IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-01-2013-1198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information vs knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Sabina Du Rietz

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to offer a new and more elaborate view of the relationship between information and knowledge in accountability settings. Design/methodology/approach - The study investigates how knowledge is accomplished when accountability is demanded. The “knowing-in-practice” perspective (Lave, 1988;Orlikowski, 2002;Pentland, 1992) is introduced to theorise knowledge as the ability to purposefully go on with practice and information as a resource that may contribute to this knowledge. Empirically, the study investigates Nordic investors’ engagement with companies addressing environmental, social, and governance issues. Findings - The findings illustrate how information may contribute to knowledge in an accountability setting. Whether or not the information contributes to knowledge in the accountability setting depends on the information’s origin, convergence with other accounts, and use in contradicting and disproving executives’ information. The analysis also shows how knowledge in accountability settings may be achieved without information – for example, by enacting theories. Research limitations/implications - The study suggests that research should more carefully distinguish between knowledge and information. According to the perspective used here, knowledge is the ability to purposefully go on with practice. Information is one of many resources that can contribute to knowledge. Practical implications - This study provides insight into the relationship between accounting systems and the practice of demanding accountability. Such understanding is valuable when designing accounts-based governance and civil regulation, such as for addressing sustainability issues, as in this study. Originality/value - The study challenges the view of knowledge as a representation or factual commodity, and provides a new and more elaborate view of the relationship between information and knowledge in accountability settings by introducing the knowing-in-practice perspective to the accounting literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Sabina Du Rietz, 2018. "Information vs knowledge," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(2), pages 586-607, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2013-1198
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2013-1198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2013-1198/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2013-1198/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2013-1198?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marco Taliento & Christian Favino & Antonio Netti, 2019. "Impact of Environmental, Social, and Governance Information on Economic Performance: Evidence of a Corporate ‘Sustainability Advantage’ from Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Patrycja Krawczyk, 2021. "Non-Financial Reporting—Standardization Options for SME Sector," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Alessio Faccia & Francesco Manni & Fabian Capitanio, 2021. "Mandatory ESG Reporting and XBRL Taxonomies Combination: ESG Ratings and Income Statement, a Sustainable Value-Added Disclosure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.

    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:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2013-1198. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.