Journal of Applied Economic Research
ISSN 2712-7435
The Frontiers of Academic Discipline: Institutional Approach (the Case of Accounting)
Volkova O.N.
Abstract
The issues of institutionalization and demarcation of the boundaries of academic disciplines in recent years have received a significant interest, within the framework of new waves of epistemological and institutional research and interdisciplinarity. The aim of this work is to model the process of academic discipline’s institutionalization and the structure of its institutions by the case of accounting discipline, in the international and Russian context. Due to the specific nature of the subject, we will use the institutional approach as well as the associated social-network approach within which discipline is viewed as the result of the interaction of individual actors, their groups and networks in the subject discourse. The paper identifies the reasons for interest in demarcating the boundaries of academic disciplines in general, and accounting in particular. The institutional structure of accounting is defined as a set of institutions of accounting practices (techniques and professions) and accounting knowledge (science and the dissemination of knowledge (education and professional communication)). The stages of development of all these institutions are structured; special attention is paid to the institutions of accounting knowledge. It is shown that today accounting, institutionally, is a mature academic discipline, a separate part of economic science and practice. The main features of accountants' academic community network organization are revealed: its tightness facilitates the exchange of knowledge within the community, but also hinders the search for new objects and methods of research and interdisciplinarity. The features of the development of accounting institutions in the Russian academic environment are discussed. The importance of the results is due to the possibilities of social construction in society and in markets that are provided by all economic disciplines, including accounting. The model of the structure of institutions and networks presented in this work can be extended to other disciplines that will help overcome the existing gap between the content of domestic and foreign ideas about their institutional nature and subject fields, as well as the revision of Russian national educational and research classifications, the content of training programs in economic disciplines, including accounting.
Keywords
academic discipline; academic discipline boundaries; accounting; institutes; institutional analysis.
References
1. Stepin, V.S. (2006). Filosofiia nauki. Obshchie problem [Philosophy of Science. General Issues]. Moscow, Gardariki.
2. Kent, B.E., Charles, S. (1987). Peirce: Logic and the Classification of Sciences. Kingston, McGill-Queen’s University Press.
3. Messer-Davidow, E., Shumway, D.R., Sylvan, D.J. (eds.) (1993). Knowledges: Historical and Critical Studies in Disciplinarity. Charlottesville, The University Press of Virginia.
4. Dmitriev, A.N., Savelyeva, I.M. (eds.) (2015). Nauki o cheloveke: istoriia distsiplin [Human Science. History of the Discipline]. Moscow, Higher School of Economics.
5. Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of Disciplines. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
6. Szostak, R. (2004). Classifying Science. Dordrecht, Springer.
7. Bikbov, A. (2006). Instituty slaboi distsipliny [Institutions of Weak Discipline]. NLO [New Literary Review], No 7. Available at: magazines.russ.ru/nlo/2006/77/bi24.html.
8. Trushchelev, S.A. (2014). O razvitii distsiplinarnogo i institutsional'nogo podkhodov k generatsii znaniia v oblasti psikhiatrii (Development of Disciplinary and Institutional Approaches to General of Knowledge in Psychiatry). Sotsial'naia i klinicheskaia psikhiatriia [Social and Clinical Psychiatry], No. 3, 84–89.
9. Greendorfer, S.L. (1987). Specialization, Fragmentation, Integration, Discipline, Profession: What Is the Real Issue? Quest, Vol. 39, No. 1, 56–64.
10. Garand, J.C. (2005). Integration and Fragmentation in Political Science: Exploring Patterns of Scholarly Communication in a Divided Discipline. Journal of Politics, Vol. 67, No. 4, 979–1005.
11. Hambrick, D.C., Chen, M.-J. (2008). New Academic Fields as Admittance-Seeking Social Movements: The Case of Strategic Management. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33, No. 1, 32–54.
12. Yudin, G.B. (2010). Ekonomicheskoe i sotsial'noe: avtonomiia sfer i distsiplinarnye granitsy (The «Economic» and the «Social»: Autonomy of Spheres and Disciplinary Boundaries). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, 54–71.
13. Kirchik, O.I. (2011). Distsiplinarnye granitsy kak granitsy simvolicheskie: sluchai agrarnoi ekonomiki [Disciplinary Borders as Symbolic Borders: The Case of Agrarian Economy]. Simvolicheskaia vlast': sotsial'nye nauki i politika [Symbolic Power: Social Sciences and Politics]. Moscow, Universitetskaia Kniga, 247–275.
14. Vakhshtain, V. (2012). Konstitutsiia sotsial'nykh nauk [Constitution of Social Sciences]. Antropologicheskii forum [Anthropology Forum], No. 16, 41–50.
15. Hann, C., Hart, K. (2011). Economic Anthropology. Cambridge, Polity Press.
16. Serenko, A., Bontis, N. (2013). The intellectual core and impact of the knowledge management academic discipline. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, 137–155.
17. Beattie, V., Davie, E. (2006). Theoretical studies of the historical development of the accounting discipline: A review and evidence. Accounting, Business and Financial History, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1–25.
18. Jack, L. (2017). Accounting and Social Theory. An introduction. Routledge.
19. Rutherford, B.A. (2010). The social scientific turn in UK financial accounting research: a philosophical and sociological analysis. Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 40, No. 2, 149–171.
20. Hopwood, A.G., Miller, P. (1994). Accounting As Social and Institutional Practice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
21. Potter, B. (2005). Accounting as a social and institutional practice: perspectives to enrich our understanding of accounting change. Abacus, Vol. 41, No. 3, 265–289.
22. Chapman, C.S., Cooper, D.J., Miller, P. (eds.) (2009). Accounting, Organizations, and Institutions: Essays in Honour of Anthony Hopwood. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
23. Maher, M.W. (2000). Management Accounting Education at the Millennium. Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 15, No. 2, 335–346.
24. Ismail, N.A. (2009). Accounting Information System: Education and Research Agenda. Malaysian Accounting Review, Vol. 8, No. 1, 63–80.
25. Jindrichovska, I., Kubickova, D. (2015). Czech accounting academia and practice: Historical roots and current issues. Accounting & Management Information Systems. Contabilitate Si Informatica De Gestiune, Vol. 14, No. 2, 328–361.
26. Ball, R. (2016). Why We Do International Accounting Research. Journal of International Accounting Research, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1–6.
27. Lehman, C. (2006). Perspectives on language, accountability and critical accounting: An interpretative perspective. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 17, No. 6, 755–779.
28. Barrett, D. (2007). Paradigm shifts for the twenty-first century management science. Cost Management, November/December, 5-11.
29. Fuller, S. (2002). Disciplinary Boundaries: A Conceptual Map of the Field. Chapter 8 in Social Epistemology. Indiana University Press.
30. Kasavin, I.T. (2013). Sotsial'naia epistemologiia: Fundamental'nye i prikladnye problem [Social Epistemology. Fundamental and Applied Problems]. Moscow, Al'fa-M.
31. Tilly, C. (1984). Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. Russell Sage Foundation.
32. Pedersen, O.K., Morgan, G., Crouch, C., Whitley, R., Campbell, J.L. (eds.) (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Institutional Analysis. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
33. Badua, F.A., Previts, G.J., Vasarhelyi, M.A. (2011). Tracing the development of accounting thought by analyzing content, communication, and quality of accounting research over time. The Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, 31–56.
34. Leefmann, J., Levallois, C., Hildt, E. (2016). Neuroethics 1995–2012. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Guiding Themes of an Emerging Research Field. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Vol. 10, 336.
35. Nag, R., Hambrick, D.C., Chen, M.J. (2007). What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 9, 935–955.
36. Isaac, J. (2012). Working Knowledge. Making the Human Sciences from Parsons to Kuhn. Harvard University Press.
37. Carroll, W.K. (2013). Discipline, Field, Nexus: Re-Visioning Sociology. Canadian Review of Sociology, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1–26.
38. Fourcade, M. (2009). Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton University Press.
39. Jacobs, J.A. (2014). In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University. University of Chicago Press.
40. Brown, R., Jones, M. (2015). Mapping and exploring the topography of contemporary financial accounting research. The British Accounting Review, Vol. 47, No. 3, 237–261.
41. Gendron, Y. (2015). Accounting academia and the threat of the paying-off mentality. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 26, 168–176.
42. Andrikopoulos, A., Kostaris, K. (2017). Collaboration networks in accounting research. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Vol. 28, 1–9.
43. Palea, V. (2017). Whither accounting research? A European view. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 42, 59–73.
44. Sugimoto, C.R., Weingart, S. (2015). The kaleidoscope of disciplinarity. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 71, No. 4, 775–794.
45. Lamont, M., Molnar, V. (2002). The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 28, No. 1, 167–195.
46. Huutoniemi, K. (2016). Interdisciplinarity as Academic Accountability: Prospects for Quality Control Across Disciplinary Boundaries. Social Epistemology, Vol. 30, No. 2, 163–185.
47. Ogurtsov, A.P. (1988). Distsiplinarnaia struktura nauki [Disciplinary Science of Structure]. Moscow, Nauka, 1988.
48. Espeland, W., Stevens, M. (1998). Commensuration as a Social Process. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 24, 313–343.
49. Foucalt, M. (1996). Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual'nosti [Will for Truth. On the Other Side of Knowledge, Power and Sexuality. Collection of Works (in Russian)]. Moscow, Kastal.
50. Foucalt, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir. Paris, Gallimard.
51. Volkova, O.N. (2018). Demarkatsiia granits ekonomicheskoi distsipliny: soderzhatel'nyi podkhod (sluchai bukhgalterskogo ucheta) (Defining the boundaries of an economic discipline: A content-related approach (The case of accounting)). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 2, 95–121.
52. Lenoir, T. (1997). Instituting Science: The Cultural Production of Scientific Disciplines. Stanford University Press.
53. Hunt, L. (1994). The Virtues of Disciplinarity. Eighteenth-Century Studies, Vol. 28, 1–7.
54. Post, R. (2009). Debating Disciplinarity. Critical Inquiry, Vol. 35.
55. Power, M. (1997). The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford University Press. 56. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford, Clarendon.
57. Strathern, M. (ed.) (2000). Audit Cultures. Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. London, Routledge.
58. Voronova, E.Iu. (2010). Neoinstitutsional'nyi analiz uchetnogo protsessa [Neo-Institutional Analysis of the Accounting Process]. Moscow, MGIMO – Universitet.
59. Pankov, V.V., Kozhukhov, V.L., Peshekhonov, A.S. (2016). Perspektivy razvitiia institutsional'noi teorii bukhgalterskogo ucheta [Prospects of the Development of the Institutional Theory of Accounting]. Audit, No. 12, 16–19.
60. Volkova, O.N. (2014). Struktura i evoliutsiia sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo instituta ucheta (Structure and evolution of socio-economic institute of accounting). Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet (International Accounting), No. 26 (320), 53–62.
61. Tracy, K., Robles, J.S. (2009). Questions, questioning, and institutional practices: An introduction. Discourse Studies, Vol. 11, No. 2, 131–152.
62. Washington, R.E., Karen, D. (eds.) (2010). Sport, Power, and Society. Institutions and Practices: A Reader. Routledge.
63. Fujii, H. (2016). An Institutional Theory Perspective on Accounting Evolution: Rulemakers’ Belief and Empirical Evidence. In Bensadon D., Praquin N. (eds.). IFRS IN A GLOBAL WORLD. International and Critical Perspectives on Accounting. Switzerland, Springer International Publishing, 41–56.
64. De Roover, R. (1955). New Perspectives of the History of Accounting. The Accounting Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, 405–420.
65. Waweru, N.M. (2010). The origin and evolution of management accounting: a review of the theoretical framework. Problems and Perspectives in Management, Vol. 8, No. 3, 165–183.
66. Shah, K. (2015). Historical Evolution of Management Accounting. The Cost and Management, Vol. 43, No. 4, 12–17.
67. Volkova, O.N. (2015). Vlastomental'nost' i uchetnye praktiki (Governmentality and Accounting Practices). Politicheskaia kontseptologiia: zhurnal metadistsiplinarnykh issledovanii (Journal of Metadisciplinary Research The Political Conceptolory), No. 1, 18–26.
68. Brown, R. (2004). A History of Accounting and Accountants. New York, Cosimo Classics.
69. Mattessich, R. (2008). Two Hundred Years of Accounting Research. An International Survey of Personalities, Ideas and Publications. New York.
70. Boldyrev, I.А. (2011). Ekonomicheskaia metodologiia segodnia: kratkii obzor osnovnykh napravlenii (Economic Methodology Today: A Review of Key Areas). Zhurnal Novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii (Journal of the New Economic Association), No. 9, 47–71.
71. Villani, G. (2018). Cronica. Fb&C Ltd.
72. Rolova, A. (1994) Ital'ianskii kupets i ego torgovo-bankovskaia deiatel'nost' v XIII–XV vv. [The Italian Merchange and his Commercial and Banking Activities in the 13th-15th centuries]. Srednie veka [Medieval Ages], Issue 57, 62–74.
73. Murav'ev, A.A. (2013). O nauchnoi znachimosti rossiiskikh zhurnalov po ekonomike i smezhnym distsiplinam (On Scientific Value of Russian Journals in Economics and Related Fields). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 4, 130–151.
74. Aleskerov, F.T., Badgaeva, D.N., Pisliakov, V.V., Sterligov, I.A., Shvydun, S.V. (2016). 3nachimost' osnovnykh rossiiskikh i mezhdunarodnykh ekonomicheskikh zhurnalov: setevoi analiz (An Importance of Russian and International Economic Journalist: A Network Approach). Zhurnal Novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii (Journal of the New Economic Association), Vol. 2, No. 30, 193–207.
75. Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature, Vol. 393, 440–442.
76. Whitley, R. (2000). The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Second Edition. Oxford University Press.
77. Braun, T., Schubert, A. (2003). A quantitative view on the coming of age of interdisciplinarity in the sciences 1980-1999. Scientometrics, Vol. 58, 183–189.
78. Schummer, J. (2004). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, Vol. 59, 425–465.
79. Valenza, R. (2009). Literature, Language, and the Rise of the Intellectual Disciplines in Britain, 1680-1820, 1st ed. Cambridge University Press.
80. Lattuca, L.R. (2002). Learning Interdisciplinarity: Sociocultural Perspectives on Academic Work. Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 73, No. 6, 711–739.
81. Price, D.J. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. Yale, Yale University Press.
82. Miller, M., Boix-Mansille, V. (2004). Thinking Across Perspectives and Disciplines. GoodWork Project Report Series, No. 27. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University.
83. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
84. Krishnan, A. (2009). What are academic disciplines? Some observations on the disciplinarity vs. interdisciplinarity debate. NCRM Working paper Series. University of Southhampton, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods.
85. Mäki, U. (2013). Scientific Imperialism: Difficulties in Definition, Identification, and Assessment. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 27, No 3, 325–339.
86. Volkova, O.N. (2013). Osobennosti natsional'nogo kontsepta bukhgalterskogo ucheta (opyt lingvokul'turnogo analiza) (Features of concept of national accounting (experience of linguistic-cultural analysis). Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet (International Accounting), No. 27 (273), 51–60.
87. Kovalev, V.V. (2004) O nekotorykh kriticheskikh vystupleniiakh protiv dvoinoi bukhgalterii [Critical Arguments against Double-Entry Accounting]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriia 5. Ekonomika (Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Series 5. Economics), No. 4, 136–145.
88. Pyatov, M.L. (2014). Evoliutsiia metodologii bukhgalterskogo ucheta v ramkakh balansovoi modeli firmy (Evolution of Accounting Methodology Within the Balance Model of the Company). Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriia 5. Ekonomika (Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Series 5. Economics), Vol. 4, 56–75.
About Authors
Volkova Olga Nikolaevna – Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Saint Petersburg, Russia (<st1:metricconverter productid="190121, St" w:st="on">190121, St</st1:metricconverter>. Petersburg, Soyuza Pechatnikov street, 16); e-mail: volkova@rambler.ru.
For citation
Volkova O.N. The Frontiers of Academic Discipline: Institutional Approach (the Case of Accounting). Bulletin of Ural <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Federal</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>. Series Economics and Management, 2018, Vol. 17, No. 3, 504-531. DOI: 10.15826/vestnik.2018.17.3.022.
Article info
Received April 11, 2018; Accepted May 22, 2018.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2018.17.3.022
Download full text article:
~583 KB, *.pdf
(Uploaded
13.07.2018)
Created / Updated: 2 September 2015 / 20 September 2021
© Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education «Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N.Yeltsin»
Remarks?
select the text and press:
Ctrl + Enter
Portal design: Artsofte
Contact us
Rector's Office
Rector, Dr. Victor Koksharov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-45-03, e-mail: rector@urfu.ru
Vice-Rector for International Relations, Dr. Maxim Khomyakov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-46-27, e-mail: Maksim.Khomyakov@urfu.ru