Introduction to special issue on ethnographies of accountability

C. Cordery, Ivo De Loo, H. Letiche
{"title":"Introduction to special issue on ethnographies of accountability","authors":"C. Cordery, Ivo De Loo, H. Letiche","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-07-2023-6546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper aims to outline the motivation for this Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) Special Issue, providing an overview of the six selected papers. This study seeks to inspire further ethnographic research on accountability.Design/methodology/approachThe authors reflect on why ethnographic investigation is essential to accountability research and the boundaries that constrained and enabled both this Special Issue and which occur in ethnographic research.FindingsThe contents of this issue do not merely describe or analyse one or more “accounts”, but also consider how the accounted for reflects its surroundings and its role in the social world. The authors argue that such research should progress from ethnographic descriptive data to infer meaningful conclusions and move from the everyday natural settings of behaviour to examine inter-relatedness. This requires the researcher to maintain their intra-relatedness. These boundaries, inherent to human existence, are actively created and operate at different aggregation levels to include and exclude.Research limitations/implicationsIn this introduction and the papers selected for this AAAJ special issue, with few exceptions, accountability shifts from the researched to the researcher as research accounts are produced. Yet, ethnographies of accountability are epistemologically and ontologically weighted towards accepting the possibility of shared social meaning requiring researchers to manage the interactions, relationalities and presuppositions between these places. The authors urge future researchers to experiment more explicitly than has often been the case with published accounts of these demands.Originality/valueThis AAAJ Special Issue provides a set of original empirical and theoretical contributions to support and advance further ethnographic research into accountability which acknowledges the boundaries that may include and exclude.","PeriodicalId":132341,"journal":{"name":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"1 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-07-2023-6546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to outline the motivation for this Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) Special Issue, providing an overview of the six selected papers. This study seeks to inspire further ethnographic research on accountability.Design/methodology/approachThe authors reflect on why ethnographic investigation is essential to accountability research and the boundaries that constrained and enabled both this Special Issue and which occur in ethnographic research.FindingsThe contents of this issue do not merely describe or analyse one or more “accounts”, but also consider how the accounted for reflects its surroundings and its role in the social world. The authors argue that such research should progress from ethnographic descriptive data to infer meaningful conclusions and move from the everyday natural settings of behaviour to examine inter-relatedness. This requires the researcher to maintain their intra-relatedness. These boundaries, inherent to human existence, are actively created and operate at different aggregation levels to include and exclude.Research limitations/implicationsIn this introduction and the papers selected for this AAAJ special issue, with few exceptions, accountability shifts from the researched to the researcher as research accounts are produced. Yet, ethnographies of accountability are epistemologically and ontologically weighted towards accepting the possibility of shared social meaning requiring researchers to manage the interactions, relationalities and presuppositions between these places. The authors urge future researchers to experiment more explicitly than has often been the case with published accounts of these demands.Originality/valueThis AAAJ Special Issue provides a set of original empirical and theoretical contributions to support and advance further ethnographic research into accountability which acknowledges the boundaries that may include and exclude.
问责民族志特刊导言
本文旨在概述本会计,审计和问责期刊(AAAJ)特刊的动机,提供六篇选定论文的概述。本研究旨在激发对问责制的进一步民族志研究。设计/方法/方法作者反思了为什么民族志调查对问责制研究至关重要,以及限制和实现本特刊和民族志研究的边界。这个问题的内容不只是描述或分析一个或多个“账户”,而是考虑账户如何反映其环境及其在社会世界中的作用。作者认为,这样的研究应该从民族志描述性数据发展到推断有意义的结论,并从日常的自然行为环境转向研究相互关系。这就要求研究者保持他们的内在联系。这些边界是人类生存所固有的,被积极地创造出来,并在不同的聚合层面上运作,以包容和排斥。在本引言和为AAAJ特刊选择的论文中,除了少数例外,随着研究报告的产生,责任从研究人员转移到研究人员。然而,责任的民族志在认识论和本体论上都倾向于接受共享社会意义的可能性,这要求研究人员管理这些地方之间的相互作用、关系和前提。作者敦促未来的研究人员进行更明确的实验,而不是经常发表这些需求的报告。原创性/价值本AAAJ特刊提供了一套原创性的经验和理论贡献,以支持和推进进一步的民族志研究,以承认可能包括和排除的边界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信