Author:
Behnam Michael,MacLean Tammy L.
Abstract
ABSTRACT:A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization’s social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort necessary to operationally enact that commitment, a “credibility cover” is created that perpetuates business as usual. In other words, the legitimacy that organizations gain by formally adopting the standards may shield the organization from closer scrutiny, thus enabling rather than constraining the types of activities the standards were designed to discourage.There is a lack of research on why certain types of IAS are more prone than others to being decoupled from organizational practices. Applying a neo-institutional perspective to IAS, we theorize that the structural dimensions of the types of standards themselves can increase the likelihood of organizations adopting IAS standards in form but not in function.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Philosophy,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference95 articles.
1. Managing Ethics and Legal Compliance: What Works and What Hurts
2. Cooperation, Deterrence, and the Ecology of Regulatory Enforcement
3. SAI. 2008a. Overview of SA8000. http://www.sa-intl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=473.
4. SAAS. 2008c. Requirements for gaining and maintaining accreditation. http://www.saasaccreditation.org/certprocess.htm.
Cited by
130 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