no-img

بزرگترین فروشگاه آنلاین دانلود کتاب نرم افزار مقاله ISI فایلهای ویدئویی آموزشی مقالات ترجمه شده ارشد ودکتری
مطالب ویژه
اطلاعیه های سایت

ادامه مطلب

دانلود ۵ مقاله پولی غیر قابل دانلود از امرالد سری سیزدهم www.emeraldinsight.com
zip
دی ۱, ۱۳۹۶
۵,۰۰۰ تومان
0 فروش
۵,۰۰۰ تومان – خرید

دانلود ۵ مقاله پولی غیر قابل دانلود از امرالد سری سیزدهم www.emeraldinsight.com


Industry analysts – how to
conceptualise the distinctive new
forms of IT market expertise?
Neil Pollock
The University of Edinburgh Business School, The University of Edinburgh,
Edinburgh, UK, and
Robin Williams
Institute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation,
The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore conceptual issues arising in an empirical study
of the emergence of a distinctive new form of expertise – of industry analysts and in particular
the leading firm Gartner Group that exercises enormous influence over the Information Technology
(IT) market.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper critically reviews existing analytical frameworks and
especially work from the Sociology of Professions. This has largely focused upon groups which have
already succeeded in gaining wide acceptance of the effectiveness of their methods and knowledge.
For emerging expert groups a key challenge is to create an audience for whom they are expert (Turner,
۲۰۰۱). The study contributes to a “third wave” of studies that shift the focus of enquiry from the operation
of professional institutions to the conduct of expert work – and how knowledge is produced, validated
and consumed. The paper draws upon an extended ethnographic study of Gartner Inc., and other
industry analysts to characterise some key features of their expertise. Data sources include over 100
hours of participant observation of industry analysts and their interactions with vendors and technology
adopters at IT industry conferences; interviews with over 20 industry analysts from Gartner (including a
telephone interview with its founder Gideon Gartner) and other analyst organisations; a substantial body
of interviews with technology vendors and clients (particularly in relation to the Customer Relationship
Management technology sector); together with a review of Gartner documentation and reports.
Findings – The paper compares the empirical findings of industry analysts with accounts from current
literature on management consultants and other groups such as journalists and financial analysts. Industry
analysts, like consultants, have not sought to follow a classical professional model. Thus the brand
reputation of big (industry analyst or consultancy) firms provides an alternative warrant of the quality of
expertise to professional institutions. However, Gartner analysts identify differences as well as similarities
between their work and management consultants. Gartner’s ability to rank the offerings of IT vendors
requires them to adopt formal methodologies and internal review procedures to produce defensible
knowledge and demonstrate their independence. Industry analysts need to establish cognitive authority
over rapidly changing technological fields. This imparts some “public good” elements to their knowledge.
Originality/value – The paper suggests ways forward for analysing new forms of knowledge
intermediary in business and accounting, applying perspectives from the “third wave” of studies, and
involving detailed study of the “epistemic systems” through which such knowledge is produced,
consumed and validated (Knorr Cetina, 2010).
Keywords Biography of artefacts, Conceptual models of expertise, Industry analysts,
Institutionalizing expertise, Sociology of professions


Accounting, accountants and
accountability regimes in
pluralistic societies
Taking multiple perspectives seriously
Judy Brown, Jesse Dillard and Trevor Hopper
School of Accounting and Commercial Law,
Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to synthesize work in the emerging field of how accounting
and accountability can be reoriented to better promote pluralistic democracy which recognizes
and addresses differentials in power, beliefs and desires of constituencies. An agenda for future
research and engagement is outlined, drawing on this and insights from other papers in this special
issue of the Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) aimed at taking multiple
perspectives seriously.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews and synthesizes the central themes associated
with accounting, accountants and accountability regimes in pluralistic societies, especially with respect
to the research studies in this AAAJ special issue, and it identifies possibilities for future research and
engagement.
Findings – Three central themes are identified: the challenges of achieving critical, pluralistic
engagement in and through mainstream institutions; the possibilities of taking multiple perspectives
seriously through decentred understandings of governance and democracy; and the value of an
agonistic ethos of engagement in accounting. The articles in this issue contribute to these themes,
albeit differently, and in combination with the extant social science literature reviewed here, open up
pathways for future research and engagement.
Practical implications – This work seeks to encourage the development of pluralistic accounting
and accountability systems drawing on conceptual and practice-based resources across disciplines and
by considering the standpoints of diverse interested constituencies, including academics, policymakers,
business leaders and social movements.
Originality/value – How accounting can reflect and enact pluralistic democracy, not least to involve
civil society, and how problems related to power differentials and seemingly incompatible aims can be
addressed has been largely neglected. This issue provides empirical, practical and theoretical material
to advance further work in the area.
Keywords Accountability, Pluralism, Agonistic democracy, Dialogic accountings
Paper type Research paper


GUEST EDITORIAL
The past, the present and the
future of accounting for
human rights
Ken McPhail
Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK and
La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia, and
John Ferguson
School of Management, University of St Andrews, Fife, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss a number of important recent developments in the
area of business and human rights and considers the impact of these developments for accounting,
assurance and reporting. Following the UN endorsement of the Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights (the Guiding Principles) in June 2011, initiatives related to their implementation have
advanced at a rapid pace. Despite the centrality of accounting, assurance and reporting to some of the
key initiates – accounting research has, hitherto, lagged behind this growing momentum. In order to
address this lacunae, this paper develops an agenda for future research in the area of accounting and
human rights. In doing so, the paper provides an overview of the important contributions advanced by
the other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ).
Design/methodology/approach – This paper draws together and identifies key issues and themes
related to the rapidly evolving research and policy domain of business and human rights and considers
the relevance of these issues to accounting research.
Findings – The paper highlights the wide-ranging impact the Guiding Principles and other
developments in business and human rights have for accounting practice and draws attention to potential
areas of research for accounting scholars. In particular, the paper highlights the emergence of business
and human rights due diligence requirements, including their management and reporting. Further,
the paper draws attention to the development of business and human rights reporting and assurance
practice – which, while still in its infancy, has gathered considerable momentum and support.
Research limitations/implications – The paper provides important insights into emerging issues and
developments in business and human rights that have clear relevance to accounting research and practice.
Originality/value – This paper, and the other contributions to this special issue of AAAJ, provide a
basis and a research agenda for accounting scholars seeking to undertake research in this significant
and emerging field.
Keywords Human rights, Accountability, Reporting, Assurance
Paper type Research paper


Should the international
accounting standards board have
responsibility for human rights?
Ken McPhail
Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK and
La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
Kate Macdonald
School of Social and Political Sciences,
University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, and
John Ferguson
School of Management, University of St Andrews, Fife, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the basis for, and ramifications of, applying relevant
human rights norms – such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights –
to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). In doing so, the paper seeks to contribute to
scholarship on the political legitimisation of the IASB’s structure and activities under prevailing global
governance conditions.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper explores three distinct argumentative logics regarding
responsibilities for justice and human rights vis-à-vis the IASB. First, the authors explore the basis for
applying human rights responsibilities to the IASB through reasoning based on the analysis of “public
power” (Macdonald, 2008) and public authorisation. Second, the authors develop the reasoning with
reference to recent attempts by legal scholars and practitioners to apply human rights obligations to
other non-state and transnational institutions. Finally, the authors develop reasoning based on
Thomas Pogge’s (1992b) ideas about institutional harms and corresponding responsibilities.
Findings – The three distinct argumentative logic rest on differing assumptions – the goal is not to
reconcile or synthesise these approaches, but to propose that these approaches offer alternative and in some
ways complementary insights, each of which contributes to answering questions about how human rights
obligations of the IASB should be defined, and how such a responsibility could be “actually proceduralised”.
Originality/value – The analysis provides an important starting point for beginning to think about
how responsibilities for human rights might be applied to the operation of the IASB.
Keywords IASB, Human rights, Pluralism, United Nations Guiding Principles
Paper type Conceptual paper


Business & human rights:
a commentary from the inside
Michael Posner
Center for Business and Human Rights, NYU Stern School of Business,
New York, New York, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to first, provide an overview of the genesis of the business and
human rights agenda; second, to identify key areas of focus in the emerging business and human
rights agenda; and, finally, to argue for an approach to engaging business in the human rights agenda
that is both challenging and practically orientated.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on the author’s ethnographic experiences both
as a human rights advocate with Human Rights First (1978-2009) and as Assistant Secretary of State
for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the US State Department (2009-2013).
Findings – The paper links the business and human rights agenda to the growth in size and power of
corporations. It identifies six key areas of focus in this emerging agenda, specifically, supply chains
and labor rights, the extractive industries especially relating to security, information technology and
issues of freedom of expression, agriculture and issues of child and forced labor, and investment
and socially responsible investors. The paper contends that business schools have a crucial role to play
in engaging businesses in a challenging and practical way to provide them with workable solutions to
these challenges.
Research limitations/implications – The paper contends that we have come to the end of the
beginning of the discussion of business and human rights and are now in the phase of defining what
the rules are in this twenty-first century global economy. The paper provides important considerations
for taking this phase forward.
Originality/value – This paper provides original insights into the emergence of the business and
human rights agenda. It identifies key areas of focus along with a valuable approach to making
progress in these areas.
Keywords Corporations, State, Business schools, Business and human rights
Paper type Viewpoint


 



درباره نویسنده

admin 115 نوشته در بزرگترین فروشگاه آنلاین دانلود کتاب نرم افزار مقاله ISI فایلهای ویدئویی آموزشی مقالات ترجمه شده ارشد ودکتری دارد . مشاهده تمام نوشته های

دیدگاه ها


پاسخ دهید

نشانی ایمیل شما منتشر نخواهد شد. بخش‌های موردنیاز علامت‌گذاری شده‌اند *