Ostensive versus performative approaches for theorising accounting‐strategy research

Author:

Boedker Christina

Abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to inquire into the theoretical assumptions that underpin much accounting‐strategy research and to develop an alternative way to approach such study.Design/methodology/approachTwo theoretical lenses are discussed and contrasted. These are the ostensive and performative lenses.FindingsHitherto, most accounting‐strategy research has drawn on an ostensive lens, whilst only a few approach research from a performative perspective. Whilst the ostensive approach is beneficial and reduces the complexity and messiness of research sites, it also assumes that stability, orderliness and predictability characterise social life (e.g. strategy is “ready made” and remains constant during implementation). Furthermore, in this approach, accounting assumes a subordinate role and its main aim is to ensure “correct” implementation of predefined intents. This limits accounting to being an output of strategy, as opposed to, for example, an input and transformer. Greater diversity of definitions and new investigative approaches are needed. To this end, and as a key contribution, the paper develops an alternative approach drawing on Latour's performative theory. This proposes that strategy and accounting are somewhat fragile, even unstable, objects, which change depending on the hands through which they travel and the network within which they are located. Furthermore, accounting is not merely designed to follow or implement predefined intents. It is also a catalyst of expansion, transformation, even surprise.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper does not offer primary data.Originality/valueThe paper offers to scholars the possibility of studying accounting‐strategy as “relations” rather than “objects”, illustrates how this may be done, and proposes research questions to this end. It identifies a space of inquiry that needs further attention and that can provide new insights into the accounting‐strategy relationship.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Accounting

Reference94 articles.

1. Abernethy, M.A. and Brownell, P. (1999), “The role of budgets in organizations facing strategic change: an exploratory study”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 189‐204.

2. Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C.S. (2005), “Management control systems and the crafting of strategy: a practice‐based view”, in Chapman, C.S. (Ed.), Controlling Strategy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 106‐24.

3. Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C.S. (2007), “Management accounting as practice”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 32 Nos 1‐2, pp. 5‐31.

4. Austin, J.L. (1961), “Performative utterances”, in Urmson, J.O. and Warnock, G.J. (Eds), Philosophical Papers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

5. Berger, P.L. and Luckman, T. (1967), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Anchor, New York, NY.

Cited by 47 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3