Transparency fallacy

Stefan Gold and Pasi Heikkurinen

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2018, vol. 31, issue 1, 318-337

Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to focus on the research question of how stakeholder claims for transparency work as a means to support responsibility in the international supply chain. Design/methodology/approach - This theoretical study analyses the relationship between stakeholder claims for corporate transparency and responsible business in the global context, and develops a conceptual model for further theoretical and empirical work. Findings - The study finds that the call for corporate transparency is insufficient as a means to increase responsibility within international supply chains. The erroneous belief that stakeholder claims for transparency will lead to responsible behaviour is identified as the “transparency fallacy”. The fallacy emerges from the denial of opacity in organisations and the blindness to the conditions of international supply chains (including complexity, distance, and resistance) that work against attempts to increase transparency. Research limitations/implications - Acknowledging the limits of the transparency mechanism in both management theory and practice is necessary in order to advance responsible business in the international arena. Being conceptual in nature, the generic limitations of the type of research apply. Practical implications - While acknowledging opacity, corporate managers and stakeholders should focus on changing the supply chain conditions to support responsible behaviour. This includes reducing complexity, distance, and resistance in the supply network. Originality/value - This study contests the commonly assumed link between corporate transparency and responsibility, and sheds light on the limits and unintended consequences of stakeholder attempts to impose transparency on business organisations.

Keywords: Accountability; Corporate communication; Transparency; Stakeholder; Supply chain; Corporate responsibility (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-06-2015-2088

DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-06-2015-2088

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal is currently edited by Prof James Guthrie and Prof Lee Parker

More articles in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().