Institutional contradictions and change of organisations and accounting

Abstract

Purpose-the purpose of this paper is to analyse how contradictions between institutional pressures shape accounting and organisational change within AirGreenland. Methodology-the paper applies document analysis and retrospective interviews to trace accounting and organisational change spanning 50 years and analyses developments on multiple levels: societal, governance and micro levels. Findings-the paper illustrates the didactical development of the organisation and management accounting. The contradictory impetus from the institutional level generates a space where actors are able to affect development and change management accounting systems. Actors at company level further acted on the institutional level to affect change in governance and institutions. Research limitations-the case differs from case studies in emerging countries due to the low number of inhabitants in Greenland, its income per capita and the legislative influence asserted by Denmark, the former colonial power, restricting the generalizability of findings. Originality-the paper extends extant research on development of organisations and management accounting change in developing countries through a longitudinal study of how contradictory demands from the governance and legislative levels affect accounting and organisational change. Moreover, the paper is the first case study to address management accounting practices in Greenland.

CSR reporting in Arab countries: the emergence of three genres

“…However, companies are not isolated; their practices are part of broader social interactions, so their decision to follow one of the three ways of interaction is affected by their institutional environment, and the consequences of their decisions affect this environment (Ismaeel and Zakaria, 2019; Thrane and Balslev, 2017). Figure 2 explains the three interaction strategies.…”

“…The outcome of these different ways of interaction is to dilute the new genre and its rules and routines in the first way of interaction, to re-enforce them in the third way of interaction or to dilute some elements and re-enforce others in the second way of interaction. However, companies are not isolated; their practices are part of broader social interactions, so their decision to follow one of the three ways of interaction is affected by their institutional environment, and the consequences of their decisions affect this environment (Ismaeel and Zakaria, 2019;Thrane and Balslev, 2017). Figure 2 explains the three interaction strategies.…”

Management accounting change as a learning process: a longitudinal analysis

“…Many non-human factors can affect change (for example, the Actor-Network Theory research stream), nonetheless, people involved in change have an active role in identifying and interpreting pressures, constraints and opportunities coming from networks and embedding both human and non-human factors (Teittinen, 2008; Rautiainen and Scapens, 2013). Thus, every study intended to explain and improve the understanding of management accounting change needs to acknowledge the roles played by the actors involved and their actions (Anderson, 1995; Shields, 1995; Krumwiede, 1998; Thrane and Balslev, 2017). The selection and the shaping of new accounting routines (Burns and Scapens, 2000) may be affected by many factors, both internal to the organization, such as the need of cost control, new beliefs and values brought by a new top management, power and politics mobilization or outside organizations (e.g.…”