Accounting Sociology, viewpoints and Challenges: From the perspective of the dominant paradigms

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
raheleh homayouni rad 1
Fraydoon rahnamay Roodposhty 2
Hashem Nikoomaram 3
mehrdad navabakhsh 4
1 pH.D candidate of accounting, Islamic Azad university, Science and Research branch,Tehran, Iran
2 Full professor in accounting. Islamic azad university-science and research branch, Tehran, Iran
3 full professor in accounting, Islamic Azad university, science and research branch, Tehran, Iran
4 faculty member of Islamic Azad university, science and research branch, Tehran
Abstract
Today, due to the complexity of the relationship of existing companies in society with each other, as well as with the government and people in the community, the conditions have emerged that companies should be responsible not only to the stakeholders, but also to the people of the people. To be A socially-accountable accounting with a broad sociological look can expand the scope of traditional accounting by taking into account the social outcomes of their decisions and their economic effects. The main purpose of this paper is to study accounting sociology in order to develop accounting knowledge. To this end, with the help of a number of experts, a questionnaire was set up in line with the research objectives and a sample of 170 high-level professors in the field of accounting in the country participated in the completion of the study. The hypotheses were tested using one-sample t-test and content analysis was used to analyze the phenomena related to the subject. The results indicate a significant and effective relationship between accounting and sociology. Examining paradigms shows that the direction of moving accounting and sociology paradigms towards collectivist approaches is.
Keywords
Sociology of Accounting
Accounting Paradigms
Sociology Paradigms
Social Accounting
Content Analysis
  • حساس یگانه، یحیی و برزگر، قدرت اله. (1393). مبانی نظری مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت­ها و پارادایم تحقیقاتی آن در حرفه حسابداری. فصلنامه حسابداری مدیریت، 22، 109-133.
  • خواجوی، شکرالله؛ حلاج، محمد و گنجی، کیانوش. (1395). مقایسه نظریه دامنه و نظریه روش در پژوهشهای حسابداری مدیریت: با تاکید بر نظریه کنشگر- شبکه. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی حسابداری مدیریت، 9(29)، 53-72.
  • رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون؛ نیکومرام، هاشم و بنی طالبی دهکردی، بهاره. (1395). نظام اطلاعات حسابداری مدیریت مبتنی بر شبکه کنشگران. تهران: انتشارات ترمه
  • رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون و مرتضوی، محبوبه سادات. (1395). توسعه دانش حسابداری مدیریت بر بستر علم جامعه شناسی. انتشارات ترمه.
  • شیخی، محمد تقی. (1391). حسابداری اجتماعی بعنوان ضامن نظم و توسعه اجتماعی: ارتباط بین جامعه شناسی و حسابداری. دهمین همایش ملی حسابداری ایران.
  • Arnold, P., & Sikka, P. (2001). Globalization and the state–profession relationship: The case of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(6), 475–499.
  • Bradish, C. and J. J. Cronin (2009). “Corporate Social Responsibility in Sport”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 691-697.
  • Buhr, N., Gray, R., & Milne, M. J. (2014). Histories, rationales, national standards and future prospects for sustainability reporting. In J. Bebbington, J. Unerman, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 51–71). Abingdon,Oxon: Routledge.
  • Deegan, C. (2016). Twenty five years of social and environmental accounting research within Critical Perspectives of Accounting: Hits, misses and ways forward. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 43, 65–87.
  • Dumay, J., & Cai, L. (2015). Using content analysis as a research methodology for investigating intellectual capital disclosure. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(1), 121–155.
  • Gray, R. H., & Milne, M. J. (2017). Perhaps the Dodo should have accounted For Human Beings?: Accounts of humanity and (its) extinction. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal [in press].
  • Gray, R., Brennan, A., & Malpas, J. (2014). New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting. Accounting Forum, 38(4), 258–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. accfor.2013.10.005.
  • Gray, R. (2010). Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability…and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(1), 47–62.
  • Gray, R. (2002). The Social Accounting Project And Accounting Organizations And Society, Accounting Is Applied In The Financial Statements Of Companies In Gaza Strip. Journal of Islamic University, (Human Studies Series), 15 (1), 239-281.
  • Gray, R. (2013). Back to basics: What do we mean by environmental (and social) accounting and what is it for?—A reaction to Thornton. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(6), 459–468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.04.005.
  • Gray, R. (2016). Reading for displeasure: Why bother with social accounting at all? Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 36(2), 153–161.
  • Harvey, B. (2014). Social development will not deliver social licence to operate for the extractive sector. The Extractive Industries and Society, 1(1), 7–11. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.exis.2013.11.001.
  • Hassard, J. Wolfram, J. (2013). Can Sociological Paradigms Still Inform Organizational Analysis? A Paradigm Model for Post-Paradigm Times. journals.sagepub.com
  • Hines, R. (1989). The Sociopolitical Paradigm in Financial Accounting Research.  Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 2.
  • Kuper, A. and Kuper, J. (1996). The Social Science Encyclopedia. 2nd Edition, New York: Routledge.
  • Lehman, G. (2015). Charles Taylor's ecological conversations: politics, commonalities and the natural environment. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Lehman, G. (2017a). Philosophical perspectives on critical accounting. In R. Roslender (Ed.), The routledge companion to critical accountingLondon: Routledge [forthcoming].
  • Lehman, G. (2017b). The language of environmental and social accounting research: The expression of beauty and truth. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 44, 30–41.
  • Lehman, G., & kuruppu, S. C. (2017). A framework for social and environmental accounting research. Accounting forum, 41, 139-146.
  • Lindgreen, A.; Swaen, V.; and F. Maon (2009). “Introduction: Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85, No. 2, pp. 251-256.
  • Mangos, N. and Neil R. Lewis, (1995). A socio‐economic paradigm for analysing managers′ accounting choice behavior.  Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 8 Issue: 1, pp.38-62.
  • Milne, M. J., & Gray, R. H. (2013). ‘W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting’. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 13–29.
  • Mouritsen, J., & Kreiner, K. (2016). Accounting, decisions and promises. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 49, 21–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.02. 002.
  • Parker, L. D. (2011). Twenty-one years of social and environmental accountability research: A coming of age. Accounting Forum, 35(1), 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2010.11.001.
  • Peloza, J. and L. Falkenberg (2009).“The Role of Collaboration in Achieving Corporate Social Responsibility Objectives”, California Management Review, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 95-113.
  • Sikka, P. (2011). Accounting for human rights: The challenge of globalization and foreign investment agreements. Journal of Critical Perspectives on Accounting. London:. 22 (8), 811-18.
  • Sikka, P., & Lehman, G. (2015). The supply-side of corruption and limits to preventing corruption within government procurement and constructing ethical subjects’. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 28, 62–70.
  • Sikka, P., & Stittle, J. (2017). Debunking the myth of shareholder ownership of companies: Some implications for corporate governance and financial reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting [in press].
  • Spence, C. (2009). Social accounting’s emancipatory potential: A Gramscian critique. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(2), 205–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2007.06.003.
  • Srivastava, M. (2013). “A Comprehensive Study of Corporate Social Responsibility with the Help of Rudyard Kipling’s Model”, AIMA Journal of Management and Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1-12.
  • Thomson, I. (2015). ‘But does sustainability need capitalism or an integrated report’ a commentary on ‘The International Integrated Reporting Council: A story of failure’. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 27, 18–22.
  • Tregidga, H., Milne, M., & Kearins, K. (2014). (Re)presenting sustainable organizations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 477–494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2013.10.006.
  • Tregidga, H., Milne, M. J., & Kearins, K. (2015). Ramping up resistance corporate sustainable development and academic research. Business & Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650315611459 Advance Online Publication.
  • Tweedie, D. (2018). Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Available online 4 February 2018.
  • Unerman, J., & Chapman, C. (2014). Academic contributions to enhancing accounting for sustainable development. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6),385–394.
  • Walker, S. P. (2016). Revisiting the roles of accounting in society. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 49, 41–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2015.11.007.
  • Whitehouse, L. (2003). “Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Citizenship and the Global Compact: A New Approach to Regulating Corporate Social Power?”, Global Social Policy, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 299-318.

 

Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge
Volume 9, Issue 33
Spring 2020
Pages 9-24