Achieving Transparency: The Visible, Invisible and Divisible in Academic Accountability Networks

Demands for greater transparency form an increasingly prevalent feature of many areas of organizational activity. Through the rubric of transparency, demands are made for organizations to demonstrate recognition of their responsibility for environmental impact, how money is spent, the returns received on money invested and so on. This paper argues that transparency reviews, however, do not straightforwardly open up opportunities for observing the internal dynamics of an organization in order to render the organization accountable and its members aware of their responsibilities. Instead, transparency reviews encourage the adoption of new or re-formatted informational production processes that produce information intended to fit the auspices of the review. In this way, internal aspects of organizations are not `made available' but instead are re-oriented toward the production of specific forms of informational output that will externalize (or make available) a particular version of the internal dynamics of the organization. By studying these production processes in detail we find a series of ad-hoc, uncertain and disconnected processes through which accountability criteria are met and transparency achieved.

[1]  Steve Woolgar,et al.  Accountability in action?: the case of a database purchasing decision. , 2002, The British journal of sociology.

[2]  R. Gray The social accounting project and Accounting Organizations and Society. Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique? , 2002 .

[3]  H. Willmott Managing the Academics: Commodification and Control in the Development of University Education in the U.K. , 1995 .

[4]  Øystein D. Fjeldstad,et al.  Strategy Tradeoffs in the Knowledge and Network Economy , 2001 .

[5]  Wendy L. Currie,et al.  Rethinking Management Information Systems: An Interdisciplinary Perspective , 1999 .

[6]  Tapio Reponen,et al.  Strategic information systems - a conceptual analysis , 1993, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Marianne de Laet,et al.  The Zimbabwe Bush Pump , 2000 .

[8]  Martin Smits,et al.  Assessment of information strategies in insurance companies in the Netherlands , 1997, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[9]  D J Hunter,et al.  The audit society. , 1997, Journal of management in medicine.

[10]  Jerome S. Bruner,et al.  The Transparency of Interpersonal Choice , 1955 .

[11]  H. Willmott,et al.  Systems Of Surveillance And The Silencing Of UK Academic Accounting Labour , 1994 .

[12]  P. Sikka Transparency and accountability of the professional accountancy bodies: some observations on the Canning and O'Dwyer paper , 2001 .

[13]  M. Michael,et al.  From authority to authenticity: The changing governance of biotechnology , 2002 .

[14]  Nikolas Rose,et al.  Powers of Freedom: Contents , 1999 .

[15]  Russell L. Ackoff,et al.  Creating the Corporate Future: Plan or be Planned For , 1981 .

[16]  H. Garfinkel Studies in Ethnomethodology , 1968 .

[17]  Steven P Wall,et al.  Public Justification and the Transparency Argument , 1996 .

[18]  H. Garfinkel Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities , 1964 .

[19]  Bob Norton,et al.  Practical Information Policies, 2nd ed. , 2000 .

[20]  R. Gray ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM: AN EXPLORATION OF THE CHALLENGE OF GENTLY ACCOUNTING FOR... , 1992 .

[21]  Michael J. Earl,et al.  Information management : the strategic dimension , 1988 .

[22]  B. Latour,et al.  Power, Action and Belief. A New Sociology of Knowledge? , 1986 .

[23]  E. Tiryakian,et al.  Studies in social interaction , 1972 .

[24]  Brendan O’Dwyer,et al.  Professional accounting bodies' disciplinary procedures: accountable, transparent and in the public interest? , 2001 .

[25]  A. Mol,et al.  Regions, Networks and Fluids: Anaemia and Social Topology , 1994, Social studies of science.

[26]  Timothy L. Nyerges,et al.  Transparency of environmental decision making: a case study of soil cleanup inside the Hanford 100 area , 2004 .

[27]  M. Power The Audit Explosion , 1994 .

[28]  Marilyn Strathern,et al.  Commons and borderlands : working papers on interdisciplinarity, accountability and the flow of knowledge , 2004 .

[29]  K. Hetherington,et al.  Secondhandedness: Consumption, Disposal, and Absent Presence , 2004 .

[30]  S. Woolgar Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials , 1990 .

[31]  Research Assessment Exercise: a fatal remedy? , 1999 .

[32]  Michael S. Scott Morton,et al.  STRATEGY FORMULATION METHODOLOGIES , 2003 .

[33]  A. Pettigrew Context and Action in the Transformation of the Firm , 1987 .

[34]  Michael B. Usher,et al.  Science in action , 1993, Nature.

[35]  G. Vattimo The Transparent Society , 1992 .

[36]  Charles Oppenheim,et al.  Practical Information Policies , 2000 .

[37]  D. Owen,et al.  Questioning the value of the research selectivity process in British university accounting , 1995 .

[38]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[39]  M. Power Expertise and the construction of relevance: Accountants and environmental audit , 1997 .

[40]  I. Velody Knowledge for what? The intellectual consequences of the Research Assessment Exercise , 1999 .

[41]  J. Baudrillard,et al.  The transparency of evil : essays on extreme phenomena , 1994 .

[42]  Robert Moore,et al.  Purity and Danger , 2008 .

[43]  John Rawls,et al.  政治自由主义 = Political liberalism , 2000 .