IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-01-2015-1942.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Speaking truth to power”: analysing shadow reporting as a form of shadow accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Helen Tregidga

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the act of shadow reporting by a social movement organisation as a form of shadow accounting within a sustained campaign against a target corporation. Situated within a consideration of power relations, the rationales underlying the production of the shadow report, and the shadow reports perceived value and limits as a shadow accounting mechanism, are investigated. Design/methodology/approach - A Foucauldian approach to power/knowledge and truth is drawn upon in the analysis of a single case study. Alongside a consideration of the shadow report itself, interviews with both the preparers of the report and senior management of the corporation targeted comprise the main data. Findings - The paper provides an empirical investigation into shadow reporting as a form of shadow accounting. While a range of insights are garnered into the preparation, dissemination and impact of the shadow report, key findings relate to a consideration of power relations. The perceived “truth” status of corporate accounts compared to accounts prepared by shadow accountants is problematised through a consideration of technologies of power and power/knowledge formations. Power relations are subsequently recognised as fundamental to the emancipatory potential of shadow reporting. Research limitations/implications - Results from a single case study are presented. Furthermore, given the production of the shadow report occurred several years prior to the collection of data, participants were asked to reflect on past events. Findings are therefore based on those reflections. Originality/value - While previous studies have considered the preparation of shadow reports and their transformative potential, this study is, the author believes, the first to empirically analyse the preparation, dissemination and perceived impacts of shadow reporting from the perspectives of both the shadow report producers and the target corporation.

Suggested Citation

  • Helen Tregidga, 2017. "“Speaking truth to power”: analysing shadow reporting as a form of shadow accounting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(3), pages 510-533, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2015-1942
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2015-1942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2015-1942/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2015-1942/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2015-1942?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. George, Sendirella & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse, 2023. "Social movement activists’ conceptions of political action and counter-accounting through a critical dialogic accounting and accountability lens," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Olivier Boiral & David Talbot & Marie‐Christine Brotherton, 2020. "Measuring sustainability risks: A rational myth?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2557-2571, September.
    3. Ruff, Katherine, 2022. "In support of making up users," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    4. Pupovac, Sanja & Moerman, Lee, 2022. "Bringing Shell and Friends of the Earth on stage: A one-act spectacle of oil spills in the Niger Delta," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. Jittima Wichianrak & Tehmina Khan & David Teh & Steven Dellaportas, 2023. "Critical Perspectives of NGOs on Voluntary Corporate Environmental Reporting: Thai Public Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Tregidga, Helen & Milne, Markus J., 2022. "Not at our table: Stakeholder exclusion and ant/agonistic engagements," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    7. Jane Andrew & Max Baker, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: The Last 40 Years and a Path to Sharing Future Insights," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 56(1), pages 35-65, March.
    8. Wendy Stubbs, 2019. "Strategies, practices, and tensions in managing business model innovation for sustainability: The case of an Australian BCorp," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1063-1072, September.
    9. Antonio Bontempi & Daniela Bene & Louisa Jane Felice, 2023. "Counter-reporting sustainability from the bottom up: the case of the construction company WeBuild and dam-related conflicts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 7-32, January.
    10. Tweedie, Dale, 2018. "After Habermas: Applying Axel Honneth’s critical theory in accounting research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 39-55.
    11. Andrew, Jane & Baker, Max, 2020. "The radical potential of leaks in the shadow accounting project: The case of US oil interests in Nigeria," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    12. Brown, Judy & Tregidga, Helen, 2017. "Re-politicizing social and environmental accounting through Rancière: On the value of dissensus," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-21.

    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:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2015-1942. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.