IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v55y2016icp12-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance measurement in global governance: Ranking and the politics of variability

Author

Listed:
  • Mehrpouya, Afshin
  • Samiolo, Rita

Abstract

The past thirty years have witnessed the spread of rankings, ratings and league tables as governance technologies which aim to regulate the provision of public goods by means of market pressures. This paper examines the process of company analysis underlying the production of a ranking known as the Access to Medicine Index. We conceptualize the Index as a “regulatory ranking” with the explicit mission of addressing a perceived regulatory gap and market failure: the lack of access to medicine in the Global South. The Index, which ranks the world's largest pharmaceutical companies with regards to their access to medicine policies and practices, aspires to help address the problem of access to medicine through stakeholder consultation, transparency and competition. This study unbundles the epistemic work underlying the performance measurement process leading to the creation of the Index. We trace how the goal of stakeholder consensus, the need to project objectivity and the aspiration to govern through competition shape analysts' epistemic work. We discuss how through notions such as “the good distribution” and “aspirational indicators”, performance measurement and ranking become entangled in a “politics of variability” whereby company data need to be variably interpreted in order to optimise the possibilities of intervening in companies through competitive pressures, while at the same time complying with the imperatives to remain in the space of perceived stakeholder consensus and to provide a faithful representation of companies performance to inform public debates. We reflect on the challenges posed by these analysis processes for the regulatory aspirations of the ranking.

Suggested Citation

  • Mehrpouya, Afshin & Samiolo, Rita, 2016. "Performance measurement in global governance: Ranking and the politics of variability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 12-31.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:55:y:2016:i:c:p:12-31
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2016.09.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368216300769
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2016.09.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Büthe & Walter Mattli, 2011. "The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9470.
    2. Martin Kornberger & Chris Carter, 2010. "Manufacturing competition: how accounting practices shape strategy making in cities," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(3), pages 325-349, March.
    3. Burchell, Stuart & Clubb, Colin & Hopwood, Anthony & Hughes, John & Nahapiet, Janine, 1980. "The roles of accounting in organizations and society," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 5-27, January.
    4. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic, 2006. "Marketization: From Intellectual Agenda to Global Policy Making," Post-Print hal-01891997, HAL.
    5. Callon, Michel, 2009. "Civilizing markets: Carbon trading between in vitro and in vivo experiments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 535-548, April.
    6. Sigrid Quack, 2010. "Transnational communities and governance," Post-Print hal-01891975, HAL.
    7. Jean-Paul Moatti & Benjamin Coriat & Yves Souteyrand & Tony Barnett & Jérôme Dumoulin & Yves-Antoine Flori, 2003. "Economics of AIDS and access to HIV/AIDS care in developing countries : issues and challenges," Post-Print halshs-00112023, HAL.
    8. Jeacle, Ingrid & Carter, Chris, 2011. "In TripAdvisor we trust: Rankings, calculative regimes and abstract systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 293-309.
    9. Qu, Sandy Q. & Cooper, David J., 2011. "The role of inscriptions in producing a balanced scorecard," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 344-362.
    10. Chua, Wai Fong, 1995. "Experts, networks and inscriptions in the fabrication of accounting images: A story of the representation of three public hospitals," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(2-3), pages 111-145.
    11. Ezzamel, Mahmoud & Lilley, Simon & Willmott, Hugh, 2004. "Accounting representation and the road to commercial salvation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 783-813, November.
    12. Dambrin, Claire & Robson, Keith, 2011. "Tracing performance in the pharmaceutical industry: Ambivalence, opacity and the performativity of flawed measures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 428-455.
    13. Cristiano Busco & Paolo Quattrone, 2015. "Exploring How the Balanced Scorecard Engages and Unfolds: Articulating the Visual Power of Accounting Inscriptions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 1236-1262, September.
    14. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic & Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson, 2009. "Governance and its Transnational Dynamics: Towards a Reordering of our World?," Post-Print hal-01891980, HAL.
    15. Bloomfield, Brian P & Vurdubakis, Theo, 1997. "Visions Of Organization And Organizations Of Vision: The Representational Practices Of Information Systems Development," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 639-668, October.
    16. MacKenzie, Donald, 2009. "Making things the same: Gases, emission rights and the politics of carbon markets," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 440-455, April.
    17. Free, Clinton & Salterio, Steven E. & Shearer, Teri, 2009. "The construction of auditability: MBA rankings and assurance in practice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 119-140, January.
    18. Strathern, Marilyn, 1997. "‘Improving ratings’: audit in the British University system," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 305-321, July.
    19. Chenhall, Robert H. & Hall, Matthew & Smith, David, 2013. "Performance measurement, modes of evaluation and the development of compromising accounts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51294, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Pollock, Neil & D’Adderio, Luciana, 2012. "Give me a two-by-two matrix and I will create the market: Rankings, graphic visualisations and sociomateriality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 565-586.
    21. Claire Dambrin & Keith Robson, 2011. "Tracing performance in the pharmaceutical industry: ambivalence, opacity and the performativity of flawed measures," Post-Print hal-00687848, HAL.
    22. Power, Michael, 1999. "The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198296034.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pollock, Neil & D'Adderio, Luciana & Williams, Robin & Leforestier, Ludovic, 2018. "Conforming or transforming? How organizations respond to multiple rankings," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 55-68.
    2. Justyna Bandola-Gill, 2022. "Statistical entrepreneurs: the political work of infrastructuring the SDG indicators [The legitimacy of experts in policy: navigating technocratic and political accountability in the case of global," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(4), pages 498-512.
    3. Mennicken, Andrea & Kornberger, Martin, 2021. "Von performativität zu generativität: Bewertung und ihre Folgen im Kontext der Digitalisierung," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110925, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Faulconbridge, James R. & Muzio, Daniel, 2021. "Valuation devices and the dynamic legitimacy-performativity nexus: The case of PEP in the English legal profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Afshin Mehrpouya & Rita Samiolo, 2019. "Numbers in regulatory intermediation: Exploring the role of performance measurement between legitimacy and compliance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 220-239, June.
    6. Clune, Conor & O’Dwyer, Brendan, 2020. "Organizing dissonance through institutional work: The embedding of social and environmental accountability in an investment field," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    7. Baxter, Jane & Carlsson-Wall, Martin & Chua, Wai Fong & Kraus, Kalle, 2019. "Accounting and passionate interests: The case of a Swedish football club," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 21-40.
    8. Beime, Kristina S. & Englund, Hans & Gerdin, Jonas & Seger, Karin, 2024. "Theorizing the subjectivizing powers of market-based technologies: Looking beyond coercion and seduction," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    9. Apostol, Oana & Mäkelä, Hannele & Vinnari, Eija, 2023. "Cultural sustainability and the construction of (in)commensurability: cultural heritage at the Roşia Montană mining site," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Schwarting, Rena & Ulbricht, Lena, 2022. "Why Organization Matters in “Algorithmic Discrimination” [Warum Organisationen einen Unterschied bei „algorithmischer Diskriminierung“ machen]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 74(S1), pages 307-330.
    11. Palermo, Tommaso & Power, Michael & Ashby, Simon, 2022. "How accounting ends: self-undermining repetition in accounting lifecycles," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115278, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Leopold Ringel & Jelena Brankovic & Tobias Werron, 2020. "The Organizational Engine of Rankings: Connecting “New” and “Old” Institutionalism," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 36-47.
    13. Matthias Benzer, 2020. "NICE and Society: Health Technology Appraisal and the Cultivation of Social Relations," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 25(2), pages 165-183, June.
    14. Janne Järvinen & Matias Laine & Timo Hyvönen & Hannele Kantola, 2022. "Just Look at the Numbers: A Case Study on Quantification in Corporate Environmental Disclosures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 23-44, January.
    15. Alexander E. Kentikelenis & Leonard Seabrooke, 2022. "Governing and Measuring Health Security: The Global Push for Pandemic Preparedness Indicators," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(4), pages 571-578, September.
    16. Rowbottom, N. & Locke, J. & Troshani, I., 2021. "When the tail wags the dog? Digitalisation and corporate reporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    17. Rajak, Manindra & Shaw, Krishnendu, 2019. "Evaluation and selection of mobile health (mHealth) applications using AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pollock, Neil & D’Adderio, Luciana, 2012. "Give me a two-by-two matrix and I will create the market: Rankings, graphic visualisations and sociomateriality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 565-586.
    2. Boedker, Christina & Chong, Kar-Ming & Mouritsen, Jan, 2020. "The counter-performativity of calculative practices: Mobilising rankings of intellectual capital," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Baxter, Jane & Carlsson-Wall, Martin & Chua, Wai Fong & Kraus, Kalle, 2019. "Accounting and passionate interests: The case of a Swedish football club," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 21-40.
    4. Martinez, Daniel E. & Cooper, David J., 2019. "Assembling performance measurement through engagement," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    5. Robson, Keith & Bottausci, Chiara, 2018. "The sociology of translation and accounting inscriptions: Reflections on Latour and Accounting Research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 60-75.
    6. Pollock, Neil & D'Adderio, Luciana & Williams, Robin & Leforestier, Ludovic, 2018. "Conforming or transforming? How organizations respond to multiple rankings," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 55-68.
    7. Ronzani, Matteo & Gatzweiler, Marian Konstantin, 2022. "The lure of the visual: Multimodality, simplification, and performance measurement visualizations in a megaproject," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Lambert Jerman & Pierre Labardin, 2016. "Du pouvoir visuel des nombres comptables: les apports de la phénoménologie d'Husserl," Post-Print hal-01902585, HAL.
    9. Crvelin, David & Becker, Albrecht, 2020. "‘The spirits that we summoned’: A study on how the ‘governed’ make accounting their own in the context of market-making programs in Nepal," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. André, Kévin & Cho, Charles H. & Laine, Matias, 2018. "Reference points for measuring social performance: Case study of a social business venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 660-678.
    11. van Erp, Wil & Roozen, Frans & Vosselman, Ed, 2019. "The performativity of a management accounting and control system: Exploring the dynamic relational consequences of a design," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(4).
    12. Palermo, Tommaso & Power, Michael & Ashby, Simon, 2022. "How accounting ends: self-undermining repetition in accounting lifecycles," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115278, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Paul Andon & Jane Baxter & Wai Fong Chua, 2015. "Accounting for Stakeholders and Making Accounting Useful," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 986-1002, November.
    14. Madlen Sobkowiak, 2023. "The making of imperfect indicators for biodiversity: A case study of UK biodiversity performance measurement," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 336-352, January.
    15. Martinez, Daniel E. & Pflueger, Dane & Palermo, Tommaso, 2022. "Accounting and the territorialization of markets: A field study of the Colorado cannabis market," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Robson, Keith & Ezzamel, Mahmoud, 2023. "The cultural fields of accounting practices: Institutionalization and accounting changes beyond the organization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    17. Roberts, John, 2018. "Managing only with transparency: The strategic functions of ignorance," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 53-60.
    18. Power, Michael, 2021. "Modelling the microfoundations of the audit society: organizations and the logic of the audit trail," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100243, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Yu, Lichen & Mouritsen, Jan, 2020. "Accounting, simultaneity and relative completeness: The sales and operations planning forecast and the enactment of the ‘demand chain’," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    20. Sundström, Andreas & Catasús, Bino, 2023. "Let the right one in: ‘Accounting proxemics’ in the design of performance indicators," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:55:y:2016:i:c:p:12-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.