CRITICAL THOUGHT AND BRAVE NEW ACCOUNTINGS

Öz

On one hand, accounting is influenced by societies, organizations, and managements, but it has an
effect on social change as a facilitator or an obstacle, on the other. For accounting to secure full accountability
to the society and nature, it must first be freed from the hegemony of financialisation. This
needs to acknowledge the fact that financial capitalism is not sustainable and it is possible to construct
another world which is not under the control of financial capital. Otherwise, financial/financialized
accounting has metamorphosed into pseudo social, environmental and green accountings. However,
this kind of accountings could not regulate and create more transparent organizations in conformity
with the public and nature’s interests and go beyond public relations and propaganda studies of bureaucratic,
hierarchical, monopolistic and oligopolistic organizations. Critical thought argues that before
or simultaneously with constructing brave new accountings, brave new societies, organizations, and
managements have to be formed, which requires both technical and social, political, historical dimensions
to be taken into account. While literally imagining social, green and humanistic accountings,
more and more time and effort should be used within the unlimited scope of research extending from
structuralist and humanistic paradigms and practices which place as much importance on the humans’
power for making history as existing social and organizational structures, since in the final analysis all
social structures including organizations and accounting are human artifacts and can be changed by
the humans’ free will.

ELEŞTİREL DÜŞÜNCE VE CESUR YENİ MUHASEBELER

Öz

Muhasebe uygulamaları bir yandan toplumlardan, örgütlerden, yönetimlerden etkilenmekte, diğer
yandan daha adaletli bir toplum, daha eşitlikçi örgüt ve daha demokratik yönetim oluşumunu hızlandırarak
ya da engelleyerek sosyal değişimi etkilemektedir. Muhasebenin topluma ve doğaya tam hesap
verilebilirliği sağlaması için öncelikle finansallaşmanın boyunduruğundan kurtulması gerekmektedir.
Bu ise finansal kapitalizmin sürdürülebilir olmadığını ve finansal sermayenin kontrolünde olmayan
başka bir dünya kurmanın mümkün olduğunu kabul etmeyi gerektirmektedir. Tersi durumda finansal/
finansallaşmış muhasebe sözde sosyal, çevresel, yeşil muhasebelere dönüşme becerisini göstermektedir.
Ancak bu tür muhasebeler örgütlerin toplum ve doğa yararına saydamlaştırılması ve düzenlenmesini
mümkün kılamamakta ve bürokratik, hiyerarşik, tekelci ve oligopolcü örgütlerin halkla ilişkiler
ve propaganda çalışmaları olmaktan öteye geçememektedir. Eleştirel düşünce, cesur yeni muhasebeler
yaratmadan önce ya da böyle bir çabayla eşzamanlı olarak cesur yeni toplumlar, örgütler ve yönetimler
yaratmak gerektiğini, bunların da hem teknik, hem de sosyal, politik, tarihsel boyutların dikkate
alınmasını gerektireceğini savunmaktadır. Gerçek anlamda sosyal, yeşil ve insancıl muhasebeler
tasarlarken mevcut sosyal ve örgütsel yapılar kadar insanların tarih yapma gücünü de dikkate alan
yapısalcı ve hümanist düşünce ve uygulamalar arasında uzanan geniş araştırma alanında daha çok
zaman ve emek harcamak gerekmektedir, çünkü son tahlilde örgütler ve muhasebe de dahil tüm sosyal
yapılar insan ürünü olmakta ve insanın özgür iradesiyle değiştirilebilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal ve Örgütsel Gerçeklik
• Yönetim Kontrolü
• Eleştirel ve Anaakım Muhasebe
• Ortodoks ve Karşı Düşünceler.

Kaynakça

1. Armstrong, P. (1987). “The Rise of Accounting Controls in British Capitalist Enterprises”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.12, No.5, pp.415-36.
2. Armstrong, P. (1991). “Contradiction and Social Dynamics in the Capitalist Agency Relationship”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.16, No. 1, pp. 1-25.
3. Berry, T. (1989). “Authority, Accountability and Accounting”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.63-78). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
4. Black, J. ve Neathey, F. (1989). “Labour and Deskilling: A Critique of Managerial Control in the Glass Industry”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.161-81). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
5. Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A.G. (1985). “Accounting in its Social Context: Towards a History of Value Added in the United Kingdom”. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 10, 381-413.
6. Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A. Hughes, J. ve Nahapiet, J. (1980). “The Roles of Accounting in Organizations and Society”. Accounting, Organizations and Society. pp.Vol5, No.1, 5-21.
7. Burrell, G ve Morgan, G. (2016). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. New York: Routledge.
8. Capps, T, Hopper, T., Mouritsen, J., Cooper, D. ve Lowe, T. (1989). “Accounting in the Production and Reproduction of Culture”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.217-44). London: Macmillan Press Limited.

9. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T. ve Puxty, T. (1989). “Introduction”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.3-7). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
10. Cooper, D., Puxty, T., Lowe, T. ve Willmott, H (1989). “The Accounting Profession, Corporatism and the State”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.245-70). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
11. Cooper, D.J. ve Sherer, M.J. (1984). “The Value of Corporate Accounting Reports: Arguments for a Political Economy of Accounting”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.9, No. 3/4, pp. 207-32.
12. Hines, R.D. (1989). “The Sociological Paradigm in Financial Accounting Research”. Accounting, Auditing, Accountability Journal, Vol.2, No.1.
13. Hopwood, A.G. (1985). “The Tale of a Committee that Never Reported: Disagreements on Intertwining Accounting with the Social”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.10, No. 3, pp. 361-77.
14. Hopwood, A.G. (1987). “The Archaeology of Accounting Systems”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.12, No.3, pp. 207-34.
15. Hopwood, A.G. (1989). “Accounting and the Pursuit of Social Interests”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.141-57). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
16. Knights, D. ve Collinson, D. (1987). “Disciplining the Shopfloor: A Comparison of the Disciplinary Effects of Managerial Psychology and Financial Accounting”. Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol.12, No.5, pp.457-77.
17. Knights, D. ve Roberts, J. (1982). “The Power of Organization or the Organization of Power?”. Organization Studies. 1982, 3/1:47-63.
18. Laughlin, R.C. (1987). “Accounting Systems in Organizational Contexts: A Case for Critical Theory”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.12, No.5, pp.479-502.
19. Laughlin, R.C. ve Puxty A.G. (1981). “The Decision-Usefulness Criterion: Wrong Card, Wrong Horse?”. The British Accounting Review. 43-87.
20. Lowe E.A. ve Mcinnes, A.J.M. (2007). “Control in Socio-Economic Organizations: A Rationale for the Design of Management Control Systems, (Section I). The Journal of Management Studies, 8(2):213-27.
21. Lowe, E.A. ve Tinker, A.M. (1977). “New Directions for Management Accounting”. Omega. The International Journal of Management Science, Vol.8, No.2.
22. Lowe, E.A. (1971). “On the Idea of A Management Control System: Integrating Accounting and Management Control”. Journal of Management Studies. Wiley Blackwell, Vol.8(1), pp.1-12.
23. Lowe, E.A. (1974). “Comments on Georgiou's the Goal Paradigm and Notes towards a Counter Paradigm”. Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol.19, No.2 .pp. 253-4.
24. Lowe, T. ve Puxty, T. (1989). “The Problems of a Paradigm: A Critique of the Prevailing Orthodoxy in Management Control”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.9-28). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
25. Lowe, T. ve Tinker, T. (1989). “Accounting as Social Science: Abstract versus Concrete Sources of Accounting Change”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.47-61). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
26. Merino, B.D. (1998). “Critical Theory and Accounting History: Challenges and Opportunities”. Critical Perspectives on Accounting. 9, 603-16.
27. Merino, B.D. ve Neimark, M.D. (1982). “Disclosure Regulation and Public Policy: A Sociohistorical Reappraisal”. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol.1, Issue 1, 33-57.
28. Merino, B.D., Mayper, A.G. ve Tolleson, T.D. (2010). “Neoliberalism, Deregulation and Sarbanes-Oxley: The Legitimation of a Failed Corporate Governance Model”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol.23 No.6, pp.774-92.
29. Neimark, M.D. (1995). “The selling of ethics: The ethics of business meets the business of ethics”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol.8 No.3, pp. 81-96.
30. O'Leary, T. (1985). “Observations on Corporate Financial Reporting in the Name of Politics”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.10, No.l, pp. 87-102.
31. Otley, D. (1989). “A Strategy for the Development of Theories in Management Control”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.27-45). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
32. Pettigrew, A.M. (1972). “Information Control as a Power Resource”. Sociology.pp.187-204. London: Sage Publications.
33. Power, M. (1992). “After Calculation? Reflections on Critique of Economic Reason by Andre Gorz”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.7, No.5, pp.477-99.
34. Puxty, A.G., Willmott, H.C., Cooper, D.J. ve Lowe, T. (1987). “Modes of Regulation in Advanced Capitalism: Locating Accountancy in Four Countries”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.12, No.3, pp.273-91.
35. Puxty, T, Chua, W.F., (1989). “Ideology, Rationality and the Management Control Process”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.115-39). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
36. Roberts, J. (1984). “The Moral Character of Management Practice”. Journal of Management Studies, 21, 3.
37. Roberts, J. (1989). “Authority or Domination: Alternative Possibilities for the Practice of Control”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.271-91). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
38. Roberts, J. ve Scapens, R. (1985). Comments on Georgiou's the Goal Paradigm and Notes towards a Counter Paradigm. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol.10, No.4. pp.443-56.
39. Robson, K. ve Cooper, D.J. (1989). “Power and Management Control”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss.79-114). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
40. Saravanamuthu, K. ve Tinker, T. (2003) “Politics of Managing: the Dialectic of Control”. Accounting, Organizations and Society 28 (2003) 37–64.
41. Sikka, P., Willmott, H., ve Lowe, T. (1989). “Guardians of Knowledge and Public Interest: Evidence and Issues of Accountability in the UK Accountancy Profession”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, pp. 47-71.
42. Tinker, T. (1991). “The accountant as partisan”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.16, 3, pp.297-310.
43. Tinker, T. ve Neimark, M.D. (1988).“The Struggle over Meaning in Accounting and Corporate Research: A Comparative Evaluation of Conservative and Critical Historiography”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, Vol 1. No 1. pp.55-74, New York: Routledge.
44. Yaşar, Ş. ve Yükçü, S. (2018). “Büyük Sorgulama: Muhasebe ve Şiddet İlişkisi”. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi. Özel Sayı. 20, ös15- ös32.
45. Willmott, H. (1989). “Autocritique”. Ed. Chua, W.F., Lowe, T., Puxty, T. Critical Perspectives in Management Control içinde (ss. 331-40). London: Macmillan Press Limited.
46. Willmott, H. (1993). “Strength is Ignorance; Slavery is Freedom: Managing Culture in Modern Organizations.” Journal of Management Studies. 30:4 1993, 515-50.