IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/qrampp/qram-10-2019-0108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

University budgeting: internal versus external transparency

Author

Listed:
  • Maria C. Conesa Carril
  • Nieves Gómez Aguilar
  • Manuel Larrán Jorge

Abstract

Purpose - The analysis intends to clarify whether higher education institutions place as much value on internal transparency as on external transparency. This study aims to analyze the university budgeting process as a reflection of internal transparency. It also aims to identify the weaknesses of the budgeting process regarding transparency in order to improve decision-making. Design/methodology/approach - A case study that applies mixed methods – documentary analysis, observations and interviews – has been conducted. To study internal transparency, the model of three levels of transparency of Biondi and Lapsley (2014) has been applied to the budgeting process of a university. Then, the results have been compared to the external transparency of this institution. Findings - While external transparency is achieved, internal transparency in the budgeting process is far from optimal in the case of study. An improvement in transparency of the budget process can promote the engagement of stakeholders in the process and achieve better governance. Research limitations/implications - The general inductive approach is not as strong as other approaches in the area of theory or model development. However, it does provide a simple approach for deriving findings linked to this research’s questions. Practical implications - Trust issues and external accountability appear to be more relevant than internal transparency for universities. However, improving the three levels of transparency along the budgeting process could motivate collegiate members to reinforce accountability, as it requires them to effectively communicate their actions and decisions to their represented. Originality/value - This paper seeks to situate transparency as an attribute of university governance, contributing to the scarce literature on transparency, internal and external, in the university. The study compares the approach of this university to external transparency – which relates to accountability – with internal transparency – a concept that links to corporate governance. This study uses the novel lens of Biondi and Lapsley model (2014) to study internal transparency, focussing on university budgeting as a key management tool.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria C. Conesa Carril & Nieves Gómez Aguilar & Manuel Larrán Jorge, 2020. "University budgeting: internal versus external transparency," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 17(4), pages 589-617, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:qrampp:qram-10-2019-0108
    DOI: 10.1108/QRAM-10-2019-0108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRAM-10-2019-0108/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/QRAM-10-2019-0108/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/QRAM-10-2019-0108?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. Juan Bautista Abello-Romero & Daniel López & Francisco Ganga & Claudio Mancilla, 2021. "Perceptions on Regulation and Asymmetry of Information as Critical Factors in University Governance in Latin America," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.

    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:qrampp:qram-10-2019-0108. 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.