related contingencies contrasts with research that foregrounds the constitutive nature of repeated uses of accountings. It shows how repetition may also undermine, rather than cumulatively consolidate, accounting practices.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipAccepted by Thomas Ahrens. The authors thank Thomas Ahrens and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and guidance. Earlier versions of this paper have been presented at research seminars held at the LSE and Royal Holloway, 2015 IPA Conference, 2016 EIASM Conference on New Directions in Management Accounting, and 2017 MASOP workshop. The authors are grateful for the helpful comments of Albrecht Becker, Wai Fong Chua, and Dane Pflueger. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), Chartered Insurance Institute (CII), Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), and Lighthill Risk Network.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.subjectSurveyen_US
dc.subjectRisk Cultureen_US
dc.subjectRepetitionen_US
dc.subjectProcess Theoryen_US
dc.subjectAccounting Life Cycleen_US
dc.subjectPracticeen_US
dc.titleHow accounting ends: Self-undermining repetition in accounting life cyclesen_US
dc.identifier.journalContemporary Accounting Researchen_US
dc.source.volume39
dc.source.issue4
dc.source.beginpage2790
dc.source.endpage2824
dc.contributor.departmentLondon School of Economics and Political Scienceen_US
dc.identifier.eissn1911-3846
vlerick.knowledgedomainAccounting & Financeen_US
vlerick.knowledgedomainSpecial Industries : Financial Services Managementen_US
vlerick.typearticleFT ranked journal article  en_US
vlerick.vlerickdepartmentAFen_US
vlerick.vlerickdepartmentCFSMen_US
dc.identifier.vperid258194en_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record