Author
Listed:
- Stuart Cooper
- Suzana Grubnic
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the dynamic relationship between formal and non-formal processes of accountability in a public services context. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a case study of the impact of the Health and Social Care Act (2012) on the practices of Health and Wellbeing Board (HWB) members. It draws upon multiple data sources, including in-depth interviews with the members, comprehensive archival data published by the HWB (2011–2019), and observations of HWB public meetings. We utilise the concept of dynamic duality (Li, 2008) to further theorise the relationship between formal and non-formal processes of accountability and how they mutually transform one another. Findings - The case illustrates the role of formal and non-formal processes of accountability at a HWB in England. Moreover, the case study reveals the relationship and interaction between the formal and non-formal accountability processes and how they change and transform each other over time. We find that whilst non-formal accountability processes were strengthened by a historical legacy of partnership working, over time the dynamics at play led to the development of formal accountability processes through more sophisticated performance systems, which in turn transformed non-formal accountability processes. Originality/value - The paper presents a more holistic conceptualisation than articulated in prior accountability literature, dynamic duality, on the relationship between formal and non-formal accountability processes. Through application of this conceptualisation to a HWB in England, the paper spotlights the inter-relationship between formal and non-formal processes of accountability, and how they have the potential to transform each over an extended time-period.
Suggested Citation
Stuart Cooper & Suzana Grubnic, 2024.
"Exploring dynamic duality between formal and non-formal accountability processes in a public services context,"
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 38(2), pages 674-699, November.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-12-2021-5567
DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-12-2021-5567
Download full text from publisher
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-12-2021-5567. 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.