IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-01-2019-3847.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From monologic to dialogic

Author

Listed:
  • Kylie L. Kingston
  • Craig Furneaux
  • Laura de Zwaan
  • Lyn Alderman

Abstract

Purpose - Informed by the critical perspective of dialogic accounting theory, the purpose of this paper is to explore the use of evaluation as a means of enhancing accountability to beneficiaries within nonprofit organisations (NPOs). As a stakeholder group frequently marginalised by traditional accounting practices, the participation of beneficiaries within a NPO’s accountability structure is presented as a means of increasing social justice. Design/methodology/approach - The research design used case studies involving two NPOs, examining documents and conducting interviews across three stakeholder groups, within each organisation. Findings - Findings reveal that when viewed on beneficiaries’ terms, accountability to beneficiaries, through participative evaluation, needs to consider the particular timeframe of beneficiary engagement within each organisation. This temporal element positions downwards accountability to beneficiaries within NPOs as multi-modal. Research limitations/implications - The research poses a limit to statistical generalisability outside of the specific research context. However, the research prioritises theoretical generalisation to social forms and meanings, and as such provides insights for literature. Practical implications - In acknowledging that beneficiaries have accountability needs dependent upon their timeframe of participation, NPOs can better target their downwards accountability structures. This research also has practical implications in its attempt to action two of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals. Originality/value - This paper makes a contribution to the limited research into nonprofit accountability towards beneficiaries. Dialogic accounting theory is enacted to explore how accountability can be practised on beneficiaries’ terms.

Suggested Citation

  • Kylie L. Kingston & Craig Furneaux & Laura de Zwaan & Lyn Alderman, 2019. "From monologic to dialogic," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(2), pages 447-471, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2019-3847
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3847/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-01-2019-3847/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-01-2019-3847?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. Ellie Norris & Shawgat Kutubi & Steven Greenland, 2023. "Cultural accountability in the annual report: The case of First Nations entities in Australia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4453-4478, December.
    2. Power, Sean Bradley & Brennan, Niamh M., 2022. "Accounting as a dehumanizing force in colonial rhetoric: Quantifying native peoples in annual reports," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 87(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:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2019-3847. 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.