The mobilization of accounting in preening for privatization

Abstract

Purpose The paper sets out to examine the use of accounting as part of the privatization process of a national railway in Canada. The argument is that proponents of the privatization used accounting strategically to justify and sustain the privatization. Major societal events, such as the privatization of national assets, merit close scrutiny so that an accounting world thus constructed should not be permitted to pass unchallenged. Design/methodology/approach The paper explores the way in which accounting language, concepts and information were deployed in the prospectus issued in support of the initial public offering of shares by the Canadian government. Findings Evidence is found suggesting that the vagaries of accounting language were marshalled to sustain a self‐fulfilling prophecy of success. Research limitations/implications Case studies possess both the strength of specific instance detail and interpretation, and the ostensible weakness of interpretation of a sample of one. But such research may provide for reframing conceptual perspectives and contribute to stimulating additional efforts at interrogating accounting language's roles in major social change events. Practical implications The paper strongly endorses a critical analytical perspective by all those affected by major social change, such as privatization, in which accounting language often plays a persuasive but subtle role. Originality/value Individuals, groups, employees, managers, customers, and others, including the public‐at‐large, who are potentially impacted by privatizations, are reminded that accounting is not an innocent bystander in the political maneuverings associated with a privatization. Accounting does not axiomatically provide an objective measure of some underlying financial truth, but is part of an arsenal of rhetoric to achieve political ends.

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 — 44 citations exist upstream.

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