IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v36y2019i3p1883-1926.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Construction of the Efficient Office: Scientific Management, Accountability, and the Neo‐Liberal State†

Author

Listed:
  • Lee D. Parker
  • Ingrid Jeacle

Abstract

The office has been a central site of organizational planning, accountability, and control since the 19th century. Yet it has been the subject of relatively little accounting research. Through the dual theoretical lenses of Foucaultian and Labour Process theories, this study employs historical photo‐elicitation methodology to investigate the implementation of management control and accountability in the scientifically managed office which emerged in the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Our analysis reveals the manner in which accounting records created new modes of disciplinary control and surveillance within the office and how accounting tasks were de‐skilled in a gradually feminized and mechanized office environment. We also witness the role of accounting in the physical structuring of office space through the assembly line arrangement of office furniture to facilitate paper flows and the installation of record‐keeping systems of surveillance. In addition, our visually derived historical account of these transformations in office administration allows us to reflect on some contemporary issues. The production‐line design and efficiency so promoted by scientific management served as a forerunner to today's open‐plan office, as well as influencing contemporary office management philosophies such as Activity‐Based Working. Furthermore, we seek to inform current debates on the role of accounting in contemporary neo‐liberal society. In the history of the scientific office, we gain an early glimpse of the subsequent role that accounting comes to play within a neo‐liberal agenda as a powerful technology of micro‐measurement and micro‐management. La construction du bureau efficient : l'organisation scientifique du travail, la reddition de comptes et l’État néolibéral Depuis le XIXe siècle, le bureau est un centre de planification organisationnelle, de reddition de comptes et de contrôle. Pourtant, relativement peu de chercheurs en comptabilité s'y sont intéressés. Dans la double optique de la théorie de Foucault et de celle des processus de travail, les auteurs utilisent une méthodologie d'interprétation de photos historiques pour étudier l'instauration du contrôle de gestion et de la reddition de comptes dans les bureaux qui ont adopté l'organisation scientifique du travail en émergence aux États‐Unis à la fin du XIXe siècle et au début du XXe. L'analyse des auteurs révèle la manière dont les documents comptables ont créé de nouveaux modes de contrôle disciplinaire et de surveillance dans les bureaux et comment les tâches comptables ont été « déspécialisées » dans un milieu de travail qui s'est progressivement féminisé et mécanisé. Ils observent également le rôle de la comptabilité dans l'aménagement physique des bureaux grâce à la disposition en « chaîne de montage » du mobilier de bureau de manière à faciliter la circulation du papier et l'installation de systèmes de tenue des comptes destinés à la surveillance. De plus, l'historique de cette évolution de l'administration des bureaux qu'ils retracent grâce à leur analyse visuelle amène les auteurs à se pencher sur certaines questions contemporaines. La conception du bureau inspirée de la chaîne de production et l'efficience que lui attribuent les tenants de l'organisation scientifique du travail ont pavé la voie au décloisonnement de l'espace dans les bureaux d'aujourd'hui et ont influencé les idéologies contemporaines d'organisation du travail comme celle de l'organisation par activités. En outre, les auteurs cherchent à éclairer les débats actuels sur le rôle de la comptabilité dans la société néolibérale contemporaine. L'historique de l'organisation scientifique du travail au sein des bureaux permet aux auteurs d'anticiper le rôle que la comptabilité jouera ultérieurement dans un programme d'action néolibéral à titre de technologie efficace de micromesure et de microgestion.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee D. Parker & Ingrid Jeacle, 2019. "The Construction of the Efficient Office: Scientific Management, Accountability, and the Neo‐Liberal State†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 1883-1926, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:36:y:2019:i:3:p:1883-1926
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12478
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12478?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Parker, Lee D. & Schmitz, Jana, 2022. "The Reinvented accounting firm office: Impression management for efficiency, client relations and cost control," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    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. Alina Mirela Teacu (Parincu), 2019. "Neuromanagement – the Impact of Neuroscience on the Organizational Performance," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 487-493.
    2. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    3. Michel Anteby & Curtis K. Chan, 2018. "A Self-Fulfilling Cycle of Coercive Surveillance: Workers’ Invisibility Practices and Managerial Justification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 247-263, April.
    4. David Vallat, 2015. "Une alternative au dualisme État-Marché : l’économie collaborative, questions pratiques et épistémologiques," Working Papers halshs-01249308, HAL.
    5. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Ethan Ilzetzki & Saverio Simonelli, 2017. "Measuring Productivity Dispersion: Lessons From Counting One-Hundred Million Ballots," CSEF Working Papers 483, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    7. Alpenberg, Jan & Paul Scarbrough, D., 2018. "Trust and control in changing production environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 527-534.
    8. Fracarolli Nunes, Mauro & Lee Park, Camila & Shin, Hyunju, 2021. "Corporate social and environmental irresponsibilities in supply chains, contamination, and damage of intangible resources: A behavioural approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    9. François Silva & Charles-Philippe Mourgues, 2020. "Les managers : mercenaires ou missionnaires," Post-Print hal-03083893, HAL.
    10. Udo Milkau, 2017. "Risk Culture during the Last 2000 Years—From an Aleatory Society to the Illusion of Risk Control," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-20, December.
    11. N. I. Fisher & V. N. Nair, 2009. "Quality management and quality practice: Perspectives on their history and their future," Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1), pages 1-28, January.
    12. Diwas Singh KC & Bradley R. Staats, 2012. "Accumulating a Portfolio of Experience: The Effect of Focal and Related Experience on Surgeon Performance," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 618-633, October.
    13. Lise Arena & Anthony Hussenot, 2021. "From Innovations at Work to Innovative Ways of Conceptualizing Organization: A Brief History of Organization Studies," Post-Print hal-03290300, HAL.
    14. repec:awi:wpaper:0421 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Vimpari, Jussi & Junnila, Seppo, 2017. "Evaluating decentralized energy investments: Spatial value of on-site PV electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1217-1222.
    16. Bloom, Nick & Manova, Kalina & Teng Sun, Stephen & Van Reenen, John & Yu, Zhihong, 2018. "Managing trade: evidence from China and the US," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 88703, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    18. Samuel JUBÉ, 2020. "Labour and international accounting standards: A question of social justice," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(1), pages 95-115, March.
    19. Robert J. Bennett & Harry Smith & Piero Montebruno & Carry van Lieshout, 2022. "Changes in Victorian entrepreneurship in England and Wales 1851-1911: Methodology and business population estimates," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(7), pages 1211-1243, September.
    20. Jody Hoffer Gittell, 2001. "Supervisory Span, Relational Coordination and Flight Departure Performance: A Reassessment of Postbureaucracy Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 468-483, August.
    21. Dusan Gosnik & Klemen Kavcic, 2021. "Analysis of Selected Aspects of an Organisation: The Organisation as an Instrument, an Interest Group and as a Process," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 19(2 (Summer), pages 167-181.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:coacre:v:36:y:2019:i:3:p:1883-1926. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.