Prison break from financialization: the case of the PRI reporting and assessment framework

Arjaliès, Diane-Laure; Laurel-Fois, Daniela; Mottis, Nicolas

doi:10.1108/aaaj-02-2020-4439

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 84 publications

(323 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the focus is more on the incoherent rules and the issue of accountability than on how neoclassical economics is made performative. Similar approaches are also seen in Goretzki and Pfister (2022), Arjaliès et al (2023) and Besson et al (2023), who find the conforming effects of performance measures.…”

Section: Processes Of a Multi-faceted Notionsupporting

confidence: 79%

How accounting research understands performativity: effects and processes of a multi-faceted notion

Yu,

Huber

2023

QRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to review the literature on the use of the notion of performativity and its related concepts in accounting research. The literature uses the term performativity in almost diametrically different ways, yet most papers assume that the meaning of the term is self-evident. We build on recent reviews of the notion of performativity and explicate the implicit tensions in the accounting literature, discovering a need to clarify how the accounting literature has explored the processes – how accounting becomes performative – and effects – what is performed – of accounting performativity. The paper develops suggestions for future theoretical and empirical research. Design/methodology/approach The authors have searched in six leading accounting journals (Accounting, Organizations and Society, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Management Accounting Research, Critical Perspectives on Accounting and Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management) for the terms “performativity” and/or “performative” and/or “performable”. This yielded 289 results from which we distilled a core sample of 92 papers which substantially draw on the concept and explicate their use of the term. Findings The authors find that the accounting literature has paid almost equal attention to the conforming and amplifying effects of performativity but has mostly explored how conditions of performativity are built. Less attention has been paid to how accounting generates multiple worlds and how differences in these worlds are coordinated by accounting. Building institutions and searching for accounting incompleteness have been developed as the two main processes where accounting is made performative. Research limitations/implications The paper develops avenues for future research, highlighting the potential for a deeper understanding of how the notion of performativity can be used. We do not advocate homogenizing the literature, instead exploring its fruitful tensions to discover a renewed interest in how accounting is constitutive of existing and/or new worlds. We illustrate this potential by reflecting on the debates about accounting incompleteness and the boundaries of accounting. The authors also suggest the potentials for concepts of performativity in studying emerging phenomena such as big data and sustainability and revisiting the ethics of using accounting as a social and organizational practice. Originality/value The literature review explicates differences in the use of the term performativity, which usually remain implicit in the literature. The study develops a framework that attends to both the processes – problematizing the conditions for performativity or not – and effects – conforming and amplifying – of performativity accounting studies have drawn upon, which clarifies how the accounting literature has mobilized the notion of performativity and the contributions the accounting literature has added. Further, the authors extend Vosselman’s (2022) review both in scope and nuance.

show abstract

Section: Processes Of a Multi-faceted Notionsupporting

confidence: 79%

How accounting research understands performativity: effects and processes of a multi-faceted notion

Yu,

Huber

2023

QRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the ‘business case’ for voluntary corporate responsibility is insufficient to tackle societal concerns, businesses and governments need an integrated framework to consider the needs of all stakeholders and not just a privileged few (Busch et al, 2023). An important element of such governance is the development of adequate measures for sustainability accounting that not only recognize nature as a stakeholder but also consider value plurality (Arjaliès, Laurel-Fois, & Mottis, 2023; Quattrone, 2022). Here we also need to keep paying attention to variations in political economy institutions.…”

Section: Organizing Sustainably: a Research Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizing Sustainably: Introduction to the Special Issue

Delbridge,

Helfen,

Pekarek

et al. 2024

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To confront the climate crisis requires fundamental system change in order to break the convention of relentless economic exploitation of nature. In this Special Issue we extend understanding of the opportunities for an organizing perspective on sustainability in order that organization studies might contribute more effectively to the challenges of organizing sustainably. This organizing perspective is particularly sensitive to (1) a variety of forms and practices of sustainable organizing in different societal spheres and on different levels, (2) the social institutions, logics and value systems in which these forms and practices are embedded, (3) the power and politics of promoting (or blocking) sustainable organization, and (4) the ways in which work, voice, participation, and inclusion are organized and contribute to developing societal capabilities. These features formed the basis of our original call for papers and we review selected literature on sustainability, including the contribution of organization studies and the articles in this Special Issue, through this organizing perspective. In so doing we identify four key themes of a future research agenda that builds from the foundations of existing research and addresses key current limitations in both theory and practice: sustainability requires social justice; connecting local and global scale shifts; democratizing governance; and acting collectively. We conclude with some implications for our own scholarship in organization studies if we are to meet the twin challenges of the need for new theorizing in combination with devising practically relevant support for change.

show abstract

Organizational History and Evolution of Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI)

Mosonyi

2023

Encyclopedia of Sustainable Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prison break from financialization: the case of the PRI reporting and assessment framework

Cited by 7 publications

References 84 publications

How accounting research understands performativity: effects and processes of a multi-faceted notion

How accounting research understands performativity: effects and processes of a multi-faceted notion

Organizing Sustainably: Introduction to the Special Issue

Organizational History and Evolution of Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About