Accounting and the public interest

Abstract

Purpose Seeks to explore the interplay of accounting and the broad social roles and contexts in which it is manifested. Design/methodology/approach By mapping the origins of our current place in the world, a cacophony of ideas and philosophies emerge, and thus many possible trajectories for our future. Why (for example) are we witnessing “corporate” crime, environmental degradation, and mal‐distributions of wealth? As these are the complicated acts of individual people while simultaneously the interactions of broad social histories, we see two pieces of this puzzle – one “grand,” one “small,” and view accounting as a part of these social practices creating relationships, collaborations, and conflicts. The micro piece of the puzzle is the inner psyche of each person, while the macro aspect appeals to the legacy of critical theory * we are socially constructed and inexorably linked to our social environment. In this paper, we link these two pieces of our puzzle illustrating with examples that the personal is political. Findings Concludes that “Like the salt in the stew, you cannot separate the two” aspects of who we are (from the song “Salt” by Lizz Wright 2003). Psychologically and socially we are presented with impressions, discourses, beliefs and interpretations; we act upon these, and we are mediated by “private” and “public” social practices. Practical implications As part of the environment, we re‐create the world, offering new forms of signification and through this humans can re‐conceive new social realties and negotiate “the public interest.” Originality/value The use of psychology to reflect on accounting's origins in “personae” and the illustrations of broader social conscience illuminates the connectedness of individual and social values, the complexities of “who we are” and “why we are,” and the power in creating alternative social constructions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.