Beyond accountants as technocrats: A common good perspective

Abstract

In a context characterised by the scientification of accounting practices and standards, an important question to pose is how might accounting professionals be released from an excessive focus on rationality (technical accuracy, technical neutrality and technical abstraction) and reclaim the profession in the public interest? Grounded in a person-oriented approach, we contend the common good principle can help accountants to mitigate the tyranny of economic rationality/homo economicus notably through greater consideration of public interest, thereby enabling them to exercise stronger ethical judgement. First, the common good can serve as a basis for the establishment of an ethical protocol based on the search for embedded community goods, human development and the personal good of each member. Second, the common good provides specific ethical principles including subsidiarity, totality, teleological hierarchy, longterm commitment, reality and unity that can better assist accounting professionals to exercise ethical judgement and therefore contribute to the public interest. In contrast to defending a strict adherence to ethical rules enshrined in professional codes of conduct, this article argues for an open ended protocol inspired by the common good principle. This will, we contend, better promote the re-contextualisation of accounting practices conducted by reflexive, sentient and publically-conscious practitioners.

Escaping the Fantasy Land of Freedom in Organizations: The Contribution of Hannah Arendt

“…Several studies have already examined organizations that are concerned with the common good and resistant to totalitarian practices, as they strive to pursue the dual ideal of a community good and the personal good of all community members (Frémeaux and Michelson 2017 ; Sison and Fontrodona 2012 ). Future research can use the reflections presented in this article to add to the principles of the common good most commonly emphasized in the current literature—subsidiarity, totality, teleological hierarchy, long-term commitment, reality, or unity (Frémeaux et al 2020a , b ). Furthermore, we animate scholars interested in career studies to contribute to a critical examination of the different ways of experiencing professional success, dynamics of cooperation, and spontaneous activities.…”

“…Historically, performance management has been linked to the scientificization of work, the objectification of evaluation criteria, and the development of coercive forms of power (e.g., rewards and punishment). Such areas of inquiry have been explored in consulting, accounting firms and business schools, revealing an excessive focus on technical accuracy, technical neutrality, and technical abstraction (Alvesson and Robertson 2006 ; Malsch and Guénin-Paracini 2013 ; Frémeaux et al 2020a , b ), and an excessive focus for academics on publication opportunities and elegant publishable models (Alvesson and Spicer 2016 ; Edwards and Roy 2017 ; Frémeaux et al 2020a , b ). Continuously monitored and evaluated individuals feel compelled to adopt desired behaviors and to submit to the type of soft domination found in contemporary organizations.…”

Organisational learning for the common good: an emerging model

“…A recent and very interesting stream is focusing on the common good as a key organisational purpose (Hollensbe et al, 2014), and investigates how organisational learning changes when entrepreneurs/managers consider the pursuit of the greater good as a key value when making decisions (Mirvis, Herrera, Googins, & Albareda, 2016;O'Brien, 2009). This line of research advocates moral, humanistic principles for shaping organisational theory and practice, criticises an excessively technocratic approach to evaluation and accounting (Frémeaux, Puyou, & Michelson, 2018), and also demonstrates that competitive advantage can be unnecessary to explain the contribution of organisational learning to organisational survival: for example, non-profit organisations survive through legitimacy, social connectedness, and goodwill, which must then become the main goals of organisational learning (Moldavanova & Goerdel, 2018). This research stream is extremely interesting; however, it focuses on the pursuit of the common good as moral motivation, and does not provide tools to measure the common good as an expected outcome or impact.…”

A Common Good Perspective on Diversity

“…The common good principle also transcends the instrumental approach by explicitly setting human and virtue development as an objective, and by proposing a dialectic of ends and means: profit, capital, or technological development are explicitly seen as necessary means and not as objectives. Lastly, the common good principle avoids the exclusion logic, because it is based on the assumption that by pursuing a community good turned toward human development, individuals tend to achieve their personal good more fully (Frémeaux, Puyou, & Michelson, 2018). It involves all members of the community, proclaims that no person and no category of individuals can be ruled out, and encourages all the members of the community to pursue the desire to oppose exclusion (Melé, 2012).…”