Statistics
| Number of Journals | 26 |
| Number of Issues | 454 |
| Number of Articles | 4,662 |
| Article View | 5,529,688 |
| PDF Download | 3,681,829 |
Designing a Metaphor Functional Model of Dialogic Accounting: by Grounded Theory and Fuzzy Interpretive Matrix Analysis | ||
| مجله دانش حسابداری | ||
| Article 9, Volume 13, Issue 3 - Serial Number 50, October 2022, Pages 195-227 PDF (1.44 M) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.22103/jak.2021.18394.3603 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Atena Gilani1; Mehdi Safari Gerayli* 2; Javad Ramezani3; Ramezan Rezaeyan4 | ||
| 1Ph.D.Candidate of Accounting, Nour Branch, Islamic Azad University, Nour, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor of Accounting, Bandargaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bandargaz, Iran. | ||
| 3Assistant Professor of Accounting, Nour Branch, Islamic Azad University, Nour, Iran. | ||
| 4Assistant Professor of Statistic and finance Mathematics, Nour Branch, Islamic Azad University, Nour, Iran. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objective: Today's field of accounting knowledge, due to social changes, is an area that needs to be transformed in terms of promoting a focus on interaction with stakeholders. In fact, achieving a coherent and interactive understanding between the pillars of the accounting profession and stakeholders is always considered a futuristic perspective of the social context in this area that should be considered. Due to such support, the accounting profession has sought to develop accounting metaphors in recent years, inspired by critical analysis or pragmatism analysis. In a simple definition, metaphor can be considered as a process of connecting the knowledge-enhancing functions of an interdisciplinary field in the humanities, which helps to establish a concept in the form of a scientific paradigm in that field. The purpose of this research is designing a metaphor functional model of dialogic accounting by grounded theory and fuzzy interpretive matrix analysis. Method: The methodology of this research was mixed and used in the qualitative part of the grounded theory analysis based on Glaser's approach to formulate the model and in the quantitative part of the fuzzy structural interpretive analysis. In fact, the purpose of the analysis in the qualitative part was to present the model and in the quantitative part was to determine the most influential component identified in the data analysis of the foundation. The target population in the quality department was 12 academic specialists who were considered experts, both scientifically and empirically. The process of selecting individuals was a theoretical sampling method based on empirical knowledge in the auditing profession. However, the target population in the quantitative section was 25 managers of the accounting department of capital market companies who were selected based on work experience and the level of technical and specialized knowledge through improbable sampling. This number of participants was approved because of the nature of the fuzzy interpretive matrix analysis, which emphasizes the limited number of participants in the research. Result: The results of the research in the qualitative part indicate the existence of 3 categories, 6 components and 36 conceptual codes that have laid the foundation for the metaphorical function of dialogic in accounting in the form of an integrated hexagonal model. Then, with the aim of determining the reliability of the research dimensions, Delphi 6analysis was used, which based on the two criteria of average and agreement coefficient, all 6 main components determined in the research model based on the agreement coefficient; the mean and standard deviation are confirmed. In other words, considering that the average of the main components was 5 and above 5, and on the other hand, because the agreement coefficient obtained is more than 0/5 and the standard deviation was below 1, it should be stated that all the main components of the research were approved. Also, the results in a small part of prioritizing the components of dialogic accounting in 5 levels of the matrix model indicate that the fifth level was the most influential component and the first level was the least effective component related to each of the research categories. Therefore, it was found that the component of the standardization normalizing trust in accounting knowledge "X1" as a criterion of the category of cultural mechanism of discourse accounting to users is the most influential component of dialogic accounting. Conclusion: Accounting knowledge, which has an institutionalized existential philosophy towards a society and its stakeholders, is considered to have an effective role in creating trust and can lead to an effective system of accountability and responsibility for legitimacy among stakeholders. Since dialogic accounting, in its essence, requires symbolic approaches to reach arguable norms and common knowledge between itself and the stakeholders, trust is a consequence that can occur in the presence of this metaphor or allegory (dialogic) in accounting. In fact, dialogic accounting, in its structured norm form, contributes to common understandings in accounting perception and causes the nature of dialogic accounting of symmetric information capacities to be promoted in decision-making for users. Also, social integration, due to the formed norms based on trust in accounting, is able to create mutual perceptible capacities for the operators of this profession, i.e. accountants, in terms of understanding the needs of users with social realities and changes, and the ground for the modification of financial reporting standards as a set of functions. Provide accounting. On the other hand, the norm of trust in accounting based on the cultural content of dialogic accounting helps to strengthen the reasoning symbols in the form of a common language and causes justice in the use of information based on its procedural dimension in accounting to take a more coherent form and causes the proportionality of the functions of this knowledge with the needs and expectations of stakeholders. It was also found that the value-oriented functions of future accounting, as another component of the cultural mechanism of dialogic accounting, is ranked second in terms of influence from the metaphor of dialogic accounting, which will lead to the development of future perspectives of accounting knowledge based on interaction with stakeholders in social contexts. Therefore, in line with the theoretical framework of Litteljohen and Fosse (2011), future accounting values depend on the dynamics of the company's interaction cycle with stakeholders through financial instruments and information feedback. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Dialogic Accounting Metaphor; Normalizing Trust in Accounting Knowledge; Fuzzy Interpretive Matrix Analysis | ||
| References | ||
|
اسماعیلپور، رضا؛ آذر، عادل و شاهمحمدی، محمد (1396). ارائه مدل ساختاری تفسیری از شاخصهای انتخاب تأمینکننده مبتنی بر مسئولیت اجتماعی شرکت، مطالعات مدیریت صنعتی، 15(47)، 70-45.
اعتمادی، حسین؛ معروفی، احمدرضا و محمدیشاد، زهره (1399). گفتمان مالیسازی مستتر در روشهای حسابداری ایران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 17(67)، 27-56.
رمضاناحمدی، محمد (1388). مقایسه تحلیلی کاربرد رویکرد دستوری و رویکرد اثباتی در فرآیند نظریهپردازی در حوزه معرفتی حسابداری. پژوهشهای حسابداری مالی، 1(1)، 71-88.
سامی، سیامک؛ خسرویپور، نگار و لشگری، زهرا (1400). تأثیر کاربرد استعاره دیالکتیکی بر فرآیند بلوغ مذاکره حسابرسان. مجله دانش حسابداری، 13(1)، 121-139.
مهرانی، ساسان و ناظمی، امین (۱۳۸۶). بررسی هماهنگ سازی حسابداری در سطح بین المللی با استفاده از دیدگاههای دیالکتیک هگل، هم ریختی و دانش. مجله حسابدار، ۱۸۷(۲)، ۳۵-۴۴.
میرزائی، سعیده؛ عبدلی، محمدرضا و کوشکیجهرمی، علیرضا (1399). بررسی تأثیر لحن بدبینانه گزارشگری مالی بر گزارشگری مالی متهورانه: حفاظت از حقوق سهامداران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 17(65)، 109-138
ولیان، حسن؛ کوشکی جهرمی، علیرضا و بودلائی، حسن (۱۳۹۹). استعارهها و کاربردهای جدید در مدیریت، انتشارات اندیشه احسان، تألیف دیوید برکس، تهران.
References
Adger, W.N. & Whitby, M.C. (1993). Natural-resource accounting in the land-use sector: Theory and practice. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 20(1), 77-97.
Ahmadpour, A., & Ghahramani, H. (2010). Study of accounting information’s reliability qualitative characteristic in earning quality measures of Companies. Accounting and Auditing Review, 16(4), 44-63 [In Persian].
Ajmera, P., & Jain, V. (2020). A fuzzy interpretive structural modeling approach for evaluating the factors affecting lean implementation in Indian healthcare industry, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 11(2), 376-397.
Akyuz, E., & Celik, E. (2015). A Fuzzy DEMATEL method to evaluate critical operational hazards during gas freeing in crude oil tankers. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 38(2), 243-253.
Aleksandrov, E., Bourmistrov, A., & Grossi, G. (2019). Participatory budgeting as a form of dialogic accounting in Russia: Actors’ institutional work and reflexivity trap, Accounting. Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(4), 1098-1123.
Almqvist, R., Grossi, G., Van Helden, G.J., & Reichard, C. (2013). Public sector governance and accountability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(7/8), 479-487.
Aly, D., El-Halaby, S., & Hussainey, K. (2018). Tone disclosure and financial performance: Evidence from Egypt. Accounting Research Journal, 31(1), 63-74.
Amernic, J., & Craig, R. (2009). Understanding accounting through conceptual metaphor: Accounting is an Instument? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(8), 875-883.
Aversano, N., Polcini, P.T., Sannino, G., & Agliata, F. (2019). Integrated popular reporting as a tool for citizen involvement in financial sustainability decisions, in Caruana, J., Brusca, I., Caperchione, E., Chen, S. and Manes Rossi, F. (Eds). Financial Sustainability of Public Sector Entities, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Switzerland, 185-205.
Bebbington, J., Brown, J., Frame, B., & Thomson, I. (2007). Theorizing engagement: The potential of a critical dialogic approach. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(3), 356-381.
Bellucci, M., Simoni, L., Acuti, D., & Manetti, G. (2019). Stakeholder engagement and dialogic accounting: Empirical evidence in sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(5), 1467-1499.
Bergmann, M. (1979). Metaphor and formal semantic theory. Poetics, 8(1/2), 213-230.
Bordt, M. (2018). Discourses in ecosystem accounting: A survey of the expert community, Ecological Economics, 144(3), 82-99.
Brown, J. (2009). Democracy, sustainability and dialogic accounting technologies: Taking pluralism seriously. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(3), 313-342.
Corrigan, L.T. (2018). Budget making: the theatrical presentation of accounting discourse. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 55(4), 12-32.
Craig, R.T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119-161.
Craig, R.T. (2008). Communication as a field and discipline, in Donsbach, W. (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden MA, 2(2), 675-688.
Doris, M., Merkl-Davies N., & Brennan, M. (2017). A theoretical framework of external accounting communication: research perspectives, traditions, and theories. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(2), 1-56.
Esmaeilpour, R., Azar, A., & ShahMohammadi, M. (2017). An interpretative structural model on effective factors of the suppliers’ selection based on CSR. Industrial Management Studies, 15(47), 45-70 [In Persina]
Etemadi, H., Maroufi, A., & Mohammadi shad, Z. (2020). The subtle financialization discourse in Iranian accounting procedures. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, 17(67), 27-56 [In Persian].
Glaser, B.G. (1992). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, Calif.: Sociology Press.
Godowski, Ch., Negre, E., & Verdier, M.A. (2021). Toward dialogic accounting? Public accountants’ assistance to works councils − A tool between hope and illusion. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 69(3), 124-149.
Gray, R., Brennan, A., & Malpas, J. (2014). New accounts: Towards a reframing of social accounting. Accounting Forum, 38(4), 258-273.
Grossi, G., Biancone, P.P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2021). Dialogic accounting through popular reporting and digital platforms. Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(7), 75-93.
Jones, A., & Willis, M. (2003). The challenge of XBRL: business reporting for the investor. Balance Sheet, 11(3), 29-37.
Kingston, K.L., Furneaux, C., De Zwaan, L., & Alderman, L. (2020). From monologist to dialogic: Accountability of nonprofit organizations on beneficiaries’ terms. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 33(2), 447-471.
Littlejohn, S.W., & Foss, K.A. (2011). Theories of human communication. Tenth edition, Waveland Press, Long Grove IL.
Malthus, S., & Fowler, C. (2009). Perceptions of accounting: A qualitative New Zealand study. Pacific Accounting Review, 21(1), 26-47.
Mcgoun, E.G., Bettner, M.S., & Coyne, M.P. (2007). Pedagogic metaphors and the nature of accounting signification. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18(2), 213-230.
Mehrani, S., & Nazemi, A. (2007). Investigating international accounting synchronization using Hegel's dialectical perspectives on coherence and knowledge. Journal of Accounting, 187(2), 44-35 [In Persian].
Walters York, M.L. (1996). Metaphor in accounting discourse, Accounting. Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9(5), 45-70.
Mirzayee, S., Abdoli, M., & Koushki Jahromi, A. (2020). Financial reporting language bad on aggressive financial reporting investor protection. Empirical Studies in Financial Accounting, 17(65), 109-138 [In Persian].
Piotrowski, S., Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Deat, F. (2019). Numbers over narratives? How government message strategies affect citizens’ attitudes. Public Performance and Management Review, 42(5), 1005-1028.
Ramezan Ahmadi, M. (2009). Applying normative approach vs. positive approach in theorizing process in accounting: an analytical comparison. Journal of Financial Accounting Research, 1(1), 71-88 [In Persian].
Rutherford, B.A. (2002). The production of narrative accounting statements: An exploratory study of the operating and financial review. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 6(3), 25-56.
Sami, S., Khosravipour, N., & Lashgari, Z. (2021). Effect of dialectical metaphor of auditors' negotiation maturity process. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 13(1), 121-139 [In Persian].
Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory: Procedures and Technique. (2nd Edition); Sage, Newbury Park, London.
Valiyan, H., Koushki Jahromi, A., & Boudlayee, H. (2020). New metaphors and applications in management, andisheh ehsan publications, by David Brex, Tehran [In Persian].
Webber, B. (2006). Accounting for discourse relations: Constituency and dependency, Variations on Themes by Ronald M. Kaplan, CSLI Publications.
Whittington, G. (1987). Positive accounting: A review article. Accounting and Business Research, 2(2), 327-336.
Yen, A.C., Riley, T.J., & Liao, P. (2017). Chinese vs US investors’ reactions to accounting narratives: An experiment. Asian Review of Accounting, 25(4), 526-548.
Yusuf, J.E.W., & Jordan, M.M. (2012). Effective popular financial reports: the citizen perspective. Journal of Government Financial Management, 61(4), 44-49.
Zambo, F., & Beltrachi, G. (2016). City of Turin’s (Italy) populaf financial Reporting is credit positive. Moody’s Public Sector Europe.
Zulkifli, N., & Abdullah, L. (2015). Integration of fuzzy AHP and interval type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL: An application to human resource management. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(9), 4397-4409. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 920 PDF Download: 464 |
||