Account Of Dialogue Research Articles

Reflecting on the Critical Dialogic Accounting and Accountability Conference

ABSTRACT In October 2023, a group of accounting scholars interested in critical dialogic accounting and accountability (CDAA) gathered in Toulouse, France to attend a 2-day conference. Rather than presenting papers, the CDAA conference was designed around 3 workshops and 4 panel sessions to foster discussion on different topics in CDAA research. Looking to develop a collaborative atmosphere for dialogue and debate among attendees, the objective was to build their capacity to understand, engage with and perhaps even utilize CDAA in their own research interests. This commentary has been produced by the organizers of this conference to reflect on its design as a collaborative space, report back on insights that were developed, and avenues for research that were discussed.

Stakeholder engagement and nonprofit organizations' (NPOs) accountability: a social media-based study of the Australian 2019/2020 bushfire crisis

Purpose This study aims to examine the impact of stakeholder engagement on accountability, within nonprofit organizations (NPOs). Given the pivotal role NPOs play in disaster management and community welfare, it is crucial to gain an understanding of the obligations of NPOs, in terms of their disaster responses and accountability. Design/methodology/approach Using a case-study approach, the investigation features a content analysis of social media comments regarding the Australian Red Cross’ (ARC) funds’ allocation during the 2019/2020 bushfires, followed by a similar analysis of ARC's reports. Inspired by Carnegie et al.'s (2021) definition of accounting as a social science, this study uses dialogic theory and a transformative participatory framework, to evaluate how interactive stakeholder engagement influenced accountability strategies used by the NPO, to ensure its sustainable development. Findings The findings reveal that there was a significant increase in stakeholder engagement on social media, following negative media coverage, with participants voicing concerns over ARC’s method of funds’ allocation, delays in funds distribution and seemingly excessive administrative costs. ARC addressed these concerns by issuing Bushfire Reports, and conducting online Q&A sessions, in a bid to establish transparency. This study emphasizes how dialogic accounting can challenge accounting's limited scope – one that often overlooks ecological concerns and social justice. Originality/value This study uses the perspective of dialogic accounting theory to explore the relationship between stakeholder engagement on social media, and NPO accountability. It demonstrates how robust stakeholder engagement can challenge NPOs to establish accountability, thereby bridging the information gap between themselves and the public. The use of dialogic accounting theory allows the study to shift from the traditional focus of accounting research, which is the financial objectives of powerful entities, to the voices of the marginalized, the stakeholders, who are impacted by NPO decisions, and, in doing so, it highlights the potential for NPOs to foster accountability, and so advance sustainable development initiatives.

Safeguarding our roots: natural resources accounting and reporting in the public sector

PurposeThis study aims to explore natural resources from a public sector accounting perspective, focusing on their definitions, classifications, recognition criteria and disclosure requirements provided by different standard-setters and regulators at both international and national levels.Design/methodology/approachBy reviewing accounting frameworks for natural resources, this study extrapolates accounting dilemmas around the debate on natural resource accounting, using the dialogic accounting perspective as a theoretical framework.FindingsNatural resources cannot be defined as a single category. Various categories have different characteristics, requiring different standards to recognize multiple orientations. This avoids monetary reductionism. Furthermore, uncertainty, both in existence and measurement, may disqualify some of these resources from being considered assets. Perhaps, concentrating on the flow of services derived from natural resources is better than focusing on their valuation. This may lead to a split-asset approach (flows and underlying assets) for certain resources. This study’s findings indicate that public-sector entities should consider preparing a separate non-financial report regarding the management of natural resources with the objective of maintaining inter-generational equity.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the debate on natural resources from an accounting and reporting perspective, highlighting the importance of holding public-sector entities accountable for the use of natural resources.

Children, imagination and outer space exploration: implications for space accountability systems

PurposeThe primary objective of this paper is to explore how space organizations can incorporate children and imagination in their accountability-based accounting and decision-making processes.Design/methodology/approachThis study centers on stakeholder engagement with children, specifically examining the drawing competition associated with the CHaracterising ExOPlanet Satellite (CHEOPS) space exploration mission. We employ a multidimensional research design consisting of both an interpretive approach to the 2,748 space-related drawings submitted by children across Europe to the CHEOPS drawing competition in 2015 and a content analysis of 46 media releases published by ESA and the University of Bern, the key partners of the CHEOPS mission.FindingsOur analysis of the children’s drawings and the CHEOPS media releases indicates that the related organizations account for some of the children’s visions and imaginations, but shortcomings exist in addressing the ethical and space environmental concerns related to space exploration. We explore implications for the space accounting agenda by applying the critical dialogic accountability framework proposed by Dillard and Vinnari (2019), which allows for a discussion on an outline for action by incorporating intergenerational equity (Thomson et al., 2018) and moral imagination (Werhane, 1999).Originality/valueThis study offers a novel exploration of a largely overlooked yet crucial stakeholder group: children. By focusing on their unique perspectives and imaginative capabilities, the paper brings forth the voices of those who will inherit the future of space exploration. Employing children’s drawings as a medium of symbolic communication, this research study offers fresh insights into their perceptions, particularly relevant to space accounting. This innovative approach not only enriches the literature on stakeholder engagement and accountability but also provides space organizations with valuable guidance on fostering inclusivity and ensuring that the interests of future generations are considered in decision-making processes.

DISCUSSING HEALTH WITHOUT ADULTS – YOUTH VOICES IN PEER-LED DISCUSSIONS ON TEENAGERS’ SUBREDDITS

Contemporary digital health research, policy and practice often engage young people in voicing their opinions with a participatory approach. Simultaneously, young people organise themselves on peer-led platforms like Reddit to talk about health without adults. Peer-led discussions on platforms like Reddit gives us access to a new perspective on how young people understand and experience health. This study investigates youth voices on health in teenagers’ subreddits on Reddit and responds to three research questions: how youth voices about health matters are represented in peer-led discussions; how the platform supports plural voices; and how the Bakhtinian dialogical account of voice can offer an alternative of non-unified, heterogeneous voices of young people to shortcomings of some participatory research, service, and policymaking. This study used unobtrusive digital ethnography and extant data collection methods to sample 50 posts related to physical, mental, and sexual health. Thematic analysis was conducted with grounded theory principles. Youth plural voices revealed different conceptualisations of health and diverse narratives about actors like parents, teachers, healthcare professionals and technologies involved in health experiences. Redditors engage in humorous and factual discussions equally and share both positive and negative health experiences. There is no unity in youth health meanings, but plurality and heterogeneity deserve more recognition and support. Analysing Reddit allows us to know what and how young people talk about health with their peers. Learning from the Reddit environment, adults may redefine their ideas of youth health to be more youth-centred and better align with young people’s needs.

True transparency or mere decoupling? The study of selective disclosure in sustainability reporting

Over the last two decades, sustainability disclosure has become a well-established practice among large and medium-sized companies. Despite the increasing number of sustainability reports published annually, concerns have arisen regarding their credibility. Skeptics view sustainability reporting as a form of decoupling – a symbolic practice disconnected from the actual practices. The purpose of this study is to investigate the phenomenon of decoupling in corporate sustainability, exemplified by selective disclosure. Drawing on the counter-accounting approach and institutional theory, we identify forms of selective disclosure and their drivers. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 333 negative events derived from MSCI’s controversies database. The analysis reveals that 69 % of negative events were reported selectively indicating a prevalence of decoupling in sustainability reporting. Selective disclosure manifests in three forms: vague disclosure, avoidance, and hypocrisy. Our findings indicate a higher likelihood of selective disclosure in the areas of labor rights/supply chain and human rights/community. Additionally, companies that publish integrated reports are less likely to engage in selective disclosure. Strikingly, neither Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines nor assurance measures can effectively deter companies from engaging in selective disclosure. Our findings underscore the urgency of transitioning from a sustainability reporting practice primarily driven by business-case considerations to a more dialogic accounting approach.

The path towards sustainability: The role of internal stakeholders and management accounting in a dialogic perspective

AbstractThis research investigates the conditions under which an international organisation has adopted a successful approach to sustainability, focusing on the engagement (and perceptions) of internal actors at the operational level and on the management accounting tools that enhance and support a dialogic approach to sustainability. This study is based on an in‐depth analysis of CNH Industrial, a leading company in sustainability commitment. Data were collected through document analysis and in‐depth semi‐structured interviews with operational managers, thus using primary and secondary data. The study reveals how the internal stakeholders' dialogue is conducted and how stakeholders' engagement is built while implementing a strategy based on sustainability, highlighting the circular top‐down and bottom‐up attitude, based on a ‘convergence approach’. In this context, management accounting systems act as dialogic accounting tools. The research pays attention to internal stakeholders, analysing the creation of dialogue even through management accounting tools, which paves the way to new sustainable opportunities with a convergence approach, and drawing a picture of the relevant factors in the path to sustainability.

Management accounting for a circular economy: current limits and avenue for a dialogic approach

PurposeThis study investigates the implementation of a sustainable circular business model from an accounting perspective. Its goal is to understand if and how decision- makers use management accounting systems, and what changes are needed if these systems are to support the transition toward a circular economy.Design/methodology/approachDialogic accounting theory frames the case study of six companies that built a value network to develop and implement an innovative packaging solution consistent with circular economy principles. Content analysis was utilised to investigate the accounting tools used.FindingsThe findings indicate that circular solutions generate new organisational configurations based on value networks. Interestingly, managers’ decision-making process largely bypassed the accounting function; they relied on informal accounting and life cycle analysis, which stimulated a multi-stakeholder dialogue in a life cycle perspective.Research limitations/implicationsThe research provides theoretical and practical insights into the capability of management accounting systems to support companies seeking circular solutions.Practical implicationsThe authors offer implications for accounting practice, chief financial officers (CFOs) and accounting educators, suggesting that a dialogic approach may support value retention of resources, materials and products, as required by the circular economy.Social implicationsThe research contributes to the debate about the role of accounting in sustainability, specifically the need for connecting for resource efficiency at the corporate level with the rationalisation of resource use within planetary boundaries.Originality/valueThe study contributes to the limited research into the role of management accounting in a company’s transition to circular business models. Dialogic accounting theory frames exploration of how accounting may evolve to help businesses become accountable to all stakeholders, including the environment.

Rightsholder-Driven Remedy for Business-Related Human Rights Abuse: Case of the Fair Food Program

This paper investigates necessary conditions for developing a participatory, rightsholder-driven approach to remedy for business-related human rights abuses by analyzing findings from a case study with the Fair Food Program. With the inclusion of human rights into discussions of business ethics and CSR, scholars and practitioners have made calls for participatory approaches to remedy to address cases of human rights abuses. However, a gap remains in our understanding of how to operationalize participatory approaches in a manner that empowers rightsholders, particularly within contexts of severe power imbalances. The paper puts forth a rightsholder-driven theoretical framework for remedy, grounded on critical dialogic accountability principles and integrated with empirical analysis from the Fair Food Program case study. This framework defines remedy as a system comprising reinforcing aspects rather than standalone mechanisms. The critical dialogic accounting and accountability framework provides a theoretical framing of engagement that enables the inclusion of multiple, divergent voices and aims toward meaningful engagement with marginalized groups. The analysis of findings from the case study identifies enforcement and education as necessary conditions for effective and empowering rightsholder-driven approaches to remedy. The paper deconstructs these conditions to develop an understanding of the program’s unique approach to enforcement and education. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of rightsholder-driven remedy for Business and Human Rights and business accountability.

Accounting for the “harms” of social media firms: dialogic accountability and discursive contestation in public hearings

PurposeExisting literature has begun to identify the agonistic and contested aspects of the ongoing development of accountability systems. These “contests” are particularly important during periods of change when an accountability “deficit” has been identified, that is, when existing accountability systems are deemed inadequate and requiring revision. The purpose of this paper is to explore one such set of contests in the case of large technology and social media firms: the so-called “big tech”. The authors focus specifically on “big tech” because of increasing societal concerns about the harms associated with their products, services and business practices.Design/methodology/approachThe authors analysed four US Congressional hearings, in which the CEO of Facebook was held to account for the company's alleged breaches and harms. The authors conducted a discourse analysis of the dialogue between the account giver (Mark Zuckerberg) and account holders (Members of Congress) in the oral testimony at the four hearings.FindingsTwo areas of contestation in the dialogue between the account giver and account holders are identified. “Epistemic contests” involved contestation about the “facts” concerning the harms the company had allegedly caused. “Responsibility contests” involved contestation about who (or what) should be held responsible for these harms and according to what standards or criteria.Originality/valueThe study advances critical dialogical accountability literature by identifying two areas of contestation during periods of change in accountability systems. In so doing, they advanced the theory by conceptualising the process of change as underpinned by discursive contests in which multiple actors construct and contest the “problem” with existing accountability systems. The outcomes of these contests are significant, the authors suggest, because they inform the development of reforms to the accountability system governing big tech firms and other industries undergoing similar periods of contestation and change.

Citizen engagement and dialogic accounting through social media: a study of Italian regions

PurposeThis exploratory study aims to investigate the use of Facebook as a dialogic accounting tool for promoting citizen engagement in Italian regions.Design/methodology/approachThis study adopts a mixed methodology. Indeed, it first collects some quantitative data to construct an engagement index for the Facebook pages of the Italian regions, and then it performs a content analysis of some posts while also examining the tenor of the related comments and the level of interaction between regions and citizens.FindingsThe Italian regions have mainly used their Facebook pages for public communication purposes rather than for public participation. Therefore, they have conceived social pages more as an instrument of self-legitimisation and thus monologic accounting and have rarely considered them as a tool for engaging citizens who, in turn, showed low interest in participating in online debates. Nature and environment, tourism promotion and sport were the most engaging content types. Findings also confirm that posting many messages does not automatically increase engagement.Originality/valueThis study is one of the first to investigate the potential of social media from a dialogic accounting perspective, especially in the public sector. Additionally, it focuses on regions which are understudied in the literature, although they are critical actors in implementing public policies. Last but not least, this study offers a framework that integrates the literature on the use of social media for citizen engagement and research on such platforms as dialogic accounting tools.

Critical Dialogic Accounting and Accountability Through Integrated Popular Reporting and Digital Technologies: The City of Bari

Critical Dialogic Accounting and Accountability Through Integrated Popular Reporting and Digital Technologies: The City of Bari

Dialogue games and deductive information: a dialogical account of the concept of virtual information

Dialogue games and deductive information: a dialogical account of the concept of virtual information

Rights-based, worker-driven accountability in the fields: Contesting the uncontested contestable

We investigate the politicizing of migrant farmworkers’ rights regarding a fair and humane work environment using an agonistic-based critical dialogic accounting and accountability (CDAA) lens. The aim of CDAA is to employ accounting and accountability in the service of progressive social and environmental programs by taking pluralism seriously. This process of democratization means engaging the political by making visible the contestable that is presumed otherwise; bringing the contestable into the political/public arena; and giving power and voice to traditionally underrepresented groups. The Fair Food Program (FFP) developed by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) presents a meaningful opportunity to study a rights-based, worker-driven, non-state directed accountability system designed and implemented by the workers in a highly contested, for-profit arena where workers’ rights traditionally have been egregiously oppressed and abused.Constructing an accountability system is a political process that can be made sense of using critical dialogic accountability (CDA). We describe the FFP’s effective accountability system, and the associated responsibility network, that enables the enactment, and facilitates the ongoing assurance, of the human rights of migrant farmworkers. The study goes beyond “thought experiments and conceptual discussions” and demonstrates that the CDA framework offers a useful approach for considering ways to hold powerful actors accountable for their treatment of people and resources, specifies what is important, indicates if change is needed, and provides the evaluation criteria used to motivate and appraise the powerholder’s actions. The analysis provides useful insights into the challenges associated with implementing progressive social programs for underrepresented groups and how the challenges might be addressed.

Ethical disputes, coordinating acts and NGO accountability: Evidence from an NGO river-care programme in Malaysia

We use the Theory of Orders of Worth (OW) espoused by Boltanski and his associates to understand how disputes emerge in situations and how such disputes themselves reach agreements in the context of community engagements by an NGO. Based on a nine-month period of fieldwork at an NGO river-care programme in Malaysia, we find that, in situations of disputes, coordinating acts are predicated upon moral justifications by social actors, making the programme accountable to multiple stakeholders. Moreover, these coordinating acts develop dialogic accounting and transform felt accountability forms into adaptive accountability forms. We conclude that NGO accountability in a developing country like Malaysia is a manifestation of the ability of moral justifications governed by multiple orders of worth and such adaptive accountability forms mediate to assimilate global development agendas into local policies and programmes.

Public accountability failure in solving a public nuisance: stakeholder disengagement in a clash of Western and Islamic worldviews

PurposeThis paper examines the link between the failure of public accountability and stakeholder disengagement brought about by a New Public Management (NPM) style “smart solution” introduced to reduce public urination in Dhaka city. It shows how New Public Governance (NPG), Islamic and dialogic approaches can improve decision-making and solutions.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on the concepts of public accountability, NPM, NPG and dialogic accountability, this study highlights how narrow conceptions of accountability and poor stakeholder engagement impacted the effectiveness of the “smart solution” based on data collected through observation and unstructured in-depth interviews.FindingsEvidence suggests that narrow conceptions of accountability driven by monologic NPM perspectives led to poor stakeholder engagement, which impacted the effectiveness of the “smart solution”. The solution that consists of changing anti-urination signage from Bengali to Arabic script has not solved Dhaka's public urination problem. In many instances, the solution has disenchanted certain stakeholders who view it as an offence against Islam and a confusing de-privileging of the Bengali language which has significant national and cultural value in Bangladesh.Originality/valueThe findings of the study contribute to policymaking discussions on how to effectively engage with stakeholders and extend the literature on accountability within the context of conflicting public versus private demands related to a public nuisance. The study outlines important issues related to stakeholder engagement and introduces a framework that conceptualises how to increase the effectiveness of public policy decisions using NPG, Islamic and dialogic accountability approaches, especially on matters that require significant public/external stakeholder support. It also provides a conceptual integration of these various approaches, including nuanced insights into accountability challenges within “non-Western” contexts.

Doing critical dialogic accounting and accountability research: an analytical framework and case illustration

PurposeTo present an analytical framework for conducting critical dialogic accounting and accountability-based participatory action research to further democratisation, social change and empowering marginalised groups, and to reflect on its application in a Bangladeshi nongovernmental organisation's microfinance program.Design/methodology/approachThe framework, synthesising prior CDAA theorising and agonistic-inspired action research, is described, followed by a discussion of the methodological challenges when applying this during a ten-year, ongoing intervention seeking greater voice for poor, female borrowers.FindingsSix methodological issues emerged: investigating contested issues rather than organisation-centric research; identifying and engaging divergent discourses; engaging marginalised groups, activists and/or dominant powerholders; addressing power and power relations; building alliances for change; and evaluating and disseminating results. The authors discuss these issues and how the participatory action research methods and analytical tools used evolved in response to emergent challenges, and key lessons learned in a study of microfinance and women's empowerment.Originality/valueThe paper addresses calls within and beyond accounting to develop critical, engaged and change-oriented scholarship adopting an agonistic research methodology. It uses a novel critical dialogic accounting and accountability-based participatory action research approach. The reflexive examination of its application engaging NGOs, social activists, and poor women to challenge dominant discourses and practices, and build alliances for change, explores issues encountered. The paper concludes with reflective questions to aid researchers interested in undertaking similar studies in other contentious, power-laden areas concerning marginalised groups.

Social movement activists’ conceptions of political action and counter-accounting through a critical dialogic accounting and accountability lens

In the face of growing disaffection with neoliberalism and corporate social and environmental accounting, critical accounting recognizes the potential of counter-accounting to open spaces for democratic contestation and to advance progressive change. Critical dialogic accounting and accountability (CDAA), for example, views counter-accounting as providing social movements with opportunities to challenge neoliberal hegemony, to mobilize multiple publics and to construct new social realities. However, the democratizing potential of counter-accounting is contested within academia, and social movements’ views of counter-accounting as a politicizing practice are not well understood. We extend CDAA theorizing by elaborating on the value of counter-accounting in advancing democratic struggles against neoliberalism and illustrating how an agonistic lens can be useful in framing social movements' actions in these struggles. Social movements' conceptualizations of political action and counter-accounting are empirically investigated through interviews with 25 social movement activists. Based on the interviews and our CDAA lens, we propose possible areas for critical accounting collaborations with social movements as they seek to effect progressive change.

Opportunities and challenges of integrated report based on the principles of dialogic accounting and the engagement of stakeholders

The study aimed to identify the opportunities and challenges in the development of Integrated Reporting based on the principles of dialogic accounting and to analyze the elements related to engagement with stakeholders. An analogy was made between the principles of dialogic accounting and integrated reporting and a content analysis in the reports evidenced by the Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento, referring to the years 2018 to 2020. The following opportunities were identified: engagement with stakeholders, provision of accounts and transparency and improved dialogue. And as challenges: understanding the content. Furthermore, it was understood that the bank appreciates the engagement with its stakeholders and presents non-financial information providing a scenario for the development of dialogic accounting and integrated reporting.

Messing up research: A dialogical account of gender, reflexivity, and governance in auto‐ethnography

AbstractThis paper aims to contribute to a growing critical and reflexive awareness of the implications of gendered assumptions about ontology, epistemology, and ethics in academic research governance and practice. It provides a retrospective account of the authors' shared experiences of an autoethnographic study of lap dancing clubs, focusing on critical or “sticky moments” encountered, and considering the implications of these for research more widely. It does so by highlighting the gendered power relations shaping academic research, showing how Judith Butler's critique of the heterosexual matrix can be applied to a critical, reflexive understanding of the impact of binary, hierarchical gender power relations. The analysis provides insight into some of the ways in which autoethnographic research on sexualized work may become messy, dirty, and sticky in ways that accentuate power inequalities but also open up moments of opportunity for gender binaries and hierarchies to be revealed, challenged, and resisted. Using a Butlerian lens to reflect on our experiences, we contribute to understanding how heteronormative assumptions shape perceptions of what makes “good,” “clean,” and ethically (formally) approved research that conforms to the governmental norms of the heterosexual matrix and, by implication, those contaminating forms of research that disrupt or resist its disciplinary effects. As ethnographic research is often messy by its very nature, and particularly so when situated within sex/sexualized work, we aim to show how gendered assumptions can inhibit reflexivity in academic knowledge production, resulting in research processes that are (paradoxically) unethical. In response, we suggest three ways in which gender reflexive research might be pursued, by: (i) identifying gendered assumptions reflexively and dialogically, (ii) adopting an anti‐essentialist approach that foregrounds experiential, embodied knowledge, and (iii) developing an anti‐hierarchical methodology. We do so in the hope of opening up ways that might enable others to avoid heteronormative assumptions having potentially detrimental consequences for their research and to offer a starting point for developing gender reflexive knowledge production in the future.