The disillusion of calculative practices in academia

IF 2.3 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
D. Argento, D. Dobija, G. Grossi
{"title":"The disillusion of calculative practices in academia","authors":"D. Argento, D. Dobija, G. Grossi","doi":"10.1108/qram-12-2019-0130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this paper is to highlight and compare insights from research conducted in different disciplines on the effects of the use of calculative practices in academia. It also acts as an introduction to the special issue on “governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities’ accountability”.,This paper reviews the findings and reflections provided in academic literature on the various types of consequences stemming from the diffusion of the “audit culture” in academia. In so doing, it draws upon insights from previous literature in education, management and accounting, and other papers included in this special issue of Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management.,The literature review shows that a growing number of studies are focussing on the hybridization of universities, not only in terms of calculative practices (e.g. performance indicators) but also in relation to individual actors (e.g. academics and managers) who may have divergent values, and thus, act according to multiple logics (business and academic logics). It highlights many areas in which further robust academic research is needed to guide policy and practice developments in universities.,This paper provides academics, regulators and decision-makers with relevant insights into the critical issues of using calculative practices in academia. Despite the negative effects have been observed in various disciplines, there is an evident perpetuation in the use of those practices.,This paper contributes to the ongoing debates on the disillusion of calculative practices in academia. Yet, positive changes can be achieved within the complex settings of “hybrid” universities when the apparent class division between academics and managers is bridged.","PeriodicalId":46537,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management","volume":"20 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-12-2019-0130","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to highlight and compare insights from research conducted in different disciplines on the effects of the use of calculative practices in academia. It also acts as an introduction to the special issue on “governing by numbers: audit culture and contemporary tales of universities’ accountability”.,This paper reviews the findings and reflections provided in academic literature on the various types of consequences stemming from the diffusion of the “audit culture” in academia. In so doing, it draws upon insights from previous literature in education, management and accounting, and other papers included in this special issue of Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management.,The literature review shows that a growing number of studies are focussing on the hybridization of universities, not only in terms of calculative practices (e.g. performance indicators) but also in relation to individual actors (e.g. academics and managers) who may have divergent values, and thus, act according to multiple logics (business and academic logics). It highlights many areas in which further robust academic research is needed to guide policy and practice developments in universities.,This paper provides academics, regulators and decision-makers with relevant insights into the critical issues of using calculative practices in academia. Despite the negative effects have been observed in various disciplines, there is an evident perpetuation in the use of those practices.,This paper contributes to the ongoing debates on the disillusion of calculative practices in academia. Yet, positive changes can be achieved within the complex settings of “hybrid” universities when the apparent class division between academics and managers is bridged.
学术界计算实践的幻灭
本文的目的是强调和比较来自不同学科的研究对学术界使用计算实践的影响的见解。它还充当了“数字治理:审计文化和当代大学问责故事”特刊的介绍。本文回顾了学术文献中关于“审计文化”在学术界扩散所产生的各种后果的发现和思考。在这样做的过程中,它借鉴了以前在教育、管理和会计方面的文献,以及本期《会计与管理定性研究》特刊中包含的其他论文的见解。文献综述表明,越来越多的研究关注大学的杂交,不仅在计算实践(如绩效指标)方面,而且涉及个体行动者(如学者和管理人员),这些行动者可能具有不同的价值观,因此根据多种逻辑(商业和学术逻辑)行事。它强调了许多需要进一步开展强有力的学术研究以指导大学政策和实践发展的领域。本文为学术界、监管机构和决策者提供了有关在学术界使用计算实践的关键问题的相关见解。尽管在各个学科中都观察到负面影响,但这些做法的使用显然是长期存在的。这篇论文对学术界正在进行的关于计算实践的幻灭的辩论做出了贡献。然而,在“混合型”大学的复杂环境中,当学者和管理者之间明显的阶级划分被弥合时,积极的变化是可以实现的。
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
31.60%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management is an international journal that promotes qualitative research at the interface of accounting and management. The journal encourages the assessment of practices in the accounting field through a variety of theoretical lenses, and seeks to further our knowledge of the accounting-management nexus in its broadest (e.g., organisational, social and political) contexts. QRAM welcomes submissions of original research papers, conceptual pieces, substantive review articles, and shorter papers such as comments or research notes. The following is intended to indicate potential topics, but is by no means prescriptive. These topics can be overlapping rather than discrete subject areas, and researchers should not feel restricted by the scope of the topics listed below. • Management accounting and control • Accountability, transition and organisational change • Performance management and accounting metrics • Accounting for strategic management • The use and behavioural effects of accounting information in organisational decision-making • Public and third sector accounting and management • Accounting and management controls for sustainability and the environment • Historical perspectives on the accounting-management interface • Methods and methodologies for research at the interface of accounting and management • Accounting and management in developing countries and emerging economies • Technology effects on accounting-management dynamics
×
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