Abstract
Purpose
Informed by the critical perspective of dialogic accounting theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore the use of evaluation as a means of enhancing accountability to beneficiaries within nonprofit organisations (NPOs). As a stakeholder group frequently marginalised by traditional accounting practices, the participation of beneficiaries within a NPO’s accountability structure is presented as a means of increasing social justice.
Design/methodology/approach
The research design used case studies involving two NPOs, examining documents and conducting interviews across three stakeholder groups, within each organisation.
Findings
Findings reveal that when viewed on beneficiaries’ terms, accountability to beneficiaries, through participative evaluation, needs to consider the particular timeframe of beneficiary engagement within each organisation. This temporal element positions downwards accountability to beneficiaries within NPOs as multi-modal.
Research limitations/implications
The research poses a limit to statistical generalisability outside of the specific research context. However, the research prioritises theoretical generalisation to social forms and meanings, and as such provides insights for literature.
Practical implications
In acknowledging that beneficiaries have accountability needs dependent upon their timeframe of participation, NPOs can better target their downwards accountability structures. This research also has practical implications in its attempt to action two of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Originality/value
This paper makes a contribution to the limited research into nonprofit accountability towards beneficiaries. Dialogic accounting theory is enacted to explore how accountability can be practised on beneficiaries’ terms.
Subject
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Accounting
Reference74 articles.
1. AASB (2016), “Framework for the preparation and presentation of financial statements”, Australian Accounting Standards Board, Canberra, available at: www.aasb.gov.au (accessed 15 March 2017).
2. ACNC (2018), “How does ACNC define charity size?”, Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, Melbourne, available at: www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Manage/Reporting/SizeRevenue/ACNC/Report/SizeRevenue.Aspx (accessed 25 June 2018).
3. Social capital and accountability in grass-roots NGOs: the case of the Ugandan community-led HIV/AIDS initiative;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,2011
4. Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,2018
5. Theorizing engagement: the potential of a critical dialogic approach;Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,2007
Cited by
40 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献