Author
Abstract
Purpose - Previous research has argued that little is known about the dynamics of (de)coupling. This has led to a relatively static and potentially oversimplified view on how externally imposed accountability demands are incorporated into organizational routines. The purpose of this paper is to address these calls by exploring the dynamic processes of de- and re-coupling the two institutional rules of achieving a “balanced budget” and serving “the needs of individuals” in a Swedish school context. Design/methodology/approach - A qualitative case study based on 28 observations and 32 interviews with principals, administrators and teachers within a large Swedish municipality has been used. Findings - In contrast to earlier research, the paper shows that (de)coupling is more than just a static state; it is a result of dynamic challenges and boundary maintenance. It is a state where professional groups try to both decouple and couple accounting into routines to achieve greater autonomy and control, where incarnation of one myth leads to loosening another. It is embedded in an institutional environment’s powerful actors, and when incarnation takes place at different organizational levels, it leads to less conflict in another sphere. The dynamics of (de)coupling thereby unfolds how institutional rules play out in an organizational setting. Practical implications - From a practical viewpoint, this paper has provided insights into how rules operate in an organizational setting. Given that regulative authorities tend to assume that rules should be tightly coupled to practice, this paper provides a critical examination of the assumption that coupled organizations are inherently “better” than non-coupled ones. To what extent does incarnation of rules reflect the societal ideas – and for whom? By unfolding the dynamics of (de)coupling, this paper illuminates some potential issues with increased tightness between rules and routines. Originality/value - The paper illuminates the ways in which institutional rules takes place on the ground, and the associated roles for accounting in such process.
Suggested Citation
Anton Borell, 2019.
"Budgets vs individual needs,"
Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(3), pages 410-430, September.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jpbafm:jpbafm-12-2018-0145
DOI: 10.1108/JPBAFM-12-2018-0145
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:jpbafm:jpbafm-12-2018-0145. 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.