IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v85y2020ics0361368220300234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizing dissonance through institutional work: The embedding of social and environmental accountability in an investment field

Author

Listed:
  • Clune, Conor
  • O’Dwyer, Brendan

Abstract

Advocacy movements play an increasingly prominent role in shaping corporate social responsibility (CSR) management and reporting practices. Prior research mainly studies advocacy movements who form and operate on the periphery of the organizational field(s) they seek to alter. We know comparatively little about how these movements materialize within fields and use established field networks, resources and power structures to transform CSR and CSR reporting norms. This paper examines how an advocacy movement formed and evolved within the Dutch investment field to embed a suite of social and environmental accountability mechanisms therein. We examine the evolution of VBDO, a membership association which promotes and polices corporate accountability among Dutch listed companies and investment institutions. We depict how a movement of diverse actors materialized in and around VBDO to stimulate responsible investment and sophisticated CSR reporting in the investment field. Insights from social movement theory and institutional work are integrated with Stark’s (2009) concept of organizing dissonance to theorise the conditions underpinning the movement’s emergence and influence. We uncover how rankings work - the co-creation, dissemination and policing of CSR benchmarks - and (institutional) work censorship - the strategic self-censoring of institutional work - coalesced to cultivate constructive collaborations among movement actors. We show how this enabled the creation of accountability mechanisms that facilitated VBDO’s transition into an influential and unique boundary organization. Our analysis extends prior research by revealing the role of institutional work in cultivating cooperation between advocacy movements and the targets of their reforms. By illustrating how actors’ opposing value frames co-existed peacefully as VBDO’s accountability mechanisms evolved, we offer a counterpoint to studies suggesting that compromise underpins the organization of dissonance among actors constructing corporate accounts.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:85:y:2020:i:c:s0361368220300234
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2020.101130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368220300234
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2020.101130?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. Canning, Mary & O'Dwyer, Brendan, 2016. "Institutional work and regulatory change in the accounting profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-21.
    2. Vinnari, Eija & Laine, Matias, 2017. "The moral mechanism of counter accounts: The case of industrial animal production," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-17.
    3. O'Dwyer, Brendan & Unerman, Jeffrey, 2016. "Fostering rigour in accounting for social sustainability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 32-40.
    4. Archel, Pablo & Husillos, Javier & Spence, Crawford, 2011. "The institutionalisation of unaccountability: Loading the dice of Corporate Social Responsibility discourse," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 327-343.
    5. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & van Staden, Chris J., 2018. "Social movement NGOs and the comprehensiveness of conflict mineral disclosures: evidence from global companies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-19.
    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. Conor Clune & Roel Boomsma & Richard Pucci, 2019. "The disparate roles of accounting in an amateur sports organisation," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(7), pages 1926-1955, August.
    8. Jeffrey Unerman & Jan Bebbington & Brendan O’dwyer, 2018. "Corporate reporting and accounting for externalities," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(5), pages 497-522, July.
    9. Cooper, Stuart M. & Owen, David L., 2007. "Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(7-8), pages 649-667.
    10. Peter Tashman & Valentina Marano & Tatiana Kostova, 2019. "Walking the walk or talking the talk? Corporate social responsibility decoupling in emerging market multinationals," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(2), pages 153-171, March.
    11. Sven Modell, 2015. "Making institutional accounting research critical: dead end or new beginning?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(5), pages 773-808, June.
    12. Daniel Beunza & David Stark, 2004. "Tools of the trade: the socio-technology of arbitrage in a Wall Street trading room," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(2), pages 369-400, April.
    13. Elisa Alt & Justin B. Craig, 2016. "Selling Issues with Solutions: Igniting Social Intrapreneurship in for-Profit Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 794-820, July.
    14. Grisard, Claudine & Annisette, Marcia & Graham, Cameron, 2020. "Performative agency and incremental change in a CSR context," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    15. Dror Etzion & Fabrizio Ferraro, 2010. "The Role of Analogy in the Institutionalization of Sustainability Reporting," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1092-1107, October.
    16. Laura Empson & Imogen Cleaver & Jeremy Allen, 2013. "Managing Partners and Management Professionals: Institutional Work Dyads in Professional Partnerships," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(5), pages 808-844, July.
    17. Thomas Ahrens & Christopher S. Chapman, 2004. "Accounting for Flexibility and Efficiency: A Field Study of Management Control Systems in a Restaurant Chain," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 271-301, June.
    18. Bebbington, Jan & Kirk, Elizabeth A. & Larrinaga, Carlos, 2012. "The production of normativity: A comparison of reporting regimes in Spain and the UK," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 78-94.
    19. Mercy Denedo & Ian Thomson & Akira Yonekura, 2017. "International advocacy NGOs, counter accounting, accountability and engagement," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(6), pages 1309-1343, August.
    20. 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.
    21. Brown, Judy & Tregidga, Helen, 2017. "Re-politicizing social and environmental accounting through Rancière: On the value of dissensus," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-21.
    22. Killian, Sheila & O'Regan, Philip, 2016. "Social accounting and the co-creation of corporate legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-12.
    23. 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.
    24. Deegan, Craig & Blomquist, Christopher, 2006. "Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4-5), pages 343-372.
    25. Pimsiri Chiwamit & Sven Modell & Chun Lei Yang, 2014. "The societal relevance of management accounting innovations: economic value added and institutional work in the fields of Chinese and Thai state-owned enterprises," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 144-180, April.
    26. Jordan, Silvia & Messner, Martin, 2012. "Enabling control and the problem of incomplete performance indicators," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 544-564.
    27. Brendan O'Dwyer & Jeffrey Unerman, 2020. "Shifting the focus of sustainability accounting from impacts to risks and dependencies: researching the transformative potential of TCFD reporting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(5), pages 1113-1141, June.
    28. Jan Bebbington & Jeffrey Unerman, 2018. "Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(1), pages 2-24, January.
    29. Omiros Georgiou, 2018. "The Worth of Fair Value Accounting: Dissonance between Users and Standard Setters," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 1297-1331, September.
    30. Marta Cominetti & Peter Seele, 2016. "Hard soft law or soft hard law? A content analysis of CSR guidelines typologized along hybrid legal status," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 127-140, November.
    31. Sveta Milyaeva & Daniel Neyland, 2016. "Market innovation as framing, productive friction and bricolage: an exploration of the personal data market," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 229-244, June.
    32. Rob Hoppe & Anna Wesselink & Rose Cairns, 2013. "Lost in the problem: the role of boundary organisations in the governance of climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 283-300, July.
    33. Katherine C. Kellogg, 2012. "Making the Cut: Using Status-Based Countertactics to Block Social Movement Implementation and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1546-1570, December.
    34. Ian Thomson & Colin Dey & Shona Russell, 2015. "Activism, arenas and accounts in conflicts over tobacco control," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(5), pages 809-845, June.
    35. Gray, Rob, 2002. "The social accounting project and Accounting Organizations and Society Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 687-708, October.
    36. Perkmann, Markus & Schildt, Henri, 2015. "Open data partnerships between firms and universities: The role of boundary organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1133-1143.
    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. Xin Xu & Yi Xie & Feng Xiong & Yan Li, 2022. "The Impact of COVID-19 on Investors’ Investment Intention of Sustainability-Related Investment: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-37, April.
    2. Céline Baud & Nathalie Lallemand-Stempak, 2024. "Quantitative technologies and reflexivity: The role of tools and their layouts in the case of credit risk management," Post-Print hal-04419872, HAL.
    3. Clerkin, Brendan & Quinn, Martin, 2021. "Institutional agents missing in action?: Management accounting at non-governmental organisations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(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. O’Leary, Susan & Smith, David, 2020. "Moments of resistance: An internally persuasive view of performance and impact reports in non-governmental organizations," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. Tregidga, Helen & Milne, Markus J., 2022. "Not at our table: Stakeholder exclusion and ant/agonistic engagements," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    3. George, Sendirella & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse, 2023. "Social movement activists’ conceptions of political action and counter-accounting through a critical dialogic accounting and accountability lens," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Emilio Passetti & Lara Bianchi & Massimo Battaglia & Marco Frey, 2019. "When Democratic Principles are not Enough: Tensions and Temporalities of Dialogic Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 173-190, March.
    5. Semeen, Homaira & Islam, Muhammad Azizul, 2021. "Social impact disclosure and symbolic power: Evidence from UK fair trade organizations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    6. Grisard, Claudine & Annisette, Marcia & Graham, Cameron, 2020. "Performative agency and incremental change in a CSR context," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    7. Correa, Carmen & Laine, Matias & Larrinaga, Carlos, 2023. "Taking the world seriously: Autonomy, reflexivity and engagement research in social and environmental accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Andrew, Jane & Baker, Max, 2020. "The radical potential of leaks in the shadow accounting project: The case of US oil interests in Nigeria," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. McLaren, Josie & Appleyard, Tony, 2022. "Social movements, identity and disruption in organizational fields: Accounting for farm animal welfare," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Jane Andrew & Max Baker, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: The Last 40 Years and a Path to Sharing Future Insights," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 56(1), pages 35-65, March.
    11. Michelon, Giovanna & Pilonato, Silvia & Ricceri, Federica, 2015. "CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 59-78.
    12. 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.
    13. O'Dwyer, Brendan & Unerman, Jeffrey, 2016. "Fostering rigour in accounting for social sustainability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 32-40.
    14. O’Sullivan, Niamh & O’Dwyer, Brendan, 2015. "The structuration of issue-based fields: Social accountability, social movements and the Equator Principles issue-based field," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 33-55.
    15. Gallhofer, Sonja & Haslam, Jim, 2019. "Some reflections on the construct of emancipatory accounting: Shifting meaning and the possibilities of a new pragmatism," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    16. Unerman, Jeffrey, 2020. "Risks from self-referential peer review echo chambers developing in research fields," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    17. Michelon, Giovanna & Rodrigue, Michelle & Trevisan, Elisabetta, 2020. "The marketization of a social movement: Activists, shareholders and CSR disclosure," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Deegan, Craig & Haque, Shamima, 2021. "Corporate human rights performance and moral power: A study of retail MNCs’ supply chains in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    19. Katharina Hombach & Thorsten Sellhorn, 2019. "Shaping Corporate Actions Through Targeted Transparency Regulation: A Framework and Review of Extant Evidence," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 71(2), pages 137-168, May.
    20. 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).

    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:85:y:2020:i:c:s0361368220300234. 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.