IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-08-2022-5974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit society, organisational response and (de-)coupling: an Italian story

Author

Listed:
  • Massimo Contrafatto
  • Sara Moggi
  • Daniele Gervasio
  • Damiano Montani

Abstract

Purpose - This paper examines “how” an organisation, over time, responded, and “what strategies” were mobilised, to conform to a specific audit society-inspired model introduced in Italy by the Decree 231 (D231). D231 requires implementing an internal control and audit model and performance accounting to oversee business activities and prevent misconduct. Design/methodology/approach - A case study approach was adopted for in-depth analysis of the response strategies (i.e. avoidance and compromise) and related initiatives, which were mobilised in ITAGAS, a public organisation leader in the methane gas distribution sector in Italy. Participant observation, interviews and document analysis were the primary data sources. Theoretically, our analysis is informed by insights drawn from the institutional complexity perspective (Thorntonet al., 2012; Pache and Santos, 2013a, b) and Oliver’s (1991) model concerning strategic responses to institutional pressures. Findings - Adopting D231 generated institutional complexity in our case organisation. The analysis highlights two phases: the voluntary and compulsory adoption of the D231 model. The voluntary adoption occurred via a compromising strategy that involved forms of “selective coupling” (Pache and Santos, 2013a), which allowed the organisation to strategically adopt only those structures/practices that were seen as appropriate and consistent with its organisational logics. The compulsory phase was characterised by broader adoption of the D231 model through symbolic conformity. The case organisation adopted “avoidance” strategies (Oliver, 1991) and “co-habiting means-ends” decoupling initiatives to protect the basic organisational coherence from the regulative prescriptions. Originality/value - The paper presents original insights into how the D231 model, an example of an audit society-inspired model, unfolded over time in a specific organisation to achieve the desired change towards more responsible and accountable practices. Our analysis suggests the compulsory phase was less effective than when the model was voluntarily adopted. The paper also reveals that, in contrast to the voluntary phase, decoupling strategies were mobilised in the compulsory phase to reach an organisational equilibrium, which facilitated corporate survival; decoupling was the only effective solution to the imbalance generated by the compulsoriness of the D231 model.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo Contrafatto & Sara Moggi & Daniele Gervasio & Damiano Montani, 2024. "Audit society, organisational response and (de-)coupling: an Italian story," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 38(2), pages 537-564, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-08-2022-5974
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-08-2022-5974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2022-5974/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2022-5974/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2022-5974?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.

    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-08-2022-5974. 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.