Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective

A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization's social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort nece...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Business ethics quarterly 2011-01, Vol.21 (1), p.45-72
Hauptverfasser: Behnam, Michael, MacLean, Tammy L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 72
container_issue 1
container_start_page 45
container_title Business ethics quarterly
container_volume 21
creator Behnam, Michael
MacLean, Tammy L.
description A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization's social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort necessary to operationally enact that commitment, a "credibility cover" is created that perpetuates business as usual. In other words, the legitimacy that organizations gain by formally adopting the standards may shield the organization from closer scrutiny, thus enabling rather than constraining the types of activities the standards were designed to discourage. There is a lack of research on why certain types of IAS are more prone than others to being decoupled from organizational practices. Applying a neo-institutional perspective to IAS, we theorize that the structural dimensions of the types of standards themselves can increase the likelihood of organizations adopting IAS standards in form but not in function.
doi_str_mv 10.5840/beq20112113
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_861386789</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>25763051</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>25763051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c314t-2654ad34140b924622c6cbe94fd48c409153924a30c229f7f4a66dc194c83dcc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0EtLAzEUBeAgCtbqyrUQ3LiQ0bw7cSOlvgoFBRXdjZlMxqZMM9MkI_TfG6mIdHXhno8L9wBwjNEFzxm6LM2KIIwJxnQHDAjmNKOUiF0wwIiTDHP0vg8OQligpGROB-DjbW68gdMA49zAsdZt76IqbWPjGloHpy4a71S0rVPNdv4clauUr8L1FRzDG5PCrrHuEz4ZHzqjo_0yh2CvVk0wR79zCF7vbl8mD9ns8X46Gc8yTTGLGRGcqYoyzFApCROEaKFLI1ldsVwzJNMvaa8o0oTIelQzJUSlsWQ6p5XWdAjONnc73656E2KxtEGbplHOtH0ocoFpLka5TPJ0Sy7aPv3YJMSkoIJQnND5BmnfhuBNXXTeLpVfFxgVP10X_7pO-mSjFyG2_o8SPhIUcUy_AbkHerY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>849636231</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Behnam, Michael ; MacLean, Tammy L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Behnam, Michael ; MacLean, Tammy L.</creatorcontrib><description>A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization's social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort necessary to operationally enact that commitment, a "credibility cover" is created that perpetuates business as usual. In other words, the legitimacy that organizations gain by formally adopting the standards may shield the organization from closer scrutiny, thus enabling rather than constraining the types of activities the standards were designed to discourage. There is a lack of research on why certain types of IAS are more prone than others to being decoupled from organizational practices. Applying a neo-institutional perspective to IAS, we theorize that the structural dimensions of the types of standards themselves can increase the likelihood of organizations adopting IAS standards in form but not in function.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1052-150X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2153-3326</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5840/beq20112113</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chicago: Philosophy Documentation Center</publisher><subject>Accountability ; Accounting standards ; Business audits ; Business ethics ; Business structures ; Compliance costs ; Corporate responsibility ; Corporate social responsibility ; Ethical accountability ; Ethical codes ; International standards ; International system ; Journalism ; Neoinstitutionalism ; Organizational analysis ; Organizational behavior ; Reporting standards ; Social responsibility ; Special Section Accountability in a Global Economy: The Emergence of International Accountability Standards to Advance Corporate Social Responsibility ; Standardization ; Structural analysis ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>Business ethics quarterly, 2011-01, Vol.21 (1), p.45-72</ispartof><rights>The Society for Business Ethics</rights><rights>Copyright Loyola University of Chicago Jan 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c314t-2654ad34140b924622c6cbe94fd48c409153924a30c229f7f4a66dc194c83dcc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c314t-2654ad34140b924622c6cbe94fd48c409153924a30c229f7f4a66dc194c83dcc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25763051$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/25763051$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27923,27924,58016,58249</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Behnam, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacLean, Tammy L.</creatorcontrib><title>Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective</title><title>Business ethics quarterly</title><description>A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization's social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort necessary to operationally enact that commitment, a "credibility cover" is created that perpetuates business as usual. In other words, the legitimacy that organizations gain by formally adopting the standards may shield the organization from closer scrutiny, thus enabling rather than constraining the types of activities the standards were designed to discourage. There is a lack of research on why certain types of IAS are more prone than others to being decoupled from organizational practices. Applying a neo-institutional perspective to IAS, we theorize that the structural dimensions of the types of standards themselves can increase the likelihood of organizations adopting IAS standards in form but not in function.</description><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Accounting standards</subject><subject>Business audits</subject><subject>Business ethics</subject><subject>Business structures</subject><subject>Compliance costs</subject><subject>Corporate responsibility</subject><subject>Corporate social responsibility</subject><subject>Ethical accountability</subject><subject>Ethical codes</subject><subject>International standards</subject><subject>International system</subject><subject>Journalism</subject><subject>Neoinstitutionalism</subject><subject>Organizational analysis</subject><subject>Organizational behavior</subject><subject>Reporting standards</subject><subject>Social responsibility</subject><subject>Special Section Accountability in a Global Economy: The Emergence of International Accountability Standards to Advance Corporate Social Responsibility</subject><subject>Standardization</subject><subject>Structural analysis</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>1052-150X</issn><issn>2153-3326</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpd0EtLAzEUBeAgCtbqyrUQ3LiQ0bw7cSOlvgoFBRXdjZlMxqZMM9MkI_TfG6mIdHXhno8L9wBwjNEFzxm6LM2KIIwJxnQHDAjmNKOUiF0wwIiTDHP0vg8OQligpGROB-DjbW68gdMA49zAsdZt76IqbWPjGloHpy4a71S0rVPNdv4clauUr8L1FRzDG5PCrrHuEz4ZHzqjo_0yh2CvVk0wR79zCF7vbl8mD9ns8X46Gc8yTTGLGRGcqYoyzFApCROEaKFLI1ldsVwzJNMvaa8o0oTIelQzJUSlsWQ6p5XWdAjONnc73656E2KxtEGbplHOtH0ocoFpLka5TPJ0Sy7aPv3YJMSkoIJQnND5BmnfhuBNXXTeLpVfFxgVP10X_7pO-mSjFyG2_o8SPhIUcUy_AbkHerY</recordid><startdate>20110101</startdate><enddate>20110101</enddate><creator>Behnam, Michael</creator><creator>MacLean, Tammy L.</creator><general>Philosophy Documentation Center</general><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110101</creationdate><title>Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective</title><author>Behnam, Michael ; MacLean, Tammy L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c314t-2654ad34140b924622c6cbe94fd48c409153924a30c229f7f4a66dc194c83dcc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Accounting standards</topic><topic>Business audits</topic><topic>Business ethics</topic><topic>Business structures</topic><topic>Compliance costs</topic><topic>Corporate responsibility</topic><topic>Corporate social responsibility</topic><topic>Ethical accountability</topic><topic>Ethical codes</topic><topic>International standards</topic><topic>International system</topic><topic>Journalism</topic><topic>Neoinstitutionalism</topic><topic>Organizational analysis</topic><topic>Organizational behavior</topic><topic>Reporting standards</topic><topic>Social responsibility</topic><topic>Special Section Accountability in a Global Economy: The Emergence of International Accountability Standards to Advance Corporate Social Responsibility</topic><topic>Standardization</topic><topic>Structural analysis</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Behnam, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacLean, Tammy L.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Business ethics quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Behnam, Michael</au><au>MacLean, Tammy L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective</atitle><jtitle>Business ethics quarterly</jtitle><date>2011-01-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>45</spage><epage>72</epage><pages>45-72</pages><issn>1052-150X</issn><eissn>2153-3326</eissn><abstract>A common complaint by academics and practitioners is that the application of international accountability standards (IAS) does not lead to significant improvements in an organization's social responsibility. When organizations espouse their commitment to IAS but do not put forth the effort necessary to operationally enact that commitment, a "credibility cover" is created that perpetuates business as usual. In other words, the legitimacy that organizations gain by formally adopting the standards may shield the organization from closer scrutiny, thus enabling rather than constraining the types of activities the standards were designed to discourage. There is a lack of research on why certain types of IAS are more prone than others to being decoupled from organizational practices. Applying a neo-institutional perspective to IAS, we theorize that the structural dimensions of the types of standards themselves can increase the likelihood of organizations adopting IAS standards in form but not in function.</abstract><cop>Chicago</cop><pub>Philosophy Documentation Center</pub><doi>10.5840/beq20112113</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1052-150X
ispartof Business ethics quarterly, 2011-01, Vol.21 (1), p.45-72
issn 1052-150X
2153-3326
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_861386789
source Business Source Complete; Cambridge Journals; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing
subjects Accountability
Accounting standards
Business audits
Business ethics
Business structures
Compliance costs
Corporate responsibility
Corporate social responsibility
Ethical accountability
Ethical codes
International standards
International system
Journalism
Neoinstitutionalism
Organizational analysis
Organizational behavior
Reporting standards
Social responsibility
Special Section Accountability in a Global Economy: The Emergence of International Accountability Standards to Advance Corporate Social Responsibility
Standardization
Structural analysis
U.S.A
title Where Is the Accountability in International Accountability Standards?: A Decoupling Perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T01%3A36%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Where%20Is%20the%20Accountability%20in%20International%20Accountability%20Standards?:%20A%20Decoupling%20Perspective&rft.jtitle=Business%20ethics%20quarterly&rft.au=Behnam,%20Michael&rft.date=2011-01-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=45&rft.epage=72&rft.pages=45-72&rft.issn=1052-150X&rft.eissn=2153-3326&rft_id=info:doi/10.5840/beq20112113&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E25763051%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=849636231&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=25763051&rfr_iscdi=true