Management of the Impression of Legitimacy in Federal Universities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21118/apgs.v16i1.15704Abstract
Objective: To describe evidence of legitimacy impression management based on correctional data from the Management Reports (MR) of Brazilian Federal Universities (FU) from 2014 to 2016.
Theoretical Framework: The research uses the lens of Legitimacy theory.
Methodology: Document analysis of MRs was employed to code correctional disclosure variables of FUs, including quantitative and qualitative data on the integrity of MR information. Descriptive data of mean and standard deviation were generated for the variables. Additionally, the variable data was grouped into characteristic disclosure clusters. An envelopment analysis of the CGU-PAD system data generated efficiency clusters of administrative disciplinary proceedings (PAD). The variable distributions were subjected to difference tests between MR and efficiency clusters. Finally, a correspondence analysis was used to assess the independence of these clusters by variable.
Results: Part of the correctional disclosures presented isomorphic behavior. However, the detail of the correctional system was inversely related to the expulsion penalty disclosure. Additionally, greater publicity of the institution of acts contrasted with the opacity of authority when the processes were more efficient. In these two situations, the substantive legitimacy image materialized both in the publicity of punishment as well asw in more procedural efficiency. In the opposite direction, the exposure of the correctional system was associated with low procedural efficiency, characterizing it as a mechanism of symbolic management of the legitimacy image.
Originality: No previous studies were found on correctional transparency in universities under the Legitimacy approach.
Contributions: The research contributes to the literature by analyzing correctional disclosure as a practice of legitimacy image management. The study can support social control practices by suggesting means of confrontation between symbolic narratives and material practices.
Downloads
References
Archel, P., Husillos, J., Larrinaga, C., & Spence, C. (2009). Social disclosure, legitimacy theory and the role of the state. Accounting, auditing & accountability jornal, 22(8), 1284-1307. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570910999319
Bairral, M. A. D. C., Silva, A. H. C., & Alves, F. J. D. S. (2015). Transparência no setor público: uma análise dos relatórios de gestão anuais de entidades públicas federais no ano de 2010. Revista de Administração Pública, 49, 643-675.
https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612125158
Beuren, I. M., Hein, N., & Boff, M. L. (2011). Estratégias de legitimidade organizacional de Lindblom versus geração familiar gestora de empresas familiares. Revista Iberoamericana de Contabilidad de Gestión, 9 (17), 1-20.
Buisson, M. L. (2008). Légitimité et sciences de gestion: état des lieux et perspectives. Humanisme et entreprise, (4), 29-57.
Burns, J., & Scapens, R. W. (2000). Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional framework. Management accounting research, 11 (1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1999.0119
Castaldelli Júnior, E. (2010). Divulgação de desempenho de órgãos públicos: uma Análise de Conteúdo dos relatórios de gestão do Tribunal de Contas da União [Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade de São Paulo].
Castro, C. J. (2016). Análise da aderência dos relatórios de gestão às boas práticas de governança aplicadas ao setor público: um estudo em cinco Universidades Públicas Federais [Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade Federal Fluminense].
Controladoria Geral da União. (2018). Relatórios de punições expulsivas. http://www.cgu.gov.br/assuntos/atividade-disciplinar/relatorios-de-punicoes-expulsivas.
Covaleski, M. A., Dirsmith, M. W., & Samuel, S. (1996). Managerial accounting research: the contributions of organizational and sociological theories. Journal of management accounting research, 8, 1-36.
Dantas, J. A., Zendersky, H. C., dos Santos, S. C., & Niyama, J. K. (2005). A dualidade entre os benefícios do disclosure e a relutância das organizações em aumentar o grau de evidenciação. Revista Economia & Gestão, 5 (11), 56-76.
Deegan, C. (2019). Legitimacy theory - Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 32 (8), 2307-2329. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3638
Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983?1997. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 15 (3), 312-343. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435861
Deegan, C., Rankin, M., &Voght, P. (2000). Firms' disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting forum 24 (1), 101-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6303.00031
Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures–a theoretical foundation. Accounting, auditing & accountability journal, 15 (3), 282-311.https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852
Dias Filho, J. M. (2007). Políticas de evidenciação contábil: um estudo do poder preditivo e explicativo da teoria da legitimidade. Anais do Encontro da Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração–EnANPAD, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil, 31.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific sociological review, 18 (1), 122-136. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388226
Franco, L. M. G., Rezende, D. A., Figueiredo, F. C., & do Nascimento, C. (2014). Nível de divulgação eletrônica da contabilidade pública dos municípios do Paraná no ambiente da Internet. Revista de Ciências da Administração, 16 (38), 140-153.http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2014v16n38p140
Gama, J. R., & Rodrigues, G. M. (2016). Transparência e acesso à informação: um estudo da demanda por informações contábeis nas universidades federais brasileiras. TransInformação, 28, 47-58.https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-08892016002800004
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1989). Corporate social reporting: a rebuttal of legitimacy theory. Accounting and business research, 19 (76), 343-352.https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.1989.9728863
Hresc, J., Riley, E., & Harris, P. (2018). Mining project's economic impact on local communities, as a social determinant of health: A documentary analysis of environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 72, 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2018.05.009
Hewlin, P. F. (2004). And the award for best actor goes to...: Facades of conformity in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 633-642. https://www.mcgill.ca/humanrights/files/humanrights/irndi-patricia_hewlin-facade_conformity.pdf
Kaplan, S. E., & Ruland, R. G. (1991). Positive theory, rationality and accounting regulation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2 (4), 361-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/1045-2354(91)90008-2
Kuruppu, S., Milne, M. & Tilt, C. (2019). Gaining, maintaining and repairing organisational legitimacy. When to report and when not to report. Accounting, Auditing &Accountability Journal, 32 (7), 2062-2087. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1282
Lehman, C. (1983). Stalemate in corporate social responsibility research. American accounting association public interest section.
Lindblom, C. K. (1994). The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. In Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, New York.
Liu, X. & Zhang, C. (2017). Corporate governance, social responsibility information disclosure, and enterprise value in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 1075-1084. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.102
Marcelli, S. (2013). Governança no setor público: diagnóstico das práticas de gestão da Polícia Federal à luz do estudo 13 do PSC/IFAC [Dissertação de Mestrado Fundação Getúlio Vargas].
Maurer, J. G. (Ed.). (1971). Readings in organization theory: Open-system approaches. Random House (NY).
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83 (2), 340-363.
Meza, L. A., Biondi Neto, L., Mello, J. C. C. B. S. D., & Gomes, E. G. (2005). ISYDS-Integrated System for Decision Support (SIAD-Sistema Integrado de Apoio à Decisão): a software package for data envelopment analysis model. Pesquisa Operacional, 25, 493-503.https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-74382005000300011
Miles, R. E., & Cameron, S. (1982). Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Nistor, C. S., Stefanescu, C. A., Oprisor, T. & Crisan, A. R. (2019). Approaching public sector transparency through na integrated reporting benchmark. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting. 17 (2), 249-270.
Nord, W. R. (1980). The Study of Organizations through a Resource—Exchange Paradigm. Social exchange: Advances in theory and research, 119-139.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3087-56
Ocasio, W., Pozner, J., & Milner, D. (2020). Varieties of Political Capital and Power in Organizations: A Review and Integrative Framework. Academy of Management Annals, 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0062
O’Connor, P., López, E. M., O’ Hagan, C., Wolffram, A., Aye, M., Chizzola, V., Mich, O., Apostolov, G., Topuzova, I., Sa?lamer, G. Tan, M. & Ça?layan H. (2020) Micro-political practices in higher education: a challenge to excellence as a rationalizing myth? Critical Studies in Education, 61 (2), 195-211,https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2017.1381629
O’Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15 (3), 344-371.https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435870
Pessôa, I. D. S. (2013). Determinantes da transparência das universidades federais brasileiras. [Dissertação de Mestrado em Gestão Pública – Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória].
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in Organizations. Pitman, Marshfield, MA.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.
Richardson, A. J. (1985). Symbolic and substantive legitimation in professional practice. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2307/3340349
Sari, T., Cahaya, F. R. & Joseph, C. (2021). Coercive Pressures and Anti?corruption Reporting: The Case of ASEAN Countries. Journal of Business Ethics. 171, 495-511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04452-1
Scapens, R. W. (1990). Researching management accounting practice: the role of case study methods. The British Accounting Review, 22 (3), 259-281.https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-8389(90)90008-6
Scapens, R. W. (1994). Never mind the gap: towards an institutional perspective on management accounting practice. Management accounting research, 5 (3-4), 301-321.https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1994.1019
Scholtes, E. (2012). Transparency, symbol of a drifting government. In Transatlantic Conference on Transparency Research. Utrecht, The Netherlands
Scott, W. R. (1995). Introduction: institutional theory and organizations. The institutional construction of organizations, (pp.11-23). Sage Publications.
Silva, C. E. T. D., Vasconcelos, A. L. F. D. S., & Silva, M. N. D. (2013). Prestação de contas: a evidenciação dos conteúdos informativos no relatório de gestão da UFPE. In Anais do Colóquio Internacional sobre Gestão Universitária nas Américas (12). Buenos Aires. https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/114865
Souza, G. J. (2015). Avaliação do nível de confiabilidade das informações do Relatório de Gestão das entidades públicas. Revista Brasileira de Contabilidade, 214, 58-67.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of management review, 20 (3), 571-610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Tilling, M. V. (2004). Refinements in legitimacy theory in social and environmental accounting. School of Commerce, Flinders University. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2004.9651716
Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative science quarterly, 22-39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392383
Vaccaro, A. (2012). To Pay or Not to Pay? Dynamic Transparency and the Fight Against the Mafia’s Extortionists. Journal of Business Ethics, 106, 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-011-1050-3
Walker, E. T., & McCarthy, J. D. (2010). Legitimacy, strategy, and resources in the survival of community-based organizations. Social problems, 57(3), 315-340. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2010.57.3.315
Zeimers, G., Anagnostopoulos, C., Zintz, T., & Willem, A. (2019). Organisational learning for corporate social responsibility in sport organisations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19 (1), 80–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2018.1546752
Zorzal, L. (2015). Transparência das informações das Universidades Federais: estudo dos relatórios de gestão à luz dos princípios de boa governança na administração pública federal. [Tese de Doutorado, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, DF].
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
Authors who publish in the Journal of Public Administration and Management Social (APGS) must agree to the following terms:
• Authors retain copyright and give the journal the rightof first publication with the work simultaneously licensed underthe Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting sharingwork with the recognition of the work of authorship and publicationstarting in this journal.
• Authors have authorization to assume additional contractsseparately for non-exclusive distribution of the work releasepublished in this journal (eg. publish in institutional repositories oras a book), with an acknowledgment of its publicationstarting this journal.
• Authors are permitted and encouraged to post theirwork online (eg, in institutional repositories or on their websitepersonnel) at any point before or during the submission process, asit can generate criticism and helpful suggestions, as well asincrease the impact and citation of published work.
• Authors reserve the right of the editors of this journal to make in theoriginal works, alterations of normative order, orthographic andgrammatical, aiming at complying with its editorial policy and keep thedefault cult of language, respecting, however, the authors' style.
• Authors assume exclusive responsibility for their opinionsgiven in the articles published in this journal.
