مشخصات مقاله | |
انتشار | مقاله سال 2018 |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 11 صفحه |
هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
منتشر شده در | نشریه الزویر |
نوع نگارش مقاله | سرمقاله (Editorial) |
مقاله بیس | این مقاله بیس نمیباشد |
نمایه (index) |
Scopus – Master Journal List – JCR
|
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF) |
4.410 در سال 2017
|
شاخص H_index |
72 در سال 2019
|
شاخص SJR |
1.426 در سال 2017
|
شناسه ISSN |
1044-5005
|
شاخص Quartile (چارک) |
Q1 در سال 2017
|
نوع مقاله | ISI |
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
نوع ارائه مقاله | ژورنال |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | Management accounting and the paradox of embedded agency: A framework for analyzing sources of structural change |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | حسابداری مدیریت و پارادوکس اداره دولتی نهادینه شده: چارچوبی برای منابع تحلیلی تغییر ساختاری |
رشته های مرتبط | حسابداری |
گرایش های مرتبط | حسابداری مدیریت، حسابداری دولتی |
مجله | تحقیقات حسابداری مدیریت – Management Accounting Research |
دانشگاه | Örebro University School of Business – Sweden |
کلمات کلیدی | حسابداری مدیریت، پارادوکس، ساختار اجتماعی، تغییر دادن، ثنویت، اداره دولتی نهادینه شده |
کد محصول | E5587 |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
1. Introduction
Social structures have traditionally been seen as forces that shape social practices in ways that typically reinforce conformity and continuity (see e.g. Giddens, 1979, 1984). Despite this though, history has taught us that even the most ingrained and taken-for-granted practices may undergo change over time. Not least in the management accounting (MA) literature, there has been a large and growing interest in exploring the theoretical dilemma that arises in the intersection of these two contradictory insights, often referred to as the paradox of embedded agency (Englund et al., 2013; Covaleski et al., 2013, Kilfoyle and Richardson, 2011; Sharma et al., 2014; Yang and Modell, 2013). The dilemma is as follows: if agents are embedded in social structures which largely condition their interpretations, intentions, and rationalities, how can they come to (un-)intentionally change these very structures? While the paradox as such was formulated for the first time some two decades ago (see e.g. Emirbayer and Mische, 1998; Holm, 1995), our understanding of it has arguably evolved over time as researchers from different disciplines (including MA) have discussed it from different viewpoints and by means of different theoretical perspectives. In particular, our understanding has developed rather significantly as researchers have come to relate the paradox to theories that claim to have overcome the previously dominating dualistic view on the relationship between structure and agency (see e.g. Emirbayer and Mische, 1998; Giddens, 1984; Macintosh and Scapens, 1990; Sewell, 1992). Given this development, the time now seems opportune to try to summarize and assess some of the insights gained, and also to discuss avenues for the future. It is to this end that we turn in this editorial to the Special Issue on management accounting and the paradox of embedded agency. |