Decentralization and reliance on the controllability principle in the public sector : an exploratory study

Despite the growing devolution of budgetary responsibility in public sector organizations, little attention has been paid to the key notion of the controllability principle in this context. This paper explores the relationship between decentralization of decision-making authority and reliance on the controllability principle (RCP) in the devolution of budgetary responsibility to the middle management level of a large Norwegian hospital. The results of a questionnaire survey lend modest support to the hypothesized positive relationship between decentralization and RCP. Qualitative data are then used to probe further into these results. This highlights the importance of various institutional factors impinging on the relationship between decentralization and various means of RCP, which have not been widely discussed in previous research. Based on these findings recommendations for future research, combining the functionalist approaches underpinning much prior theorizing on the controllability issue with insights from institutional theory, are advanced. Specifically, we suggest that future research should examine the institutional constraints on decentralization as well as the institutional pressures for various allocation practices in greater detail. Keywords: Budgetary responsibility, controllability, decentralization, institutional theory, Norway, public sector

On the virtues and vices of combining theories: The case of institutional and actor-network theories in accounting research

This paper examines the possibilities and challenges of combining method theories in accounting research through an analysis of studies which combine insights from institutional theory (IT) and actor network theory (ANT). We investigate the paradigmatic challenges associated with combining these method theories and whether and how scholars have dealt with such challenges. We demonstrate how the combination of these method theories in a single study gives rise to considerable paradigmatic tensions. The most significant tensions relate to the two method theories' diverging ontological conceptions of the nature of social structures and agency and their very different epistemological views of the role of theory. Moreover, our review of extant accounting research combining IT and ANT indicates that a large number of studies simply ignore such tensions and do not provide deeper reflections on the paradigmatic implications of combining these method theories. Whilst recognizing the substantive contributions emerging from this body of research, we question whether continued rapprochement between IT and ANT is the most appropriate way forward and suggest alternative theoretical paths for examining the institutionalization of accounting. We also call on accounting researchers to exercise much greater reflexivity regarding the paradigmatic implications of combining method theories as well as the more general justifiability of such practices as a vehicle for advancing our understanding of accounting as a social and organizational practice. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Exploring the "theory is king" thesis in accounting research: the case of actor-network theory

Purpose This paper examines the influence of the normal science tradition, epitomized by the notion that "theory is king", on contemporary accounting research and the epistemological tensions that may emerge as this idea is applied to particular ways of studying accounting. For illustrative purposes, the authors focus on research informed by actor-network theory (ANT) which can be seen as an "extreme case" in the sense that it is, in principle, difficult to reconcile with the normal science aspirations.Design/methodology/approach The paper offers an analysis based on a close reading of how accounting scholars, using ANT, theorize, and if they do engage in explicit theorizing, how they deal with the tensions that might emerge from the need to reconcile its epistemological underpinnings with those of the normal science tradition.Findings The findings of this paper show that the tensions between normal science thinking and the epistemological principles of ANT have, in a few cases, been avoided, as researchers stay relatively faithful to ANT and largely refrain from further theory development. However, in most cases, the tensions have ostensibly been ignored as researchers blend the epistemology of ANT and that of normal science without reflecting on the implications of doing so.Originality/value The paper contributes to emerging debates on the role of the normal science tradition in contemporary accounting research, and also extends recent discussions on the role of theory in accounting research inspired by ANT. The paper proposes three reasons for the observed blending of epistemologies: unawareness of tensions, epistemological eclecticism and various political considerations.</p