Explaining the Giddens Structural Theory in Accounting Research from the Perspective of Knowledge

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Bahareh Banitalebi Dehkordi 1
Reza Khosravi 2
1 Assistant of Department of Business of Islamic Azad University,Shahrekord Branch,Shahrekord,Iran (Corresponding Author)
2 Ph.D Student of Accounting of Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord Branch,Shahrekord,Iran
Abstract
Since 25 years ago, when Giddens Structural Theory (ST) was introduced in accounting papers, It has strengthened its position as one of the most important schools of thought for accounting discovery as an organizational, social and political phenomenon in organizations and accepted by most accounting researchers as a theory. This theory is not only useful in challenging the assumptions of the intrinsic and functional characteristics of accounting and management accounting information systems; it also expands the sources of alternative theories. Giddens has proved his structural theory to directors and accounting researchers in useful areas and has used the theory of founding sociologists such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim in his various studies in the interpretive and applied processes of structural theory. Structural theory plays a fundamental role in the role of accounting in the structure of both the individual and departmental relationships of the organization. The focus of the Giddens theory is of an organizational and "strategic" type, so that it transfers the central role that accounting appears to be in building and rebuilding organizations. The structural theory of accounting, from the magnitude of the magnitude, can be seen as an important "ready-made" structure to serve the organization, as well as a very specific set of meanings through which a better understanding of an organizational event can be achieved. The introduction of the Giddens Structural Theory (ST) is a significant contribution to challenging the functionalism assumptions that underlie the dominant thinking research.
In the present article, for the first time in the country, the introduction and explanation of Giddens structural theory, the evolution of accounting research related to this theory and the manner of interaction and the relationship between this theory and its components in the accounting system from the perspective of knowledge are discussed.
 
Keywords
Giddens Structure Theory
The Course of Accounting Developments
Agencies
Structuralism
*       Ahrens T, Chapman CS. (2007) .Theorizing practice in management accounting research. In: Chapman CS, Hopwood AG, Shields MD, editors. Handbooks of management accounting research, Oxford: Elsevier Publishing, 99–112.
*       Alam A, Lawrence S, Nandan R. (2004). Accounting for economic development in the context of post-colonialism: the Fijian experience. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,15 , 135–57.
*        Barley SR. (1986) .Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly 31, 78–108.
*       Barrett M, Cooper DJ, Jamal K. (2005) .Globalization and the coordinating of work in multinational audits. Accounting Organizations and Society ,30,1–24.
*        Baxter J, Chua WF. (2003).Alternative management accounting research—whence and whither. Accounting Organizations and Society ,28,97–126.
*       Boland RJ Jr.(1996). Why shared meanings have no place in structuration theory: a reply to Scapens and Macintosh. Accounting Organizations and Society ,21,691–697.
*       Buhr N. A.(2002). structuration view on the initiation of environmental reports. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,13,17–38.
*       Burns J, Scapens RW.(2000). Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional framework. Management Accounting Research ,11,3–25.
*        Busco C. (2009) . Giddens’ structuration theory and its implications for management accounting research. Journal of Management and Governance ,13, 249–260.
*       Caglio A. (2003). Enterprise resource planning systems and accountants: towards hybridization? European Accounting Review ,12,123–153.
*       Conrad L, Guven Uslu P. (2011). Investigation of the impact of ‘Payment by Results’ on performance measurement and management in NHS Trusts. Management Accounting Research ,22,46–55.
*       Covaleski MA, Dirsmith MW. (1988). An institutional perspective on the rise, social transformation, and fall of a university budget category. Administrative Science Quarterly , 33,562–587.
*       Cowton CJ, Dopson S. (2002). Foucault’s prison? Management control in an automotive distributor Management Accounting Research ,13,191–213.
*       DeSanctis G, Poole MS. (1994) .Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science ,5,121–148.
*       Dillard JF. (2000).Integrating the accountant and the information systems development process. Accounting Forum ,24,407–421.
*       Dirsmith MW, Heian JB, Covaleski MA. (1997). Structure and agency in an institutionalized setting: the application and social transformation of controls in the big six. Accounting Organizations and Society , 22,1–27.
*       Englund H, Gerdin J. (2008) .Structuration theory and mediating concepts: pitfalls and implications for management accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,19,1122–1134.
*       Englund H, Gerdin J, Burns J.(2011). 25 Years of Giddens in accounting research: Achievements, limitations and the future. Accounting Organizations and Society ,36,494–513.
*       Fay E, Introna L, Puyou F-R.(2010). Living with numbers: accounting for subjectivity in/with management accounting systems. Information and Organization ,20,21–43.
*       Giddens A.(1976). New rules of sociological method: a positive critique of interpretative sociologies. New York: Basic Books Inc.
*       Giddens A. (1979).Central problems in social theory: action structure and contradictions in social analysis. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
*       Giddens A. (1990).The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1984. Giddens A. The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
*       Giddens A. (1990).Structuration theory and sociological analysis. In: Clark J, Modgil C, Modgil S, editors. Anthony Giddens: consensus and controversy. London: Falmer Press; 297–315.
*       Giddens A. (1991).Structuration theory: past, present and future. In: Bryant CGA, Jary D, editors. Giddens’ theory of structuration: a critical appreciation. London: Routledge; 201–21.
*       Granlund M, Lukka K, Mouritsen J. (1998).Institutionalised justification of corporate action: internationalisation and the EU in corporate reports. Scandinavian Journal of Management ,14,433–58.
*       Gurd B.(2008). Structuration and middle-range theory: a case study of accounting during organizational change from different theoretical perspectives. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,19,523–43.
*       Hamilton G, Hogartaigh CO´ . (2009).The third policeman: ‘the true and fair view’, language and the habitus of accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,20,910–20.
*       Jack L. (2005).Stocks of knowledge, simplification and unintended consequences: the persistence of post-war accounting practices in UK agriculture. Management Accounting Research ,16,59–79. .
*       Jayasinghe K, Thomas D. (2009).The preservation of indigenous accounting systems in a subaltern community. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal ,22,351–378.
*       Johanson U, Ma˚ rtensson M, Skoog M. (2001).Mobilizing change through the management control of intangibles. Accounting Organizations and Society ,26,715–733.
*       Jones TC, Dugdale D. (2001).The concept of an accounting regime. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,12,35–63.
*       Joseph G. (2006).Understanding developments in the management information value chain from a structuration theory framework. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems ,7,319–341.
*        Kilfoyle E, Richardson AJ. (2011).Agency and structure in budgeting: thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,22,183–199.
*       Laughlin RC. (1990).A model of financial accountability and The Church of England. Financial Accountability and Management ,6,93–114.
*       Lawrence SL, Alam M, Northcott D, Lowe T.(1997). Accounting systems and systems of accountability in the New Zealand health sector. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal ,10,665–683
*       Lukka K, Granlund M. (2002).The fragmented communication structure within the accounting academia: the case of activity-based costing research genres. Accounting Organizations and Society ,27,165–190.
*       Macintosh NB, Scapens RW. (1990).Structuration theory in management accounting. Accounting Organizations and Society ,15,455–477.
*       Macintosh NB, Scapens RW.(1991). Management accounting and control systems: a structuration theory analysis. Journal of Management Accounting Research ,3,131–158.
*       Meira J, Kartalis ND, Tsamenyi M, Cullen J. (2010).Management controls and inter-firm relationships: a review. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change ,6,149–169.
*       Messner M. (2009).The limits of accountability. Accounting Organizations and Society ,34,918–938.
*       Orlikowski WJ.(1992). The duality of technology: rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization ,3,398–427.
*       Ouibrahim N, Scapens R.(1989). Accounting and financial control in a socialist enterprise: a case study from Algeria. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal ,2,7–28.
*       Parker L, Gould G. (1999).Changing public sector accountability: critiquing new directions. Accounting Forum ,23,109–35.
*       Roberts J, Scapens RW. (1985).Accounting systems and systems of accountability: understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. Accounting Organizations and Society ,10,443–456.
*       Saravanamuthu L, Tinker T. (2003).Politics of managing: the dialectic of control. Accounting Organizations and Society ,28,37–64.
*       Scapens RW, Roberts J. (1993).Accounting and control: a case study of resistance to accounting change. Management Accounting Research ,4,1–32.
*       Scheytt T, Soin K, Metz T. (2003).Exploring notions of control across cultures: a narrative approach. European Accounting Review ,12,515–547.
*       Seal W, Berry A, Cullen J.(2004). Disembedding the supply chain: institutionalized reflexivity and inter-firm accounting. Accounting Organizations and Society ,29,73–92. .
*       Tollington T. (2006).UK goodwill and intangible asset structuration: the FRS10 rule creation cycle. Critical Perspectives on Accounting ,17,799–826.
*       Uddin S, Tsamenyi M. (2005).Public sector reforms and the public interest: a case study of accounting control changes and performance monitoring in a Ghanaian state- owned enterprise. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal ,18,648–674.
*       Yin RK. (1994).Case study research: design and methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
*       Yuthas K, Dillard JF. (1997).Ethical structuring of advanced information technology in public accounting firms. Accounting Forum ,21,361–393.
*       Yuthas K, Dillard JF.(1998). Structuration theory: a framework for behavioral research. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research ,195–221