To speak or not to speak the language of numbers: accounting as ventriloquism

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to extend the literature on accounting’s performativity by developing a ventriloquial perspective that directs the attention to the reciprocity between the accounting signs and the accountants: they both do things by making each other speak. This oscillation explains where accounting number’s authority, materiality and resistance come from. Design/methodology/approach In order to show the relevance of this approach, the authors examine various ways numbers manage to speak or do things in the context of video-recorded conversations taken from fieldwork completed with Médecins sans frontières (also known as Doctors without Borders) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Findings The analyses show how this ventriloquial perspective can inform the way the authors interpret what happens: when numbers do not say the same thing; when numbers are competing with other figures; and when numbers backfire on their own promoters. Research limitations/implications Even if some of the numbers studied are sometimes far from accounting per se, it shows how the absence or presence of accounting can make a difference. Practical implications The authors then discuss the implications of this research for accounting social innovation through accounting inscriptions. Social implications This perspective helps to understand that numbers can give great power, but that everything cannot be told with numbers. This is why making numbers speak is a great talent. Originality/value This refreshing perspective on accounting could be extended to other fields such as auditing and auditing.

How Artefacts Do Leadership: A Ventriloquial Analysis

“…For instance, acknowledging that interpreting or making sense of a number in a financial report relies on our knowledge of accounting and finances does not mean that this number does not say or do anything. On the contrary, it is because of this knowledge that this number can indeed tell us something about the financial situation of a company (Fauré et al, 2019). If the number tells us something, it is not only because we make it say something, but also because it makes us say something .…”

Speaking about vision, talking in the name of so much more: A methodological framework for ventriloquial analyses in organization studies

“…We generally found density of ventriloquial effects a good indicator of a sequence’s vividness. Number, focus, and length of the vignettes depend on the research endeavor and can range from one vignette of a specific situation (Cooren, 2010b; Cooren & Bencherki, 2010; Cooren et al, 2013) to multiple, shorter sequences that illustrate different aspects of a studied construct (Fauré, Cooren, & Matte, 2019; Long et al, 2018).…”

Niklas Luhmann’s Radical Communication Approach and Its Implications for Research on Organizational Communication

“…Analyzing the details of communication episodes, which is one of the trademarks of a communicative perspective on organization, would then consist of singularizing these specific moments where a collective course of action appears to be agreed upon to the detriment of others. Interestingly, one could then show how what we have referred to as the "game of authority" (Fauré, Cooren and Matte, 2019), which is usually implied in this kind of situation, can also be seen as another form of deparadoxification, i. e. of hiding the paradox, of the decision-making process.…”