IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/crpeac/v92y2023ics104523542030109x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Avoiding the accountability ‘sham-ritual’: An agonistic approach to beneficiaries’ participation in evaluation within nonprofit organisations

Author

Listed:
  • Kingston, Kylie L.
  • Furneaux, Craig
  • de Zwaan, Laura
  • Alderman, Lyn

Abstract

The research presented within this paper case studies two nonprofit organisations in order to gain the perspectives of beneficiaries, staff, and board members on the participation of beneficiaries in evaluating the organisation. The aim of the research is to reconsider more traditional beneficiary participative evaluation approaches through the critical lens of dialogic accounting theory. The research draws on theories of dialogic accounting and transformative participatory evaluation to posit an agonistic approach to beneficiary participative evaluation. Findings reveal the importance of considering patterns of beneficiary engagement within the nonprofit organisation, what beneficiaries want the outcome of the evaluation to be, and the operation of pluralism at multiple levels. All of these are important so as to avoid an accountability ‘sham-ritual’, where beneficiary engagement is symbolic rather than substantive. Findings lead to the development of participative evaluation frameworks for each case studied.

Suggested Citation

  • Kingston, Kylie L. & Furneaux, Craig & de Zwaan, Laura & Alderman, Lyn, 2023. "Avoiding the accountability ‘sham-ritual’: An agonistic approach to beneficiaries’ participation in evaluation within nonprofit organisations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:crpeac:v:92:y:2023:i:c:s104523542030109x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2020.102261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104523542030109X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.cpa.2020.102261?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. Rob Gray & Andrew Brennan & Jeff Malpas, 2014. "New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 258-273, December.
    2. Lee D. Parker & Deryl Northcott, 2016. "Qualitative generalising in accounting research: concepts and strategies," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 29(6), pages 1100-1131, August.
    3. Cherrie Yang & Deryl Northcott, 2019. "Together we measure: Improving public service outcomes via the co-production of performance measurement," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 253-261, May.
    4. Alex Jacobs, 2010. "Creating the Missing Feedback Loop," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(6), pages 56-64, November.
    5. repec:eme:aaaj00:aaaj-04-2015-2026 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Gray, Rob & Brennan, Andrew & Malpas, Jeff, 2014. "New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 258-273.
    7. Lesley Catchpowle & Stewart Smyth, 2016. "Accounting and social movements: An exploration of critical accounting praxis," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 220-234, September.
    8. Alain Burlaud & Bernard Colasse, 2011. "International Accounting Standardisation: Is Politics Back?," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 23-47, June.
    9. Mohammed Mohi Uddin & Ataur Rahman Belal, 2019. "Donors’ influence strategies and beneficiary accountability: an NGO case study," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 113-134, January.
    10. Dillard, Jesse & Yuthas, Kristi, 2013. "Critical dialogics, agonistic pluralism, and accounting information systems," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 113-119.
    11. Brendan O'Dwyer & Jeffrey Unerman, 2010. "Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights of beneficiaries of development NGOs," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 451-471.
    12. Jan Bebbington & Judy Brown & Bob Frame & Ian Thomson, 2007. "Theorizing engagement: the potential of a critical dialogic approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(3), pages 356-381, June.
    13. Hyman Zyl & Frederik Claeyé, 2019. "Up and Down, and Inside Out: Where do We Stand on NGO Accountability?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(3), pages 604-619, July.
    14. Alex Jacobs & Robyn Wilford, 2010. "Listen First: a pilot system for managing downward accountability in NGOs," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 797-811, September.
    15. Vinnari, Eija & Dillard, Jesse, 2016. "(ANT)agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 25-44.
    16. Winston Hyman van Zyl & Frederik Claeyé & Véronique Flambard, 2019. "Money, people or mission? Accountability in local and non-local NGOs," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 53-73, January.
    17. Carolyn Cordery & Ataur Rahman Belal & Ian Thomson, 2019. "NGO accounting and accountability: past, present and future," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 1-15, January.
    18. James Scotland, 2012. "Exploring the Philosophical Underpinnings of Research: Relating Ontology and Epistemology to the Methodology and Methods of the Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical Research Paradigms," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(9), pages 1-9, September.
    19. Lehman, Cheryl R., 2013. "Knowing the unknowable and contested terrains in accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 136-144.
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7512 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Dillard, Jesse & Vinnari, Eija, 2019. "Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 16-38.
    22. Alain Burlaud & Bernard Colasse, 2011. "International Accounting Standardisation : Is Politics Back ?," Post-Print halshs-00665494, HAL.
    23. Alain Burlaud & Bernard Colasse, 2011. "International Accounting Standardisation: Is Politics Back?," Post-Print halshs-02145367, HAL.
    24. Ebrahim, Alnoor, 2003. "Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 813-829, May.
    25. Jan Bebbington & Judy Brown & Bob Frame & Ian Thomson, 2007. "Theorizing engagement: the potential of a critical dialogic approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(3), pages 356-381, June.
    26. Ahmad Zamri Osman & Gloria Agyemang, 2020. "Privileging downward accountability inWaqfmanagement," Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(3), pages 533-554, January.
    27. Adil Najam, 1996. "NGO Accountability: A Conceptual Framework," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 14(4), pages 339-354, December.
    28. Brown, Judy, 2009. "Democracy, sustainability and dialogic accounting technologies: Taking pluralism seriously," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 313-342.
    29. Lee D. Parker & Deryl Northcott, 2016. "Qualitative generalising in accounting research: concepts and strategies," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 29(6), pages 1100-1131, August.
    30. Fleur Mercelis & Lore Wellens & Marc Jegers, 2016. "Beneficiary Participation in Non-Governmental Development Organisations: A Case Study in Vietnam," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(10), pages 1446-1462, October.
    31. repec:eme:aaaj00:09513570710748544 is not listed on IDEAS
    32. Wellens, Lore & Jegers, Marc, 2014. "Effective governance in nonprofit organizations: A literature based multiple stakeholder approach," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 223-243.
    33. Kilby, Patrick, 2006. "Accountability for Empowerment: Dilemmas Facing Non-Governmental Organizations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-963, June.
    34. Gendron, Yves, 2018. "On the elusive nature of critical (accounting) research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-12.
    35. Bryson, John M. & Patton, Michael Quinn & Bowman, Ruth A., 2011. "Working with evaluation stakeholders: A rationale, step-wise approach and toolkit," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-12, February.
    36. Frederik Claeye & W.H. Van Zyl, 2018. "Up and down, and inside out: Where do we stand on NGO accountability ?," Post-Print hal-01914087, HAL.
    37. Dillard, Jesse & Vinnari, Eija, 2017. "A case study of critique: Critical perspectives on critical accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 88-109.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kingston, Kylie L. & Luke, Belinda & Furneaux, Craig & Alderman, Lyn, 2023. "Examining the re-territorialisation of beneficiary accountability: Digitising nonprofit services in response to COVID-19," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5).
    2. 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).
    3. Aresu, Simone & Monfardini, Patrizio, 2023. "Oppressed by consumerism: The emancipatory role of household accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Chakhovich, Terhi & Virtanen, Tuija, 2023. "Accountability for sustainability – An institutional entrepreneur as the representative of future stakeholders," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Ang, Soon Yong & Wickramasinghe, Danture, 2023. "Ethical disputes, coordinating acts and NGO accountability: Evidence from an NGO river-care programme in Malaysia," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    6. Scobie, Matthew & Lee, Bill & Smyth, Stewart, 2023. "Grounded accountability and Indigenous self-determination," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    7. Tanima, Farzana Aman & Brown, Judy & Wright, Jan & Mackie, Vera, 2023. "Taking critical dialogic accountability into the field: Engaging contestation around microfinance and women’s empowerment," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Martinez, Daniel & Himick, Darlene, 2023. "Accounting in (direct) action: Prefiguring emancipation in accounting research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    9. Godowski, Christophe & Nègre, Emmanuelle & Verdier, Marie-Anne, 2020. "Toward dialogic accounting? Public accountants’ assistance to works councils − A tool between hope and illusion," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    10. Sorola, Matthew, 2022. "Q methodology to conduct a critical study in accounting: A Q study on accountants’ perspectives of social and environmental reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Lee, Bill & Carlisle, Liam, 2024. "Interpreting an escape from an eviction trap as a social account: A Gramscian reading of a credit union’s policies in support of social housing tenants," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    12. Vinnari, Eija & Dillard, Jesse, 2016. "(ANT)agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 25-44.
    13. Hyman Zyl & Frederik Claeyé, 2019. "Up and Down, and Inside Out: Where do We Stand on NGO Accountability?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(3), pages 604-619, July.
    14. Dillard, Jesse & Vinnari, Eija, 2019. "Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 16-38.
    15. Lee, Bill & Cassell, Catherine, 2017. "Facilitative reforms, democratic accountability, social accounting and learning representative initiatives," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 24-37.
    16. Brown, Judy, 2017. "Democratizing accounting: Reflections on the politics of “old” and “new” pluralisms," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 20-46.
    17. Vien Chu & Belinda Luke, 2021. "Understanding success in micro‐enterprise development: Dimensions and misconceptions," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(2), pages 63-78, May.
    18. Alshurafa, Mohammed & Aboramadan, Mohammed & Haniffa, Roszaini, 2023. "Digital postcolonialism and NGO accountability during COVID-19: Evidence from the Gaza Strip," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5).
    19. Pazzi, Silvia & Svetlova, Ekaterina, 2023. "NGOs, public accountability, and critical accounting education: Making data speak," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    20. Roslender, Robin & Nielsen, Christian, 2021. "Accounting for the value expectations of customers: Re-imagining the Integrated Reporting initiative," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 81(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:crpeac:v:92:y:2023:i:c:s104523542030109x. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/critical-perspectives-on-accounting/ .

    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.