大学杂交过程中新会计工具形成过程中行动者的反身性与参与性

IF 2.3 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
E. Aleksandrov
{"title":"大学杂交过程中新会计工具形成过程中行动者的反身性与参与性","authors":"E. Aleksandrov","doi":"10.1108/qram-01-2019-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to investigate the unfolding dynamics and evolving processes relating to the formation of accounting tools by university actors. It answers the research questions: How do individual actors engage in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridisation? Specifically, what forms of reflexivity do these actors display in various phases of university hybridisation?,This is a longitudinal case study of the development of new accounting tools in one Russian technical university from 2010 to 2016. It is based on an institutional work perspective, involving 29 interviews, documentary analysis, and observations of internal meetings relating to new accounting tools’ formation.,The findings show that academics themselves were gradually engaged in the marginalisation of academic demands in university governance in favour of managerialism via accounting. Nevertheless, the role of accounting morphed over time from a dysfunctional and negative carrier of managerial ideology and its domination, to what could arguably be considered a mediation device between academic and managerial demands. These dynamic processes and the role of accounting within them are explained by the constant challenge stemming from the involvement of several groups of actors in institutional work, which is often unpredictable and fluid due to the intricate play of plural reflexivities and actors’ identities during university hybridisation.,This paper advances the field by showing that the engagement and reflexivity of academics in the formation of accounting tools is not a “panacea” to deal with hybridisation within universities. The results highlight several obstacles, including variation in the reflexive capacities of actors within the university, leading to a reflexivity lag and reflexivity trap.","PeriodicalId":46537,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Actors’ reflexivity and engagement in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridization\",\"authors\":\"E. Aleksandrov\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qram-01-2019-0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper aims to investigate the unfolding dynamics and evolving processes relating to the formation of accounting tools by university actors. It answers the research questions: How do individual actors engage in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridisation? Specifically, what forms of reflexivity do these actors display in various phases of university hybridisation?,This is a longitudinal case study of the development of new accounting tools in one Russian technical university from 2010 to 2016. It is based on an institutional work perspective, involving 29 interviews, documentary analysis, and observations of internal meetings relating to new accounting tools’ formation.,The findings show that academics themselves were gradually engaged in the marginalisation of academic demands in university governance in favour of managerialism via accounting. Nevertheless, the role of accounting morphed over time from a dysfunctional and negative carrier of managerial ideology and its domination, to what could arguably be considered a mediation device between academic and managerial demands. These dynamic processes and the role of accounting within them are explained by the constant challenge stemming from the involvement of several groups of actors in institutional work, which is often unpredictable and fluid due to the intricate play of plural reflexivities and actors’ identities during university hybridisation.,This paper advances the field by showing that the engagement and reflexivity of academics in the formation of accounting tools is not a “panacea” to deal with hybridisation within universities. The results highlight several obstacles, including variation in the reflexive capacities of actors within the university, leading to a reflexivity lag and reflexivity trap.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46537,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qram-01-2019-0008\",\"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-01-2019-0008","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: 13

摘要

本文旨在研究与大学行为者形成会计工具相关的展开动态和演变过程。它回答了研究问题:在大学混合化过程中,个体行动者如何参与新会计工具的形成?具体来说,这些行为体在大学混合化的各个阶段表现出哪些形式的反身性?这是对2010年至2016年俄罗斯一所技术大学新会计工具开发的纵向案例研究。它以机构工作视角为基础,涉及29次访谈、文献分析和对有关新会计工具形成的内部会议的观察。研究结果表明,学者们自己逐渐参与了大学治理中学术需求的边缘化,而通过会计来支持管理主义。然而,随着时间的推移,会计的角色从管理意识形态及其支配的功能失调和消极载体转变为可以被认为是学术和管理需求之间的调解工具。这些动态过程和会计在其中的作用可以通过机构工作中几组参与者的参与所带来的不断挑战来解释,由于大学混合过程中多元反身性和参与者身份的复杂作用,这些挑战往往是不可预测的和流动的。本文通过表明学者在会计工具形成中的参与和反身性并不是处理大学内部混合的“灵丹妙药”来推进这一领域。研究结果突出了几个障碍,包括大学内部行为者的反身能力差异,导致反身滞后和反身陷阱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Actors’ reflexivity and engagement in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridization
This paper aims to investigate the unfolding dynamics and evolving processes relating to the formation of accounting tools by university actors. It answers the research questions: How do individual actors engage in the formation of new accounting tools during university hybridisation? Specifically, what forms of reflexivity do these actors display in various phases of university hybridisation?,This is a longitudinal case study of the development of new accounting tools in one Russian technical university from 2010 to 2016. It is based on an institutional work perspective, involving 29 interviews, documentary analysis, and observations of internal meetings relating to new accounting tools’ formation.,The findings show that academics themselves were gradually engaged in the marginalisation of academic demands in university governance in favour of managerialism via accounting. Nevertheless, the role of accounting morphed over time from a dysfunctional and negative carrier of managerial ideology and its domination, to what could arguably be considered a mediation device between academic and managerial demands. These dynamic processes and the role of accounting within them are explained by the constant challenge stemming from the involvement of several groups of actors in institutional work, which is often unpredictable and fluid due to the intricate play of plural reflexivities and actors’ identities during university hybridisation.,This paper advances the field by showing that the engagement and reflexivity of academics in the formation of accounting tools is not a “panacea” to deal with hybridisation within universities. The results highlight several obstacles, including variation in the reflexive capacities of actors within the university, leading to a reflexivity lag and reflexivity trap.
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