Escaping transparent, asymmetrical and agentive accountability? Entrepreneurial accounts and researchers' countertransference

M. Besson, P. Jacquinot, Rémi Jardat, Jean-Luc Moriceau
{"title":"Escaping transparent, asymmetrical and agentive accountability? Entrepreneurial accounts and researchers' countertransference","authors":"M. Besson, P. Jacquinot, Rémi Jardat, Jean-Luc Moriceau","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-01-2022-5641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis article of exploratory research provides a critical perspective on accountability, focusing on three characteristics: transparency, asymmetry and individual agency. An experimental method is developed, calling for an ethics of accountability.Design/methodology/approachFour entrepreneurs have given accounts of themselves and their projects in life cycle interviews. This article applies Devereux's approach (1967), which allows for opacity (the “unconscious”) to oneself and to others with symmetry between analysts and analysed, and a lack of demarcation between the observer and the observed.FindingsA tragic entrepreneurial accountability trap of continuous self-justification was discovered, which pertains both to the entrepreneurs and the researchers. Nonetheless, the researchers as inspired by Devereux's method were able to realize a form of accounterability.Social implicationsThis article shows that the demands for transparent, asymmetrical and agentive accountability call for ethical reflection. The request for accounts, as resulting in the accounts given and the research conducted into accountability, are all sources of constraints. Differing the accountability situation may lessen the constraints.Originality/valueThis study introduces Devereux's method as an investigative tool in accountability research, opening up new perspectives on communication and analysis. This article shows the researcher as situated both inside and outside of the accountability mechanisms. This article explores a singular form of accountability; that of entrepreneurs who seemingly only account for the future, thereby disconnecting them from others.","PeriodicalId":132341,"journal":{"name":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-01-2022-5641","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeThis article of exploratory research provides a critical perspective on accountability, focusing on three characteristics: transparency, asymmetry and individual agency. An experimental method is developed, calling for an ethics of accountability.Design/methodology/approachFour entrepreneurs have given accounts of themselves and their projects in life cycle interviews. This article applies Devereux's approach (1967), which allows for opacity (the “unconscious”) to oneself and to others with symmetry between analysts and analysed, and a lack of demarcation between the observer and the observed.FindingsA tragic entrepreneurial accountability trap of continuous self-justification was discovered, which pertains both to the entrepreneurs and the researchers. Nonetheless, the researchers as inspired by Devereux's method were able to realize a form of accounterability.Social implicationsThis article shows that the demands for transparent, asymmetrical and agentive accountability call for ethical reflection. The request for accounts, as resulting in the accounts given and the research conducted into accountability, are all sources of constraints. Differing the accountability situation may lessen the constraints.Originality/valueThis study introduces Devereux's method as an investigative tool in accountability research, opening up new perspectives on communication and analysis. This article shows the researcher as situated both inside and outside of the accountability mechanisms. This article explores a singular form of accountability; that of entrepreneurs who seemingly only account for the future, thereby disconnecting them from others.
逃避透明、不对称和代理的问责制?企业家账户与研究者的反移情
摘要本文从一个批判性的视角探讨了问责制的三个特征:透明度、不对称性和个体能动性。开发了一种实验方法,呼吁责任伦理。设计/方法/途径4位企业家在生命周期访谈中介绍了他们自己和他们的项目。本文采用了Devereux的方法(1967),该方法允许对自己和他人不透明(“无意识”),分析者和被分析者之间具有对称性,并且观察者和被观察者之间缺乏界限。发现了一个不断自我辩护的悲剧性企业家问责陷阱,这既属于企业家,也属于研究者。尽管如此,受Devereux方法的启发,研究人员能够实现一种形式的问责制。本文表明,对透明、不对称和代理问责制的要求需要伦理反思。要求提供账目,导致提供账目和对责任制进行研究,都是制约因素的来源。不同的问责情况可能会减轻约束。原创性/价值本研究将德弗罗的方法作为一种调查工具引入问责研究,为交流和分析开辟了新的视角。这篇文章显示了研究者处于问责机制的内部和外部。本文探讨了问责制的一种单一形式;那些似乎只考虑未来的企业家,因此与他人脱节。
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