Structuration and middle-range theory—A case study of accounting during organizational change from different theoretical perspectives

Abstract

This paper demonstrates the usefulness of theoretical triangulation in exploring a case study of accounting and organizational change at the Electricity Trust of South Australia (ETSA). Two theories are used, structuration as developed by Giddens and Laughlin's framework developed as a middle-range theory based on Habermas. These two theories complement each other but have significant differences. In accounting, Laughlin has been an advocate of middle range theory, and although his framework may appear dominant in exploring accounting and organizational change [Broadbent J, Laughlin R. Organisational and accounting change: theoretical and empirical reflections and thoughts on a future research agenda. Journal of Accounting and Organisational Change, 2005;1(1):7–26.] , alternative theoretical perspectives may draw out richer insights about the way accounting is involved in organizational change. Using the middle-range theory of organizational change, the accounting system at ETSA is perceived as enabling change but viewed in a favourable way; an outcome which is different to most of the previous research using this model and hence an important contribution to the literature. The counting that was viewed negatively was the counting of people, not dollars. This theory enables the exploration of the change process and how accounting is implicated. The second theoretical perspective, Gidden's concept of structuration, provides richer insights from the dimensions of domination and legitimation. Domination brings to the fore the role of accounting in control as a power device, which is not explicit using the Laughlin framework. Legitimation clarifies what is “moral” as organization's change. I demonstrate how a different theoretical lens enables different insights, not achievable by using a single approach.