In search of consensus: The role of accounting in the definition and reproduction of dominant interests

Abstract

This article examines the role of accounting in the manufacture of consensus. Consensus building is often considered a central value for rational decision-making and management. However, more than a democratic confrontation of vantage points, the quest for consensus is a way to discourage conflict and resistance. Our main argument is that accounting and consensus play central roles in processes of definition and the social reproduction of dominant interests. Accounting acts to promote some stakes and strategies (and silence others), as if they were collective and disinterested, which makes them more powerful in debates that deny struggles and asymmetries in positions of power, as well as increases legitimacy by creating an illusion of participation. We illustrate these processes through a case study in which we document the intersection between two fields of knowledge, marketing and accounting, that compete for a monopoly on the definition of value and the ability to speak for the organisation. This analysis draws on Bourdieu's conceptualisation of symbolic domination to highlight how powerful actors secure influence while avoiding contestation. Accounting produces symbolic violence that consolidates asymmetries in positions of power by shaping what is consensual and what is not so that dominant interests are reproduced with the consent of those who have most to lose in the process

Participatory budgeting in a Sri Lankan urban council: A practice of power and domination

“…field, capital and habitus, are indispensable (1996a) and their relationship has been formulated as '(habitus * capital) + field = practice '(1986a). It is discernible, however, that the extant accounting literature has drawn on either one or more of these elements and is subject to a common criticism for the failure to embed all three concepts or to balance their use into a single study (Ahn, Jacobs, Li &, Moon, 2014;Cooper and Coulson, 2014;Everett 2004;Farjaudon and Morales, 2013;Hamilton and Ò hÒgartaigh, 2009;Malsch and Gendron, 2013;Neu, 2006). The piecemeal use of these elements is envisaged as a caveat and mentions are made that such attempts may lead to a misunderstanding of Bourdieu's 'relational approach' (Alawattage, 2011).…”

“…One form of capital can be converted to another and such conversions are important for the reproduction of other forms/categories of capital and establishing a monopoly over the means of capital creation and accumulation (Bourdieu, 1977;1986b;1990;Everett, 2004;Farjaudon and Morales, 2013;Xu and Xu, 2008).…”

“…In such a context, accounting techniques such as PB can have the potential of being symbolic systems allowing these politicians to accumulate and redistribute various forms of capital and offering them the opportunity and capacity to exert domination, control and symbolic violence (see e.g. Alawattage, 2011;Farjaudon and Morales, 2013). Teasing out the real practice in the name of PB, this study contributes to Bourdieusian-based accounting work on LDCs.…”

O Consenso do Consenso Estratégico: Um Estudo sobre o Estado da Arte do Tema

“… Influência das dualidades: auto interesse das partes x bem coletivo, emergente consenso das partes x líder impulsionador, inclusão das partes x exclusão (Stoltzfus, Stohl & Seibold, 2011).  A utilização das técnicas é utilizado em locais onde o consenso é pouco provável de ser criado (Paraskevas & Saunders, 2011 (Farjaudon & Morales, 2013).  O consenso pode ser uma forma particular de governar (Byrne & Shrestha, 2014).…”

Gender on board: deconstructing the “legitimate” female director

“…In other words, it is "the violence which is exercised upon a social agent with his or her complicity" (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992, p. 167). Symbolic violence operates when dominated people quite unconsciously adhere to language and representations that are supportive of their own domination (Farjaudon and Morales, 2013), or, to put it another way, "when their thoughts and perceptions are structured in accordance with the very structures of the relation of domination that is imposed on them, their acts of cognition are, inevitably, acts of recognition, submission" (Bourdieu, 2001, p. 13). Typical examples of the exercise of symbolic violence include gender relations in which men and women both agree that women are weaker, less intelligent, more unreliable, and so forth -or class relations in which both working-class and middle-class people agree that the upper classes are more intelligent, more capable of running the country, or more deserving of higher pay [7].…”