TY - JOUR
T1 - Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting
T2 - Insights from Erving Goffman
AU - Solomon, Jill F.
AU - Solomon, Aris
AU - Joseph, Nathan L.
AU - Norton, Simon D.
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank Peter Miller, editor, Accounting, Organizations & Society, for his support and suggestions throughout the reviewing process as well as the two anonymous reviewers whose constructive comments have led to a far improved paper. Thanks to Thomas Scheff, (University of California, Santa Barbara), who provided suggestions and a number of his own works on Goffman to guide us in rewriting this paper. We are grateful to delegates from the British Accounting Association conference (April 2009) in Dundee, and the European Accounting Association annual conference (May 2009) in Tampere, Finland, for their constructive comments on the development of this paper. Special thanks go to David Collison, Cameron Graham, Michael John Jones, Michelle Rodrigue, Tony Tinker and Thomas Thijssens. We also thank the delegates at the Financial Reporting and Business Communications conference (July 2009), Cardiff, who commented on the paper, especially Barry Morse and Maurice Pendlebury. We are grateful to accounting and finance faculty at Swansea University, School of Business and Economics who commented on this paper when it was delivered for their staff seminar series in October 2009, especially Mike Adams, Deb Lewis and Dylan Thomas. Thanks also to Richard Laughlin and Simon Tan (King’s College London) for their insightful comments on this paper. We would also like to thank students taking Investment Management at King’s College, London (Spring 2010) for their ideas arising from discussions on theoretical aspects of this paper. Thanks to faculty at the Turku School of Economics, Finland, who commented on an earlier draft of this paper when we presented it to the accounting department in August 2011. We are also grateful to faculty who attended our seminar presentation of this paper to the School of Economics, Business and Law at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, in August 2011, especially Barbara Czarniawska, Inga-Lill Johansson, Kristina Jonäll, Thomas Polesie and Gunnar Rimmel. We are grateful to the Nuffield Foundation for the financial support in carrying out this research. We are also grateful to Sally Filson for her assistance in interviewing the participants for this research and for transcribing the interviews.
PY - 2013/4
Y1 - 2013/4
N2 - This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees' utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors' shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the 'performers' (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.
AB - This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees' utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors' shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the 'performers' (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84877148337&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.aos.2013.01.001
DO - 10.1016/j.aos.2013.01.001
M3 - Journal Article
AN - SCOPUS:84877148337
SN - 0361-3682
VL - 38
SP - 195
EP - 213
JO - Accounting, Organizations and Society
JF - Accounting, Organizations and Society
IS - 3
ER -