Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2017 | vol. 13, iss. 5 | 676--705
Tytuł artykułu

Reform for Reform's Sake: A Never-Ending Story of Governmental Accounting Change

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
This paper applies a qualitative approach to examine the environment surrounding the governmental accounting reform process in Malta using Lüder's Financial Management Reform Process Model. The Governmental accounting reform at central level in Malta is a process that has been going on for over 15 years and is still unfinished business. The issue of a tender in 2014 to acquire a new accounting system was a tangible step towards implementation of accrual accounting, however, uncertainties surround the required funds, the underlying new financial legislation and the applicable financial reporting standards. The case of Malta presents an example of a country that is taking advantage of EU politics in order to gain legitimacy. Given the ceremonial and legitimating features of the reform process, institutional theory is introduced in Lüder's Model, putting forward an integrated model that distinguishes between the demands and effects of the technical and institutional environments. The combination of institutional and contingency theories provides a more holistic understanding of the accounting reform process.(original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • University of Malta, Republic of Malta
  • Abernethy, M., & Chua, W. (1996). A field study of control system redesign: the impact of institutional processes on strategic choice. Contemporary Accounting Research, 13(2), 569-606.
  • Ansari, S. L., & Euske K. J. (1987). Rational, rationalizing, and reifying uses of accounting data in organizations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(6), 549-570.
  • Ball, A., & Craig, R., (2010). Using neo-institutionalism to advance social and environmental accounting? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21(4), 283-293.
  • Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy. Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. Wiley, Chichester.
  • Burns, J. (2000). The dynamics of accounting change: inter-play between new practices, routines, institutions, power and politics. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 13(5), 566-596.
  • Camilleri, N. (2014). The adoption and implementation of internationally recognized public accounting standards in Malta. The Accountant, (Winter 2014), 36-40.
  • Carruthers, B. G. (1995). Accounting, ambiguity and the new institutionalism. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(4), 313-328.
  • Carpenter, V. L., & Feroz, E. H. (1992). GAAP as a symbol of legitimacy: New York State's decision to adopt generally accepted accounting principles for external financial reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(7), 613-643.
  • Carpenter, V. L., & Feroz, E. H. (2001). Institutional theory and accounting rule choice: An analysis of four US state governments' decisions to adopt generally accepted accounting principles. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(7-8), 565-96.
  • Chalmers, K., & Godfrey, J. M. (2004). Reputation costs: the impetus for voluntary derivative financial instrument reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(2), 95-125.
  • Chan, J. L. (1994). Accounting and financial management reform in the United States Government: an application of professor Lüder's contingency model. In Buschor, E., Schedler, K. (Eds.), Perspectives on Performance Measurement and Public Sector Accounting (pp. 17-41) Berne: Paul Haupt Publishers.
  • Chan J. L., Jones, R. H., & Lüder, K. G. (1996). Modelling governmental accounting innovations. In Chan, J.L., Jones, R.H. & Lüder, K.G. (Eds.), Research in governmental and nonprofit accounting (Vol.9, pp. 1-19) Connecticut: JAI.
  • Christensen, M. (2003). Without 'reinventing the wheel': business accounting applied to the public sector. Australian Accounting Review. 13(2), 22-27.
  • Christensen, M., & Parker, L. (2010). Using ideas to advance professions: public sector accrual accounting. Financial Accountability & Management, 26(3), 246-66.
  • Christensen, M., & Yoshimi, H. (2001). A comparison of Japanese and Australian second tier government performance reporting. In Jones, R.H. (Ed.), Public sector accounting (Volume 4, pp. 47-64). London: Sage.
  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (1998). Public administration in a democratic context - a review of Norwegian research. In Brunsson, N., Olsen, J.P. (Eds.), Organizing Organizations. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
  • Chung, L. H., Gibbons, P. T., & Schoch, H. P. (2000). The influence of subsidiary context and head office strategic management style on control of MNCs: the experience in Australia. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 13(5), 647-666.
  • Collier, P. (2001). The power of accounting: A field study of local financial management in a police force. Management Accounting Research, 12(4), 465-486.
  • Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2006). The actual implementation of accruals accounting: Caveats from a case within the UK public sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(2), 272-290.
  • Connolly, C., Reeves, E., & Wall, A. (2009). Isomorphism: an explanation for the popularity of public-private partnerships? The Irish Accounting Review, 16(1), 1-19.
  • Covaleski, M. A., & Dirsmith, M. W. (1988). An institutional perspective on the rise, social transformation, and fall of a university budget category. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(4), 562-587.
  • Covaleski, M. A., & Dirsmith, M. W. (1991). The management of legitimacy and politics in public sector administration. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(2), 135-156.
  • Covaleski, M. A., Dirsmith, M. W., & Michelman, J.E. (1993). An institutional theory perspective on the DRG framework, case-mix accounting systems and health-care organizations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(1), 65-80.
  • Dillard, J., Rigsby, J., & Goodman, C. (2004). The making and remaking of organizational context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 506-542.
  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
  • Dirsmith, M. W., Heian, J. B., & Covaleski, M. A. (1997). Structure and agency in an institutionalized setting: the application and social transformation of control in the Big Six. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(1), 1-27.
  • Eurostat. (2013). Towards implementing harmonised public sector accounting standards in Member States: The suitability of IPSAS for the Member States. 6 March, COM (2013)114.
  • Fogarty, T. J. (1996). The imagery and reality of peer review in the U.S.: insights from institutional theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(2/3), 243-267.
  • Fogarty, T. J., & Rogers, R.K. (2005). Financial analysts' reports: an extended institutional theory evaluation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(4), 331-356.
  • Geiger, D. R., & Ittner, C. D. (1996). The influence of funding source and legislative requirements on government cost accounting practices. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(6), 549-567.
  • Gidley, B. (2004). Doing historical and archival research. In Seale, C. (Ed.), Researching society and culture, 2nd Edition (pp. 249-264). London: Sage.
  • Godfrey, A. D., Devlin, P. J., & Merrouche, C. (1996). Governmental accounting in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. In Chan, J.L., Jones, R.H., Lüder, K. (Eds.), Research in governmental and nonprofit Accounting (Vol. 9, pp.193-208) Greenwich: JAI.
  • Godfrey, A.D., Devlin, P.J., & Merrouche, C. (2001). A diffusion-contingency model for government accounting innovations. In Bac, A. (Ed.), International comparative issues in government accounting (pp. 279-296) Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Granlund, M., & Lukka, K. (1998). It's a small world of management accounting practices. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 153-179.
  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and new institutionalism. Academy of Management Journal, 21(4), 1022-1054.
  • Gupta, P. P., Dirsmith, M. W. & Fogarty, T. J. (1994). Coordination and control in a government agency: contingency and institutional theory perspectives on GAO audits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 264-284.
  • Haldma, T. (2006). Uneven ways of improvement of local government accounting: evidence from Estonian municipalities. In Lande, E., Scheid, J.C. (Eds.) Accounting reform in the public sector: mimicry, fad or necessity (pp. 163-176) Paris: Experts Comptables Media.
  • Heald, D. & Georgiou, G. (2011). The macro-fiscal role of the U.K. whole of government account. Abacus, 47(4), 446-476.
  • Hood, C. (1995). The 'new public management' in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93-109.
  • Hussain, M. M., & Hoque, Z. (2002). Understanding non-financial performance measurement practices in Japanese banks: a new institutional sociology perspective. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 15(2), 162-183.
  • Jaruga, A., & Nowak, W.A. (1996). Toward a General Model of Public Sector Accounting Innovations. In Chan, J.L., Jones, R.H., Lüder, K. (Eds.), Research in Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting (Vol. 9 p. 21-31) Greenwich: JAI.
  • Jones, R., & Caruana, J. (2016). Governmental accounting in Malta towards IPSAS within the context of the European Union. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 82(4), 745-762.
  • Jorge, S. (2003). Local government accounting in Portugal in comparative international perspective. PhD Thesis. University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
  • Jorge, S. (2005). The reform of governmental accounting in Portugal: an application of Lüder's contingency model. In Bourmistrov. A., Mellemvik, F. (Eds.), International trends and experiences in government accounting (pp. 28-48) Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.
  • Jorge, S., Caperchione, E., & Jones, R. (2011). Comparative International Governmental Accounting Research (CIGAR): bridging researching and networking. In Jones, R. H. (Ed.), Public Sector Accounting (Vol. 4, pp. ix-xxiv), London: Sage.
  • Lapsley, I., & Pallot, J. (2000). Accounting, management and organizational change: a comparative study of local government. Management Accounting Research. 11(2), 213-229.
  • Laughlin, R., & Pallot, J. (1998). Trends, patterns and influencing factors: some reflections. In Olson, O., Guthrie, J., Humphrey, C. (Eds.), Global warning: debating international developments in new public financial management. Oslo: Cappelan Akademisk Forlag.
  • Lüder, K. (1992). A contingency model of governmental accounting innovations in the Political-administrative environment. In Chan, J.L., Patton, J.M. (Eds.), Research in governmental and nonprofit accounting (Vol. 7 pp. 99-127) Greenwich: JAI.
  • Lüder, K. (1994). The contingency model reconsidered: experiences from Italy, Japan and Spain, in: Buschor, E., Schedler, K. (Eds.), Perspectives on Performance Measurement and Public Sector Accounting (pp. 1-15) Haupt: Berne et al.
  • Lüder, K. (2002). Research in comparative governmental accounting over the last decade: achievements and problems. In Montesinos, V., Vela, J.M. (Eds.), Innovations in Governmental Accounting (pp. 1-21) The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Lüder, K. (2013). Accrual accounting and budgeting in government - a history of the Hessian new administrative management (NVS) project. Plenary Session address at the 14th Biennial CIGAR Conference, 2-3 September 2013, Birmingham, UK.
  • Lüder, K., & Jones, R. (2003). Reforming governmental and budgeting in Europe. Germany: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft.
  • Lukka, K. (2007). Management accounting change and stability: loosely coupled rules and routines in action. Management Accounting Research, 18, 76-101.
  • Meyer, J. W. (1983). On the celebration of rationality: some comments on Boland and Pondy. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 8(2/3), 235-240.
  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
  • Macintosh, N. B. (1985). The social software of accounting and information systems. Wiley.
  • Modell, S. (2003). Goals versus institutions: the development of performance measurement in the Swedish university sector. Management Accounting Research, 14(4), 333-359.
  • MoF (Ministry of Finance, Malta). (2013a). Accounting standards must become integral part of Malta's Financial Legislation. Press Release 23 April 2013.
  • MoF. (2013b). NSO provide necessary gauges for Government to guide the ship of State. Press Release 2 August 2013.
  • MoF. (2013c). Need for harmonized accrual based public sector accounting standards. Press Release 25 October 2013.
  • MoF. (2013d). Financial estimates 2014. Ministry of Finance, Valletta.
  • MoF. (2014a), Tender for a corporate financial management solution for the government of Malta (CT2225/2012). Department of Contracts, Floriana.
  • MoF. (2014b). Financial Estimates 2015. Ministry of Finance, Valletta.
  • MoF. (2015). Financial Estimates 2016. Ministry of Finance, Valletta.
  • Moll, J., Burns, J. & Major, M. (2006). Institutional theory. In Hoque, Z. (Ed.), Methodological issues in accounting research: theories and methods (pp. 183-205) London: Spiramus.
  • Monsen, N., & Näsi, S. (1998). The contingency model of governmental accounting innovations, a discussion. European Accounting Review, 7(2), 275-288.
  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. The Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
  • Ouda, H. A. G. (2011). A prescriptive model of the transition to accrual accounting in central government. International Journal of Government Financial Management, Virginia USA: International Consortium on Governmental Financial Management, X(1), pp.63-94.
  • PAC (Public Accounts Committee, Government of Malta). (2009, 2010). Minutes of Public Account Committee Meetings.
  • Pallot, J. (1995). Contextual variables underlying innovation in national budgeting, accounting and auditing: the case of New Zealand. Paper presented at the Vth CIGAR Conference, Paris.
  • Pollitt, C. (2000). Is the emperor in his underwear? An analysis of the impacts of public management reform. Public Management Review, 2(2), 181-199.
  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: a comparative analysis, 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Powell, W. W. (1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis, in: Powell, W.W., DiMaggio, P.J., (Eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 183-203)Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Power, M., & Laughlin, R. (1996). Habermas, law and accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(5), 441-465.
  • Prior, L. (2003). Using documents in social research. London: Sage.
  • Rahaman, A., Lawrence, S., & Roper, J. (2004). Social and environmental reporting at the VRA: Institutionalised legitimacy or legitimation crisis? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 15(1), pp.35-56.
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.