This article was downloaded by:[University of Wollongong]
On:25 September 2007
Access Details:[subscription number 773326361]
Publisher:Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer Hou, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Accounting Education
An International Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
黄显声/smpp/title~content=t713683833
Commentary on 'Accountability of accounting educators
贝鲁特屠杀and the rhythm of the university: resistance strategies
蚝油扇贝for postmodern blues'
Prem Sikka; Hugh C. Wilmott
Online Publication Date:01 June 2002
To cite this Article:Sikka, Prem and Wilmott, Hugh C. (2002) 'Commentary on
'Accountability of accounting educators and the rhythm of the university: resistance
绞股蓝的副作用
strategies for postmodern blues'', Accounting Education, 11:2, 191 - 197
To link to this article: DOI:10.1080/0963928021000031754
URL:dx.doi/10.1080/0963928021000031754
戴安娜王妃身高
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [U n i v e r s i t y o f W o l l o n g o n g ] A t : 05:02 25 S e p t e m b e r 2007 Commentary on ‘Accountability of accounting educators and the rhythm of the university:resistance strategies for postmodern blues’PREM SI KKA 1* and HUGH C. WILMOTT 21University of Esx, UK and 2Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge, UK Introduction There is little over which we would take issue with in Craig and Amernic’s (2002) wide-ra
nging critique of the contemporary business and accounting education scene. When it comes to action for change, it ems that Craig and Amernic (2002) hope to galvanize (or infuriate) scholars into action by urging them to throw away the shackles of professional accreditation, professional education, technocratic thinking, quality assurance audits,rearch asssment exercis (RAE), employer expectations and corporate sponsorships.In their place, Craig and Amernic commend the development of alternative, emancipatory programmes of accounting/business education that will enable people to live purpoful and ful lling lives. The are laudable objectives. Yet, at the dawn of the twenty- rst century, the reform of accounting education and practice remains elusive. This is despite
a considerable increa in the number of accounting academics, proliferation of journals,books and conferences. Why should this be so? What might be the reasons for the apparent dif culties of translating the radical analysis into concrete policies and achievements?We respond to the questions by offering some re ections upon the contemporary nature of the University and the role of accounting education in capitalist economies. We begin by agreeing that, in principle, universities offer a mi-utopian space for re ection,study and analysis (Said, 1994; Sikka et al ., 1995). However, their status and position is contradictory and contingent. Far from being ivory towers far re
moved from commerce and government, they are rooted in the state and (highly) dependent upon the private ctor. Universities increasingly function as quasicapitalist organizations, eking addi-tional revenues and competitive advantage over their rivals (Monbiot, 2000; Willmott,2002). Any coherent call to transform universities must address their position in contemporary relations of power. The cond ction argues that moments of crisis (e.g.frauds, scandals) prent an opportunity to highlight the effects of the relations as exempli ed by the poverty of accounting education where little connection is made between the poverty of education and failures of accounting. The third ction suggests two possible directions for transmuting critique into radical change. First, to create possibilities for change, scholars need to build alliances with social movements that face parallel challenges and have congruent agendas and objectives, Secondly, new institutional structures could be created to give greater visibility to marginalized discours. We conclude the paper by summarizing our arguments.
* Address for correspondence: Professor Prem Sikka, Department of Accounting, Finance & Management,University of Esx, Colchester, Esx, CO4 3SQ, UK. E-mail: prems@esx.ac.u k
Accounting Education 11(2), 191–197 (2002)
Accounting Education ISSN 0963–9284 print/ISSN 1468–4489 online © 2002 Taylor & Francis Ltd
即将成人uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/0963928021000031754
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [U n i v e r s i t y o f W o l l o n g o n g ] A t : 05:02 25 S e p t e m b e r 2007
Universities in a competitive world To liberal and critical academics alike, the Whiteheadian idea of the ‘University’ as a space that permits the relatively free exchange of ideas and unconstrained dialogue is appealing and lf-af rming. However, universities are intertwined within contemporary power relations – relations that simultaneously underpin their status and residual forms of in uence and impede the realization of the Whiteheadian ideal. Notably, universities cannot be reformed without attention to the effects of class, gender and ethnic strati cation over which they have some, but very limited control. Such systemic exclusion is dif cult to reconcile with the universalist and indeed cosmic ntiments conveyed in the Whiteheadian conception of education and the role of the university as its most prominent guardian.
Education is a contested and politically-charged activity, not least becau it has a potential to normalize the status quo as well as a potential to foster new ways of living,eing and understanding. By inculcating individuals into notions of good/bad, right/wrong, moral/immoral and fa
ir/unfair, educational practices normalize some worldviews and establish ‘regimes of truth’ (Foucault, 1980). But education can also act to problematize such normalizations by questioning established truth claims and their associated moralities.
七七事件Given the potential of education to loon established social formations and/or cement the contemporary relations of power, it is unsurprising to nd the (capitalist) state intervening directly to discipline universities and academics through a variety of practices and regulations that re ect and reinforce the ethos of capitalism (Puxty et al ., 1994a;Willmott, 1995). Aping the language of the market, students are now described as ‘customers’ and cours are referred to as ‘products’. Teachers are increasingly rewarded on the basis of quanti able measures, considered to be proxies for productivity. In the UK,university academics have been enjoined to embrace competition through ‘peer-refereed’rearch asssment exercis and quality asssments (Willmott, 2002). Recalcitrant academics have either been persuaded to leave universities or endure worning employment conditions and allocation of resources. The performance measures have tended to persuade academics to focus upon measurable outputs and neglect other,traditional activities, such as contribution to public rvice, including interventions in public debates.
To compensate for the squeeze on public funding of higher education, universities have increasingly
built alliances with corporations (Korten, 2000). Companies are willing to provide rearch grants and sponsorships for lected projects, often subsidized by the public pur when overheads are not fully recovered. Favourable rearch ndings can then be cured and the unwelcome ones silenced. In return for commercial sponsorship scholars are increasingly expected to cure clearance from the donors before manuscripts can be submitted to scholarly journals (The Lancet , 15 September 2001, pp. 854–56).Some universities, as Craig and Amernic note (citing Woodhou’s incisive comment-aries), willingly identify themlves with corporate aims and gear their education and rearch to advance tho ideals with the anticipation that they will be rewarded with more sponsorships and donations. What appears to be better resources and working conditions also provide a benchmark for many aspiring universities and scholars. Reliance upon corporations for funding and rearch sponsorships creates unwritten boundaries. Tho 192
Sikka and Wilmott
樟脚村D o w n l o a d e d B y : [U n i v e r s i t y o f W o l l o n g o n g ] A t : 05:02 25 S e p t e m b e r 2007 transgressing the boundaries risk ostracism with vere nancial and employment conquences.Take the accreditation of university degrees by the accounting profession. This gives competitive advantage to universities and their students by curing exemptions from the examinatio
ns of the professional bodies. The accreditation process enables professional accountancy bodies to exerci considerable control over the design and teaching of accounting and related subjects. To cure accreditation, university departments have to show, in fairly minute detail, how they are ful lling the benchmarks laid down by the accountancy bodies. In addition to this documentation, the departments are visited by a panel – comprising mostly of accounting academics who act on behalf of the accountancy bodies – which interviews teachers and students to determine whether the profession’s requirements are being met.1To cure a ow of students, some UK universities are now almost giving away accounting degrees. The Association of Chartered Certi ed Accountants (ACCA) is the UK’s cond largest accountancy body (in terms of quali ed members). It has been experiencing considerable dif culties in curing recognition for its quali cations in other countries. The leaked agenda papers of one of its Council meetings (mid-1999) noted,2As Council has previously been informed, ACCA made a formal submission for recognition to the Canadian International Quali cations Appraisal Board (IQAB)in 1991; the submission was Council will recall that Canadian IQAB’s decision after the original 1991 submission was that ACCA members could only be admitted to the various provincial Institutes of Chartered
Accountants if they completed cours in Accounting, Auditing, Business Law and Taxation, complet
ed the provincial Institute’s School of Accountancy residential cour and examination, and undertook a prescribed period of In reaching its conclusions,... Canadian IQAB notes that, in its opinion, ACCA’s Professional Stage and Audit Orientation Cour are not equivalent to the nal level CICA examinations in that ‘higher level cognitive skills are not tested adequately’. It is also noted that ACCA does not maintain a university degree entrance requirement and the majority of ACCA members do not posss university degrees.
Subquently, ACCA built an alliance with the Oxford Brookes University (OBU).Since 2001, the OBU has been awarding BSc (Honours) degrees in Applied Accounting to ACCA students passing only a part of the ACCA’s professional examinations. To gain the degree, students are required to submit a guided Rearch 3and Analysis Project to the university for asssment. The project compris a 5000-word report and a 1500 word Key Skills Statement. A submission fee of £50 is required. Over 30000 students are registered for this degree and some 10000 are expected to graduate each year. In the world of 1Such exercis are, in certain respects, forerunners of what has been applied to the entire UK university system under the gui of quality assurance audits undertaken by the Quality Assurance Agency which is also responsible for (QAA) ‘benchmarking statements’. Rather than developing alternative quality standards or benchmarking statements, many academics have endord, accepted and re ned tho developed by the professional bodies.
2As appearing on visar.csustan.edu /aaba/aaba.htm (8 July 1999); accesd on 7 February 2002.3Oxford Brookes University did not submit an entry to the Accountancy Panel for the 1992, 1996 or the 2001Rearch Asssment Exerci (www.hefce.ac.uk/).
Commentary 193
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [U n i v e r s i t y o f W o l l o n g o n g ] A t : 05:02 25 S e p t e m b e r 2007 competitive advantage, OBU gains nancial advantages and ACCA considers its quali cation to be more marketable. It is far removed from the Whiteheadian notion of the University.Accountancy education In the world of competitive advantage, accounting calculations are deeply implicated in numerous social process ranging from social control (Zeff, 1978), social change (Burchell et al ., 1980), justi cation of monopoly rents (Adams, 1998) and social con ict (Tinker, 1985). Accounting is central to the workings of capitalism. It prioritis property rights (as in a balance sheet), celebrates the supremacy of capital over labour (as in the income statement) and encourages belief in ef ciency, private pro ts and competition.Within the dynamics of capitalism, accounting ‘is viewed as functioning in relation to a speci c and determining historical process: the appropriation of value and accumulation and concentration of capital’ (Johnson, 1980, p. 359). However, aspiring accountants rarely encounter any theory of society, justice, fairness or morality in mainstream books that might ac
t as a counterweight to the dominant ideas of competition and pro t maximization (Sikka, 1987; Puxty et al ., 1994b).Emphasis on its technical aspects tends to displace consideration of accounting’s role in reprenting social con ict. Instead of posing questions about the role of education in legitimizing practices that result in exploitation, poverty wages, environmental degrada-tions and fraud, the issues become tho of following the right techniques and/or accounting/auditing standards. In this way the social core of accounting remains hidden
from scrutiny. This core only gains public visibility when there are corporate collaps,scandals and revelations of frauds (e.g. Enron and WorldCom). Such moments of crisis weaken the dominant discours and create possibilities of change. They provide a reminder that aspiring accountants are being taught techniques and values that can fail,have failed, or are failing. However, the moments of crisis are also opportunities for reconstruction, or at least discussion of it. But such discussion is rarely accompanied by questions about the role of accounting education in encouraging antisocial or errant conduct by auditors, company executives or corporate advirs. The connection is rarely made between the professional values and the role of accounting education in the proliferation of social problems. Thus opportunities for reforming education remain con ned to the narrow con nes of the universities or private mutterings of academics.They are rarely taken beyond the academy.
Towards a political strategy
The poverty of accounting education and the degradation of universities is not going to be corrected by appeals to some nonexistent, idealized nostalgic past when universities approached the Whiteheadian ideal. It is unlikely to be curtailed by scholars like us writing critiques in academic journals that are read by a handful of fellow-travellers. The malai of modernity can be checked and resisted only by taking the debates beyond the academy and articulating the critique in ways that resonate with the concerns of a wider audience.The competing discours can be advanced to reposition social subjects and explain that accounting technologies and education are neither inaccessible esoteric practices nor inconquential with respect to their jobs, pensions, savings and, homes.
194Sikka and Wilmott
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [U n i v e r s i t y o f W o l l o n g o n g ] A t : 05:02 25 S e p t e m b e r 2007 Developing a strategy to guide political action in a direction that changes the nature and scope of university and accounting education is no easy matter. Nor is this task necessarily made easier by sweeping generalizations, such as the claim that ‘Accounting educators,notably [dare we allege?] m
any professors of accounting, em to have been the profession’s lap dogs, their quislings, meekly following the lf-interested vocationalism of the accounting profession, and similar pursuits of their host educational institutions.Fewer professors of accounting em to conceive their role as “professing the truth without fear or favour”, of leading the way, of challenging the status quo , of offering critique, of “disturbing the peace”, of tting the agenda, of being the conscience of the profession,and of offering “resistance” to dominant ideologies’ (Craig and Amernic, 2002, pp.121–71).
Any strategy for the mobilization of accounting academics has to recognize that they are not a homogeneous group and are unlikely to subscribe to the same political agenda.Depending upon their class, age, gender, ethnicity, wealth, politics, economic aspirations,radical zeal and other differences, some may be content with the status quo whilst others may desire a radical change. Some may be inclined to sit on the profession’s working parties and committees and advance competing discours, whilst some may well be overburdened with work-related pressures and may have little time or inclination to become involved in any radical project. Academic associations such as the American Accounting Association (AAA) and the British Accounting Association (BAA), it may be argued, could develop strategies for more liberal education and reshaping of the role of accountin
g in society. In principle, the membership of the organizations could generate pressures for change, but even that is fraught with dif culties as the membership has little in uence over the election of leaders or reform programmes drawn up by the (lf-electing) leadership. In arch of sponsorships and political respectability, AAA and BAA have been drawn into the orbit of major accountancy rms, professional associations and corporations. At times of major accounting scandals, the bodies are silent. They have taken no initiatives to promulgate alternative accounting/auditing standards or to highlight the visible hand of accounting in social problems (Cousins et al ., 2000).
The recent history of accounting suggests that pressures for change tend to come from outside the circle of academic and professional accountancy bodies. In the aftermath of major scandals, opinion formers (e.g. politicians, consumer associations and journalists)give vent to the poverty of accounting and auditing practices. This weakens, albeit momentarily, the hegemony of the accountancy bodies/ rms and creates some space for the advancement of competing analysis and discours. In respon, the accountancy bodies defend themlves by offering to revisit their practices and by making minor concessions (Sikka and Willmott, 1995) as the core of underlying theories and social relations of power remain shielded from scrutiny. The nger is rarely pointed at th
e role of accounting education in contributing to accounting failures and regulatory inadequacies as a contributory factor.
The advancement of competing discours to undermine the increasing commodi cation of universities and accounting education can perhaps best be pursued by building alliances with social movements and groups that are also concerned with degradation of life by capitalist priorities that are cured and legitimized by mainstream accounting education and practice. Such alliances could be supplemented by the formation of institutional structures that directly challenge the hegemony of the professional bodies and technocratic Commentary 195
