This is a study in industrial sociology; it a partial report, to be followed by another, of an investigation of singel factory seen in the light of Max Weber's theory of bureacracy.

Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy.

Mainstream accounting is grounded in a common set of philosophical assumptions about knowledge, the empirical world, and the relationship between theory and practice. This particular world-view, with its emphasis on hypothetico-deductivism and technical control, possesses certain strengths but has restricted the range of problems studied and the use of research methods. By changing this set of assumptions, fundamentally different and potentially rich research insights are obtained. Two alternative world-views and their underlying assumptions are elucidated-the interpretive and the critical. The consequences of conducting research within these philosophical traditions are discussed via a comparison between accounting research that is conducted on the "same" problem but from two different perspectives. In addition, some of the difficulties associated with these alternative perspectives are briefly dealt with. The history of thought and culture is, as Hegel showed with great brilliance, a changing pattern of great liberating ideas which inevitably turn into suffocating straightjackets, and so stimulate their own destruction by new emancipatory, and at the same time, enslaving conceptions. The first step to understanding of men is the bringing to consciousness of the model or models that dominate and penetrate their thought and action. Like all attempts to make men aware of the categories in which they think, it is a difficult and sometimes painful activity, likely to produce deeply disquieting results. The second task is to analyse the model itself, and this commits the analyst to accepting or modifying or rejecting it and in the last case, to providing a more adequate one in its stead. [Berlin, 1962, p. 191 SINCE the late 1970s there have been signs of unease among academics about the state and development of accounting research. In 1977 the American Accounting Association's (AAA) Statement on Accounting Theory and Theory Acceptance concluded that there was no generally accepted theory of external reporting. Instead, there was a proliferation of paradigms that offered only limited guidance to policy makers. In addition, the Committee was pessimistic that a dominant consensus could The author would like to acknowledge the continual support of Tony Lowe and the helpful comments of Ray Chambers, David Cooper, Anthony Hopwood, Richard Laughlin, Ken Peasnell, Tony Tinker, Murray Wells, David Williams, participants at a Sydney University Research Seminar, and the anonymous reviewers of this journal. Wai Fong Chua is a Senior Lecturer at the University of New South Wales, Australia. Manuscript received September 1984. Revisions received August 1985 and February 1986. Accepted March 1986.

Radical Developments in Accounting Thought

Developing computer-based information systems necessarily involves making a number of implicit and explicit assumptions. The authors examine four different approaches to information systems development.

Four paradigms of information systems development

The constructive approach means problem solving through the construction of models, diagrams, plans, organizations, etc. This mode of research is widely used in technical sciences, mathematics, operations analysis, and clinical medicine. The doctrine of management accounting includes several important examples of managerial constructions, such as the ROI-measure in profitcenter accounting or the DCF-techniques in capital budgeting. However, almost all of such constructions have been developed in companies or consulting bureaus. We argue that the constructive approach is used too scarcely in management accounting research. Our review of the accounting literature shows that surprisingly few of the most significant managerial constructions originate in management accounting research. Typically the academic literature has merely analyzed and interpreted the innovations constructed elsewhere after the fact. A potential explanation for this scarcity is the adoption of the scientific ideals of accounting either from the natural or social sciences. Another may be that the design of useful managerial constructions tends to result in a consulting relation between the researcher and the firm, which inherently limits the possibility of publishing the results. Also we argue that the constructive approach, grounded in management accounting theory and leading to working managerial constructions, satisfies the requirements of valid applied research. Thus, we propose the constructive approach as a significant option for management accounting researchers to enter the field of relevant and useful problem solving. This direction for research would be one potentially fruitful answer to the recent claims that management accounting has lost its relevance.

The constructive approach in management accounting research

Concern for the natural environment has not occupied a prominent role in accounting scholarship and practice. This paper attempts to redress this omission by investigating the implications for accounting of placing the environment at the centre of the analysis. The paper introduces the principles of this “deep green” position and explores how accounting might articulate them. Whilst there may be no place for what we currently consider to be conventional financial accounting in any “green utopia” the paper does not attempt to operationalise, within a non-green world, certain of the principles of the green position. Emphasis is placed on an accounting's potential for contribution to accountability and transparency in participative democracy, the potential for non-financial accounts of the biosphere and, perhaps most contentiously, the use of current accounting techniques for the operationalisation of an accounting for sustainability.

Accounting and environmentalism: An exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability

A central notion behind this paper is that certain fundamental theoretical and philosophical assumptions underlie any piece of research there is no such thing as a totally objective or value free investigation. Given this initial claim it is thought that the underlying assumptions behind any piece of work should be recognized and assessed by researchers to ensure that they are consistent with their personal beliefs. In other words, researchers into the management sciences should consider their own values and beliefs concerning the nature of society and the social sciences. In order to assist people in this task previous research into the organizational and social aspects of accounting is reviewed and grouped into various schools of thought within a basic sociological framework devised by Burrell and Morgan (1979). This classification of previous accounting literature according to its principal theoretical and philosophical assumptions serves a number of important purposes. First, the framework forms a map that can be used to find one's way through the wealth of research, the aims of which are sometimes confusing and the results conflicting. It will be seen that the multi-disciplinary nature of management accounting, and the consequent variety of theories subsumed under its heading, masks the fact that they tend to stem from similar perspectives towards society and the social sciences. Secondly, a practically oriented subject such as management accounting has often embraced theories from other areas with little concern for their philosophical underpinnings. By making explicit the basic assumptions behind different pieces of work, it is hoped that a greater tolerance and awareness of research from alternative disciplines and perspectives may br

Andrew Powell

Papers

Making sense of research into the organizational and social aspects of management accounting: a review of its underlying assumptions [1]

Making Sense of Research Into The Organizational and Social Aspects of Management Accounting