IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ijoais/v51y2023ics1467089523000313.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sociomateriality, agential realism, and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: A response to Vosselman and De Loo

Author

Listed:
  • Weber, Ron

Abstract

I respond to Vosselman and De Loo’s (2023) critique of my earlier paper on agential realism, representation theory, and accounting information systems (Weber, 2020). In that paper, I argued that little is learned by using an agential realism lens to study accounting-related phenomena. I claimed that insights revealed using agential realism also could have been revealed through using existing lenses such as actor-network theory and general systems theory. In particular, I defended representation theory as a way of studying accounting information systems and representationalism as a way of studying the world. Contrariwise, Vosselman and De Loo argue that representation theory and representationalism are useful only in some respects when studying accounting-related phenomena. They contend that agential realism and sociomateriality lenses are needed if the entangled nature of phenomena in accounting domains is to be understood. They point to some assumptions that they claim underpin representationalism and representation theory—assumptions that inhibit their usefulness as a way of studying entangled phenomena. In this response, I present counter-arguments to their claims and defend representationalism and representation theory as ways of understanding the world.

Suggested Citation

  • Weber, Ron, 2023. "Sociomateriality, agential realism, and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: A response to Vosselman and De Loo," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ijoais:v:51:y:2023:i:c:s1467089523000313
    DOI: 10.1016/j.accinf.2023.100639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467089523000313
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.accinf.2023.100639?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bill Edge, 2022. "Recent Developments in Sustainability Reporting," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 32(2), pages 151-155, June.
    2. Sven Modell, 2020. "In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(3), pages 666-674, March.
    3. Ed Vosselman, 2022. "The performativity of accounting: advancing a Posthumanist understanding," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 19(2), pages 137-161, January.
    4. repec:eme:aaaj00:aaaj-11-2019-4251 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Michel Callon, 2010. "Performativity, Misfires And Politics," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 163-169, July.
    6. Franck Cochoy & Martin Giraudeau & Liz McFall, 2010. "Performativity, Economics And Politics," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 139-146, July.
    7. Weber, Ron, 2020. "Taking the ontological and materialist turns: Agential realism, representation theory, and accounting information systems," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Paul du Gay, 2010. "Performativities: Butler, Callon And The Moment Of Theory," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 171-179, July.
    9. Jane Andrew & Max Baker, 2020. "For emancipation: a Marxist critique of structure within critical realism," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(3), pages 641-653, February.
    10. Judith Butler, 2010. "Performative Agency," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 147-161, July.
    11. Karunakaran, Arvind & Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Scott, Susan V., 2022. "Crowd-based accountability: examining how social media commentary reconfigures organizational accountability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114401, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Roberts, John, 2009. "No one is perfect: The limits of transparency and an ethic for 'intelligent' accountability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 957-970, November.
    13. repec:eme:aaaj00:aaaj-12-2019-4291 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Vosselman, Ed & De Loo, Ivo, 2023. "Sociomateriality and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: Revisiting agential realism," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel & Giuliani, Antonio Paco, 2018. "Why not take a performative approach to entrepreneurship?," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 60-64.
    2. Vosselman, Ed & De Loo, Ivo, 2023. "Sociomateriality and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: Revisiting agential realism," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Loconto, Allison & Rajão, Raoni, 2020. "Governing by models: Exploring the technopolitics of the (in)visilibities of land," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Letiche, Hugo & De Loo, Ivo & Lowe, Alan & Yates, David, 2023. "Meeting the research(er) and the researched halfway," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    5. Warren, Liz & Seal, Will, 2018. "Using investment appraisal models in strategic negotiation: The cultural political economy of electricity generation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 16-32.
    6. Paul Andon & Jane Baxter & Wai Fong Chua, 2015. "Accounting for Stakeholders and Making Accounting Useful," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 986-1002, November.
    7. Jafari, Aliakbar & Aly, Marwa & Doherty, Anne Marie, 2022. "An analytical review of market system dynamics in consumer culture theory research: Insights from the sociology of markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1261-1274.
    8. Constantinides, Panos & Slavova, Mira, 2020. "From a monopoly to an entrepreneurial field: The constitution of possibilities in South African energy," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(6).
    9. Andrew, Jane & Baker, Max & Huang, Casey, 2023. "Data breaches in the age of surveillance capitalism: Do disclosures have a new role to play?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Guénin-Paracini, Henri & Malsch, Bertrand & Paillé, Anne Marché, 2014. "Fear and risk in the audit process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 264-288.
    11. Karunakaran, Arvind & Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Scott, Susan V., 2022. "Crowd-based accountability: examining how social media commentary reconfigures organizational accountability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114401, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    13. Karl Beyer & Stephan Puehringer, 2019. "Divided we stand? Professional consensus and political conflict in academic economics," ICAE Working Papers 94, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    14. Sam Hampton & Richard Blundel & Aqueel Wahga & Tina Fawcett & Christopher Shaw, 2022. "Transforming small and medium‐sized enterprises to address the climate emergency: The case for values‐based engagement," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1424-1439, September.
    15. Robbins, Geraldine & Lapsley, Irvine, 2015. "From secrecy to transparency: Accounting and the transition from religious charity to publicly-owned hospital," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 19-32.
    16. Christopher, Joe, 2012. "Tension between the corporate and collegial cultures of Australian public universities: The current status," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(7), pages 556-571.
    17. Colvin, John & Blackmore, Chris & Chimbuya, Sam & Collins, Kevin & Dent, Mark & Goss, John & Ison, Ray & Roggero, Pier Paolo & Seddaiu, Giovanna, 2014. "In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 760-771.
    18. Maria Järlström & Essi Saru & Sinikka Vanhala, 2018. "Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 703-724, October.
    19. Bear, Laura, 2020. "Speculations on infrastructure: from colonial public works to a postcolonial global asset class on the Indian Railways 1840-2017," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103445, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Goddard, Andrew, 2021. "Accountability and accounting in the NGO field comprising the UK and Africa – A Bordieusian analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ijoais:v:51:y:2023:i:c:s1467089523000313. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-accounting-information-systems/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.