Theorising Interdisciplinary Public Sector Accounting Research. (November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jacobs, Kerry
• Other Names: Hyndman Noel guestEditor.; Lapsley Irvine guestEditor.
• Is Part Of: Financial accountability & management. Volume 32:Number 4(2016:Nov.)
• Page Start: 469
• Page End: 488
• Publication Date: 2016-11
• Subjects: theory -- public sector -- NPM -- accountability -- interdisciplinary; Finance, Public -- Accounting -- Periodicals; Accounting -- Periodicals; Managerial accounting -- Periodicals; Public administration -- Periodicals; 658.159
• DOI: 10.1111/faam.12093
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0267-4424

Abstract

Asbtract: While the volume of interdisciplinary public sector accounting research has expanded, there has been a call to deepen the theorisation. This paper explores the theorisation of the most highly cited interdisciplinary public sector accounting as a tool to understand better what constitutes the dominant or doxic theoretical approaches. Accountability, New Public Management (NPM) and Habermasian theorisation were the three most significant and dominant approaches which could be seen as examples of what Llewellyn (2003) classifies as grand theory (Habermas) and conceptual innovation (accountability and NPM). Much of the accountability work presents the notion of a clash between different forms of accountability, particularly associated with managerialist NPM characteristics. Despite Llewellyn's (2003) criticism of grand theoretical approaches, there are many examples of Habermasian elements being combined with other theoretical approaches to assist exploration of both micro practices and the broader social and societal impact of public sector changes. As such, there is an endorsement of theoretical approaches which address both the micro behaviour and the macro impact of accounting practices in the context of the public sector.