预算问责程序中的沟通调查

IF 2.3 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
J. Mutiganda, G. Grossi, L. Hassel
{"title":"预算问责程序中的沟通调查","authors":"J. Mutiganda, G. Grossi, L. Hassel","doi":"10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose - This paper aims to analyse the role of communication in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Design/methodology/approach - Conceptual elements of the theory of communicative action and the literature on routines were used to conduct a field study in two hospital districts in Finland, from 2009 to 2015. Data were based on interviews, document analysis, observed meetings and repeated contact with key informants. Findings - The findings explain how accountability routines take different forms – weak or strong – in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels. Differences depend on the generative structures and mechanisms of the communicative process – relational and normative – used to give and ask information to and from organisation members involved in accountability relationships. An explorative finding is that discourse-based communication plays an important role in bridging the gap between weak and strong accountability routines. The main theoretical contribution is to conceptualise and show the role of communicative rationalities in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Practical implications - The implication for practitioners and policymakers is to show to what extent the organisation policies and communicative rationalities used in accountability have potential to improve or not to improve the practices of accountability routines. Mutual understanding, motivation and capacity of organisation members to do as expected and agreed upon without pressure improve accountability routines. Originality/value - The value of this study is to explain how accountability routines take different forms in practice (weak or strong) in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels, depending on the generative structures of the communicative process used in practicing accountability routines.","PeriodicalId":46537,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigation of communication in budgetary accountability routines\",\"authors\":\"J. Mutiganda, G. Grossi, L. Hassel\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose - This paper aims to analyse the role of communication in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Design/methodology/approach - Conceptual elements of the theory of communicative action and the literature on routines were used to conduct a field study in two hospital districts in Finland, from 2009 to 2015. Data were based on interviews, document analysis, observed meetings and repeated contact with key informants. Findings - The findings explain how accountability routines take different forms – weak or strong – in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels. Differences depend on the generative structures and mechanisms of the communicative process – relational and normative – used to give and ask information to and from organisation members involved in accountability relationships. An explorative finding is that discourse-based communication plays an important role in bridging the gap between weak and strong accountability routines. The main theoretical contribution is to conceptualise and show the role of communicative rationalities in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Practical implications - The implication for practitioners and policymakers is to show to what extent the organisation policies and communicative rationalities used in accountability have potential to improve or not to improve the practices of accountability routines. Mutual understanding, motivation and capacity of organisation members to do as expected and agreed upon without pressure improve accountability routines. Originality/value - The value of this study is to explain how accountability routines take different forms in practice (weak or strong) in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels, depending on the generative structures of the communicative process used in practicing accountability routines.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46537,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-06-2018-0039","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: 0

摘要

目的-本文旨在分析沟通在形成问责程序机制中的作用。设计/方法/方法- 2009年至2015年,在芬兰的两个医院区进行了一项实地研究,使用了交际行为理论的概念要素和关于惯例的文献。数据的基础是访谈、文件分析、观察会议和与关键线人的反复接触。研究结果——研究结果解释了在不同的组织和不同的层级中,问责程序如何采取不同的形式——弱的或强的。差异取决于交际过程的生成结构和机制——关系型和规范性——用于向参与问责关系的组织成员提供和询问信息。一个探索性的发现是,基于语篇的沟通在弥合弱问责程序和强问责程序之间的差距方面发挥了重要作用。主要的理论贡献是概念化和展示沟通理性在塑造问责程序机制中的作用。实践意义-对从业者和政策制定者的意义是显示在问责制中使用的组织政策和沟通理性在多大程度上有可能改善或不改善问责制惯例的实践。组织成员在没有压力的情况下按照预期和约定行事的相互理解、动机和能力,可以改善问责程序。原创性/价值-本研究的价值在于解释问责程序在实践中如何在不同的组织和不同的层级中采取不同的形式(弱或强),这取决于在实践问责程序中使用的交际过程的生成结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Investigation of communication in budgetary accountability routines
Purpose - This paper aims to analyse the role of communication in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Design/methodology/approach - Conceptual elements of the theory of communicative action and the literature on routines were used to conduct a field study in two hospital districts in Finland, from 2009 to 2015. Data were based on interviews, document analysis, observed meetings and repeated contact with key informants. Findings - The findings explain how accountability routines take different forms – weak or strong – in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels. Differences depend on the generative structures and mechanisms of the communicative process – relational and normative – used to give and ask information to and from organisation members involved in accountability relationships. An explorative finding is that discourse-based communication plays an important role in bridging the gap between weak and strong accountability routines. The main theoretical contribution is to conceptualise and show the role of communicative rationalities in shaping the mechanisms of accountability routines. Practical implications - The implication for practitioners and policymakers is to show to what extent the organisation policies and communicative rationalities used in accountability have potential to improve or not to improve the practices of accountability routines. Mutual understanding, motivation and capacity of organisation members to do as expected and agreed upon without pressure improve accountability routines. Originality/value - The value of this study is to explain how accountability routines take different forms in practice (weak or strong) in different organisations and at different hierarchical levels, depending on the generative structures of the communicative process used in practicing accountability routines.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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