Meeting the evolving corporate reporting needs of government and society: arguments for a deliberative approach to accounting rule making

The marketization of accountancy

“…Without reifying the classical model of professionalism, accountants could rethink their market objectives and elaborate a new version of professionalism where more importance is given to public interest. This supports Cooper and Morgan's (2013) suggestions for more deliberative approaches to accounting that meet governments' and society's needs. Professional associations should also play a more prominent role in giving more visibility to a progressive version of professionalism instead of promoting a market oriented one.…”

Audit Culture Revisited

“…Here I draw attention to accounting research aimed at developing pluralistic accountings that enable contestation of neoliberal logics and forms of accountability that privilege finance capital (Brown 2009;Dillard 2013, 2014, forthcoming;Cooper and Morgan 2013;Gray, Brennan, and Malpas 2014). This literature-with its roots in social and critical accounting scholarship dating back to the 1970s-aims to encourage critique of conventional accounting practices and the values, assumptions, and politics underpinning them, as well as to open up possibilities for alternative accountings/accountabilities that foster socially just and ecologically sustainable societies.…”

Stakeholder engagement and dialogic accounting

“…The contested nature of accounting information-and the importance of responding to a wider range of interested constituencies-has led many scholars to re-think their views on reporting practices, including calls for new accounting processes that recognize the pluralist nature of contemporary society (Boyce, 2000;Cooper & Morgan, 2013;Dillard & Ruchala, 2005;Macintosh & Baker, 2002). By supporting stakeholder engagement and community participation, DA involves the creation of a public forum where diverse constituencies can express opinions and different points of view-including discussions of related ideologies and power relations-without assuming a single, shared framework that is based on an agonistic approach to democracy.…”