Accounting, Soci(et)al Risks, and Public Reason: Governmental Risk Discourses About the ILVA Steel Plant in Taranto (Italy)

The case of the ILVA steel plant in Taranto represents an example of con- trasting, incommensurable sustainability issues, explored in terms of “social” and “societal” risks (Asenova et al. in Managing the risks of public spending cuts in Scotland, 2013; Redistribution of social and societal risk: the impact on individuals, their networks and communities, 2015) [Asenova et al. (2015) refer to social risks as the risks of unemployment, and to societal risks as environmental and health risks.]. The case of ILVA has received significant attention for the great amount of dangerous pollutants spread in the environment, as well as the evidence of higher illness and mortality rates in the districts nearest to the plant. In July 2012, the Italian Judiciary halted activity in the steel plant. Four months after, the Italian Government declared the steel plant site as a “Strategic National Interest Site”, and allowed the company to restart its activity. Drawing on governmentality (Foucault in Questions of method, 1991), the paper aims to explore the role of accounting—here broadly intended as calculative practices (Miller in Soc Res 68:379–396, 2001)—in moulding ministerial discourse to support decisions when the governance of contrasting risks is needed to safeguard public interest. Supported by discourse analysis of governmental speech, the research shows that the Italian Government based its decision on various experts’ risk appraisals: accounting shaped governmental discourse by giving more visibility and relevance to “social” risks (i.e. unemployment, economic development, produc- tivity and competitiveness risks), while silencing “societal” ones (i.e. environmental and health risks). Focusing on a case of incommensurable contrasting issues, the findings contribute to show that accounting concurrently plays a significant role in government decisions legitimizing the business continuity through the creation of a specific risk discourse

Boundary work: An interpretive ethnographic perspective on negotiating and leveraging cross-cultural identity

The complexity of global organizations highlights the importance of members’ ability to span diverse boundaries that may be defined by organization structures, national borders, and/or a variety of cultures associated with organization, nation-based societal and work cultures, industries, and/or professions. Based on ethnographic research in a Japan–US binational firm, the paper describes and analyzes the boundary role performance of the firm\u27s Japanese members. It contributes toward theory on boundary spanning by introducing a “cultural identity negotiation” conceptual framework. We show boundary spanning as a process shaped through the interplay of the contextual issues that make a boundary problematic; an individual\u27s multiple repertoires of cultural knowledge; and the individual boundary spanner\u27s “negotiation”, through interaction with others, of his/her cultural identities – the sense of “who I am” as a cultural being that is fundamental to an individual\u27s self-concept. At the same time, we make transparent the epistemological and methodological foundations of an interpretive ethnographic approach, demonstrating its value for understanding complex organizational processes. Research findings have practical implications for the selection and training of an organization\u27s employees, particularly of persons who may be considered “bicultural”

Risk and Organizational Networks: Making Sense of Failure in the Division of Labour

Recent crises have implicated organizational networks, rather than individual, unitary organizations, suggesting that the network rather than the single organization is the appropriate unit of analysis for understanding risk. It is the division of labour across organizational boundaries that appear to be especially threatening. This study investigated how sense is made of the risk that arises from this division of labour, analysing journalistic commentary on two iconic cases in the UK: the Hatfield derailment and the Sudan 1 food contamination scandal. In both cases it was the nature of networks that was central to most explanations of the events that took place, and in both cases it was the societal perception of risk that was more consequential than the objective physical harm. The main conclusion from the analysis was that this sensemaking was ambivalent about organizational networks – seeing advantages as well as drawbacks, and indicating that the main problem was not the choice of how to divide labour but to ensure that the chosen division was rigorously developed and maintained