Accounting and various aspects of finance
Seyyed Hossein Noorhosseini Niyaki; Mehdi Meshki Miavaghi; Soghra Barari Nokashti
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate factors related to agency theory, government shortcomings, the consequences of critical theory maturity, and the quality of social benefits in management accounting. The grounded theory method was used to develop a model addressing the maturity of critical accounting ...
Read More
This study was conducted to evaluate factors related to agency theory, government shortcomings, the consequences of critical theory maturity, and the quality of social benefits in management accounting. The grounded theory method was used to develop a model addressing the maturity of critical accounting and the quality of social benefits, with an emphasis on the role of agency theory. Interviews were conducted with 33 experts. After identifying relevant factors, the fuzzy Delphi method was applied for prioritization. The results showed that, among the factors related to government shortcomings and agency issues, indicators associated with government shortcomings and agency theory ranked first and second, with values of 0.915 and 0.908, respectively. Among the consequential factors, the top three were information benefits, accounting system benefits, and social benefits with values of 0.932, 0.931, and 0.860, respectively.IntroductionThis study was conducted with the aim of identifying and prioritizing the factors related to agency theory, government shortcomings, and the consequences of critical theory maturity, as well as the quality of social benefits in management accounting. Today, with the ever-increasing evolution and specialization of customer needs and technological changes, often overlapping across domains, new concepts such as critical theory in accounting have been introduced (Ferri et al., 2016). In fact, accounting creates an artificial consciousness for users of financial information, so that the existing conditions may not align with what accountants currently believe and practice (Khajavi & Mohammadian, 2018). In recent perspectives, with an emphasis on communication, attempts have been made to address the epistemic challenges of the modern world and issues of critical ethics (Ghorbani & Mohseni, 2019). The central role of accounting in judgment involving companies and broader social groups, such as consumers and the public, has also been highlighted. Accordingly, accounting is increasingly being recognized as a social practice (Jahangirnia & Bakhtiari, 2017). In general, critical theory in accounting has emerged in response to the need for social critique and information pluralism and places a strong emphasis on accountability. Accounting is not merely a technique for reporting monetary or quantitative values or maximizing wealth and economic opportunities, but a tool for enhancing the quality of social benefits, accountability, and governance through broader stakeholder participation (Perksis et al., 2022). However, to date, limited efforts have been made in the field of accounting to develop and mature critical theory and to identify its indicators. Therefore, this study aims to identify and prioritize the key indicators related to agency theory, government shortcomings, and the consequences of critical theory maturity, as well as the quality of social benefits in management accounting. Research MethodThe grounded theory method was used to develop a model concerning the maturity of critical accounting and the quality of social importance, emphasizing the role of agency theory through expert interviews, which included 33 participants. Factors related to government shortcomings, agency issues, and consequential outcomes were identified and prioritized after evaluation and screening using the fuzzy Delphi method. This research was conducted during the period 1402-1403 (2023-2024). The statistical population of this study consisted of experts and specialists with sufficient knowledge and experience in fields relevant to the research topic. A purposive sampling method was used to select participants. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were then conducted. Sampling continued until the discovery and analysis process reached theoretical saturation. The data collection tool was an open-ended questionnaire in the form of semi-structured expert interviews. To analyze the interview data, three coding processes, including open coding, axial coding, and selective coding, were used based on the paradigm model of Strauss and Corbin (1998). In the quantitative phase, triangular fuzzy numbers were used to fuzzify the experts' responses. The expert evaluation was conducted using the fuzzy Delphi method with a seven-point Likert scale to validate and screen the dimensions and indicators identified in the qualitative phase. In addition, grounded theory was used for data analysis to ensure the relevance and importance of the identified indicators, and the fuzzy Delphi method was employed to finalize their selection. Results and DiscussionThe results of this study showed that among the factors related to government shortcomings and agency issues, the indicators pertaining to government shortcomings and agency representation ranked first and second in importance, with values of 0.915 and 0.908, respectively. Among the consequential factors, those related to information benefits, accounting system benefits, and social benefits ranked first to third, with values of 0.932, 0.931, and 0.860, respectively. A review of domestic studies indicates that critical thinking has been examined in several accounting-related studies. In this regard, Khajavi et al. (2020) used a critical approach to explore its role in uncovering the underlying structures and layers of social inequality in accounting and demonstrated that accounting and auditing standards should be reconsidered. Ghasemi et. al. (2020), adopting a critical perspective, argued that accounting transparency contributes to social progress and well-being. Samimi (2023) drawing on critical theory and using the grounded theory method, identified key underlying factors contributing to monopoly in auditing and negative traits associated with auditors' Machiavellianism, including cultural, environmental, and social factors; structural and technical weaknesses; and political governance, legal, and regulatory barriers. Mohseni et al. (2018) stated that critical accounting represents an approach that challenges conventional accounting practices beyond the application of specific techniques. In general, these individual studies explored various aspects of critical accounting and the quality of social benefits, and each identified and presented different variables relevant to the topic.4- ConclusionCritical accounting can guide social systems toward specific goals through social processes. In developing countries, including Iran, the expansion and development of accounting form part of the necessary infrastructure for achieving economic development goals and enhancing the quality of social benefits in governments. This depends on the growth of information and social benefits indicators in Management Accounting. The findings of this research enrich the academic literature and contribute to the enhancement of social value in accounting. Its results can be used by governments, researchers, companies, accountants, and accounting associations to support and improve sustainable reporting. Based on the findings, it is recommended that all areas of accounting be developed with a focus on identifying the current and future needs and objectives of social stakeholders. This should include reforming the accounting system through scholarly and knowledge-enhancing efforts, improving the transparency and quality of financial reporting, updating accounting standards, and aligning legal and tax provisions with international accounting standards to create a foundation for institutionalizing social benefits. Finally, the results confirm the validity of the overall research model. It is also recommended that accounting standards be developed with a critical theory approach to enhance the quality of social benefits. Moreover, in addition to applying a critical perspective on social benefits, standards should incorporate the advantages of management accounting systems and information-related benefits that are practical and useful for addressing social issues. Accounting standard-setting should prioritize attention to critical stakeholders and ensure that their concerns are properly addressed.
