Call for Papers
Call for Papers – Special Issue
Digital Transformation of Theory in the Administrative Sciences
Corresponding Guest Editor:
Steffen Roth: Full Professor of Management, La Rochelle Business School, France; Adjunct Professor of Economic Sociology, University of Turku, Finland
Jean-Sébastien Guy:Associate Professor of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Dalhousie University, Canada
Léo-Paul Dana: Full Professor of Entrepreneurship, Montpellier Business School, France
Harry F. Dahms: Full Professor of Sociology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, United States of America
If information systems emerged at the interface of computer science, management, and organization theory to specifically focus on the use of computers in management and organization (Hirschheim & Klein, 2012), then the field is a natural first choice to turn to for -expertise in and around the digital transformation of administrative sciences. Indeed, field of information systems has contributed substantially to our understanding of various managerial and organizational types of impact and side-effects resulting from digital trends as diverse and fundamental as the proliferation of the Internet, MIS, artificial intelligence, algorithmic finance, robotization, ubiquitous organization, social media, and¾last not least¾big data. Thus, the field has not only provided critical updates to established theories (Styhre, 2009; Utesheva, Simpson, & Cecez-Kecmanovic, 2016), but also built on established theories to generate its own efforts to theorize specific aspects of the interactions between information technology and administrative sciences (Hanseth, Aanestad, & Berg, 2004; Leonardi & Barley, 2008; Moura and Bispo, 2020; Thorseng & Grisot, 2017; Winner, 1996).
While it is perfectly legitimate to stress the importance of both related endeavours and the considerable ensuing benefits, we also must insist that theories of digital transformation ought not be confused with the digital transformation of theories. Although the latter-the digital transformation of theories-would be an obvious option for the former-theories of digital transformation-there is still surprisingly little ambition to digitally transform theories of administrative sciences. Nor does it help that the topical transformation currently is reflects advances in the use of computational research methods which largely remain limited confronting theories with data, rather than the theorizing itself. Thus, the standard approach to theorizing continues to be the analogue moderation of interactions, conflicts, convergences and complementarity between two or more theories, preferably in the form of written natural language texts. This approach sustains situations where, e.g., digital decision support systems for decades have been standard topics of theories of administrative sciences, while simultaneously rarely being used for theory debugging or design. Texts forms that have been in use for centuries or millennia-such as conversation, allegory, and memoir-provide another example, as they are being put forth as promising alternative genres in information systems research (see Avital, Mathiassen, & Schultze, 2017), even though it has been firmly established that digitization represents a veritable challenge for traditional genres and theories (Askehave & Ellerup, 2005). By contrast, our special issue does not seek to advance theories of the digital transformation, but rather the digital transformation of theories, with the specific focus being on theories of administrative sciences. Thus, we may ask whether and how classical and contemporary theories can be translated from natural into programming languages (Guy, 2019; Roth, 2019), or how major trends in digital transformation challenge such theories (Roth et al., 2020; Sahut, Dana, andLaroche, 2020). Moreover, in the wake of Wikipedia’s undisputed success, we may ask whether a wikification of administrative knowledge in significant ways influences the process of theory development, whether the social media aspects of academic publishing have affected the way titles, abstracts, or the theories themselves are being designed, and whether these influences are culture dependent (Jemielniak & Wilamowski, 2017). Additionally, the emergence of new tools for collaborative editing may have had an impact not only on the process of academic writing, but also on its very outcome.
Manuscripts that address general or specific aspects of the digital transformation of theories of administrative sciences (and other related fields, such as organization studies, sociology, history, or philosophy) are particularly welcome, as well as manuscripts that address the following non-exclusive list of questions:
- Digital theoretical languages: What are suitable programming languages for a digital transformation of management and organization theory? Are there particularly promising and informative constellations of natural and formal languages, in general, or programming languages, in particular?
- Coding and alternative forms of programming: What are sources, codes, and alternative forms of programming that might be useful for the digital transformation of management and organization research?
- Critical updates: What are the most critical updates to be installed on 21st-century theory platforms?
- Great resets or incremental improvements: Do we need a Great Reset of theories of administrative sciences, or is our existing theoretical fund sufficiently robust and adaptable to enable us to cope with the major (change) management issues of the 21st century?
- Theory debugging: How might we use conventional debuggers and similar or alternative tools to test and debug existing – or to facilitate the – design(s) of future theory programmes?
- Digital reverse engineering: Reverse theory engineering as practice for theory learning and new theory design?
- Digital abduction: How could digitization facilitate more speculative forms of reasoning and theorizing?
- Big data, grand theory: How does big data transform the conditions and prospects for large-scale theorizing in management, organization, and society?
- Computer love: Which management and organization theory programmes have an inherent “elective affinity” with digital topics and programme architectures? What could be roles – and where could be sites – for intuition, emotion, and (hidden) desire in digitally transformed theories?
- Artificial intelligence and digital virtuosity: Is there a place in digitally transformed organizations and societies for interactive figures, dynamic concepts, and magical moments, such as double contingency, ambiguity, paradox, oscillation, or ingenuity?
- Social networking: To what extent does the imperative to propagate the results through the social media and memetization of science affect the shape of management and organization theories?
- Open collaboration: How are the open collaboration tools affecting the content of academic output?
- Hypertextuality: Does hypertextuality create or support the emergence of new forms of organization and management theories?
- Wikification: How does Wikipedia influence the emergence of new organization and management theories?
- Gamification: What are digital tools for and trends in a serious or a simply playful gamification of management and organization theory?
- Creative theory destruction: Are there any creative-destructive digital tools that are prone to use for the purpose of theory re-/design?
- Hacking: What can (particularly heterodox) theorists learn from hackers and digital pirates I the interest of moving beyond brute force attacks (#problematization) on established theory programmes and platforms? Are there options for side channel attacks between otherwise incongruent or auto-immune theory programmes? How can we imagine phishing for complements to traditional theories of management and organization?
Manuscript submission is open from 01 April to 01 October 2021. Manuscripts must constitute original research and comply with the Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences’ author guidelines. This special issue is supported by members and convenors of dedicated tracks at the EURAM 2021 conference in Montréal, the International Social Theory Consortium, the Humanistic Management Network conference, and the Niklas Luhmann conference series at the Inter-University Center Dubrovnik. Membership or participation in these networks or events is not a prerequisite for contributions to this special issue.
Askehave, I. and Ellerup Nielsen, A. (2005) ‘Digital genres: a challenge to traditional genre theory’, Information Technology & People, 18(2), 120-141.
Avital, M., Mathiassen, L., & Schultze, U. (2017). Alternative genres in information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 26(3), 240-247.
Guy, J. S. (2019). Digital technology, digital culture and the metric/nonmetric distinction. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 55-61.
Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M. and Berg, M. (2004) ‘Guest editors’ introduction: Actor-network theory and information systems. What’s so special?’, Information Technology & People, 17(2), 116-123.
Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (2012). A glorious and not-so-short history of the information systems field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(4), 188.
Jemielniak, D., & Wilamowski, M. (2017). Cultural Diversity of Quality of Information on Wikipedias. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, DOI: 10.1002/asi.23901.
Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2008). Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Information and Organization, 18(3), 159-176.
Moura, E. O. D., & Bispo, M. D. S. (2020). Sociomateriality: Theories, methodology, and practice. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, 37(3), 350-365.
Roth, S. (2019). Digital transformation of social theory. A research update. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 88-93.
Roth, S., Schwede, P., Valentinov, V., Pérez-Valls, M., & Kaivo-Oja, J. (2020). Harnessing big data for a multifunctional theory of the firm. European Management Journal, 38(1), 54-61.
Sahut, J. M., Dana, L. P., & Laroche, M. (2020). Digital innovations, impacts on marketing, value chain and business models: An introduction. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, 37(1), 61-67.
Styhre, A. (2009). The cinematic mode of organizing: Media and the problem of attention in organization theory. Information and Organization, 19(1), 47-58.
Thorseng, A. A. and Grisot, M. (2017) ‘Digitalization as institutional work: a case of designing a tool for changing diabetes care’, Information Technology & People, 30(1), 227-243.
Utesheva, A., Simpson, J. R., & Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2016). Identity metamorphoses in digital disruption: a relational theory of identity. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(4), 344-363.
Winner, L. (1996). Who will we be in cyberspace? The Information Society, 12(1), 63-72.
Steffen Roth is Full Professor of Management at the La Rochelle Business School, France, and Adjunct Professor of Economic Sociology at the University of Turku, Finland. He holds a Habilitation in Economic and Environmental Sociology awarded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University, and Research; a PhD in Sociology from the University of Geneva; and a PhD in Management from the Chemnitz University of Technology. He is the field editor for social systems theory of Systems Research and Behavioral Science. The journals his research has been published in include Journal of Business Ethics, Ecological Economics, Administration and Society, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Journal of Organizational Change Management, European Management Journal, Journal of Cleaner Production, and Futures. His ORCID profile is available at orcid.org/0000-0002-8502-601X.
Jean-Sébastien Guy is Associate Professor in the department of sociology and social anthropology at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. He has previously published in Current Sociology, Canadian Journal of Sociology, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Current Perspectives in Social Theory, European Journal of Social Theory and International Review of Sociology. He has recently published a book on the distinction between metric and nonmetric in sociology.
Léo-Paul Dana is a graduate of McGill University and HEC-Montreal. He began lecturing at Concordia University in 1984, taught at McGill from 1992 to 1997 and subsequently at INSEAD. He served as Expert Witness for the Government of Canada House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport and later as Senior Advisor to the World Association for Small and Medium Enterprises with United Nations advisory status. Formerly tenured at the University of Canterbury, he is full professor of entrepreneurship at Montpellier Business School. He has an extensive research background studying entrepreneurship in different cultures and has produced 45 books and 295 articles appearing in a variety of journals including: Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice; International Business Review, International Small Business Journal, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of World Business, Small Business Economics, and Technological Forecasting and Social Change. His biography appears annually in the Canadian Who’s Who (published by the University of Toronto Press). Current research interests: cultural capital; methodology, wine.
Harry F. Dahms is Full Professor of Sociology, co-director of the Center for the Study of Social Justice, and co-chair of the Committee on Social Theory at the University of Tennessee, USA. Dahms’s primary research and teaching areas are theoretical sociology (social, sociological, and critical theory), economic sociology, globalization, social inequality, and social justice. He is the editor of Current Perspectives in Social Theory, and director of the International Social Theory Consortium (ISTC). His research was published in such journals as Sociological Theory, Critical Sociology, Basic Income Studies, Bulletin of Science, Technology, & Society, Fast Capitalism, Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, and numerous edited volumes.
Call for Papers – Special Issue
The Impact of Big Data on Decision-Making, Processes and Organizational Change
Jean-Michel SAHUT, IDRAC Business School (FR)
Emmanuel FRAGNIERE, HES-SO Valais-Wallis, University of Applied Science of Western Switzerland (CH)
Mastering and managing the abundant flow of information known as “Big Data” today represents a real challenge for organizations (Wamba et al., 2017). Big Data is one of the most popular topics across a wide range of academic disciplines, industry sectors, and business functions, and widely influences organizations and society in general. Moreover, Big Data has high-level operational and strategic potential in terms of business value creation and competitive advantage (Mikalef et al., 2020). Proper integration of the large volume of structured and unstructured data enables managers to obtain easy access to useful information, improve their decision-making, and foster innovations to ultimately develop a competitive advantage.
Big Data can be used to predict consumer behaviour and adjust marketing strategies. More precisely, it can be used in the following ways:
- for companies to get to know their customers better and gain a deeper understanding of their needs in order to improve consumer engagement and loyalty by offering them tailor-made offers (Park, 2019),
- to assess the risk of potential clients in terms of credit or insurance (van Thiel & van Raaij, 2019),
- to better understand branding issues (Shirdastian et al., 2019),
- to predict consumer needs and expectations and estimate potential sales. For example, Amazon conducts targeted email campaigns to propose products to people who have made a recent purchase or search. Boone et al. (2018) show how the quantity and quality of user‐generated Facebook data can be used to enhance product forecasts, and improve out‐of‐sample forecast errors,
- to co-create products. Evidence from the findings of Acharya et al. (2018) suggests that knowledge-based interactions between customers and the salesforce in fashion retailing organizations form the core of knowledge co-creation. Their results have revealed that Big Data can indeed support knowledge co-creation, which can in turn effectively lead to evidence-based, successful and efficient decision-making and can strengthen profitability,
- to adjust prices in real time. Big Data enable automatic price calculation for revenue management based on changes in demand, competition and consumer profiles (Antonio et al., 2019).
- to highlight stakeholder insights so that more effective communication strategies can be implemented (Wiencierz & Röttger, 2017),
- to better understand the end-user consumer experience and the problems encountered in product use: condition of use, deviation of use, damage to products, guarantees, fraud (Zhou et al., 2020), etc.
Big Data also improves production, distribution and logistics within companies. For example, Big Data enables the identification of optimal facility locations and the distribution processes of an international manufacturing network to meet the demand of global markets (Mishra & Singh, 2020). However, using Big Data may lead to some problems and risks due to the organizational changes it induces. There is a high risk of “organizational myopia” due to the radical transformation caused by operating in data mode, placing data at the heart of the corporate strategy and business models. It is a real mutation, a change of DNA, which impacts the whole business process and even redefines their ways of working, communicating and interacting. Moreover, Big Data has numerous security and ethical issues for managers, including its impact on consumer equality, diversity, autonomy, well-being, and protection. Accordingly, Big Data can be mobilized for a variety of purposes, some of which may have positive outcomes for the community, specifically in healthcare sectors (Obermeyer and Emanuel, 2016) and social policy (Blumenstock et al., 2015). In healthcare, Big Data introduces new opportunities for medical practitioners and patients with the improvement of medical treatments and patient quality of life. However, ethical issues relative to the personal privacy involved in healthcare data acquisition, storage, and processing have become predominant in some countries (Clim et al., 2019). The list of dilemmas created by advances in Big Data is long (Ludwin and Murray, 2017).
The question thus arises of how companies, public institutions, stakeholders, etc. should resolve such dilemmas. Indeed, the new and complex field of Big Data offers numerous opportunities for research and dialogue among researchers and practitioners. Therefore, this special issue focuses on impacts of Big Data, and especially (more precisely) how it affects access to new information, and knowledge sharing and transfer, in order to enable decision-making, strengthen innovation and ensure successful transformations within organizations.
Suggested Topics (non-exhaustive list)
- Using Big Data to analyse customer behavior and behavioral intentions
- Big Data and marketing strategies
- Big Data and intra- and inter- company knowledge sharing
- Using Big Data to support fast prototyping and Lean start-up
- Big Data and distribution strategies
- Big Data and logistical processes
- Big Data and healthcare issues
- Big Data and organizational change
- Big Data and social media
- Big Data and collective intelligence
- Big Data and artificial intelligence
- Big Data and ethical issues
- Big Data and governance
Details of Paper Submission and Due Date
The authors are encouraged to present their paper at the “Digital, Innovation, Entrepreneurship & Financing” (DIF 2021) international conference which will be held on June 28th-30th, 2021 in Lyon (France). For details please check: https://dif2021.sciencesconf.org
Interested contributors should preferably (ideally) submit full papers in PDF format in English, but extended abstracts may also be considered if they show considerable potential, no later than March15, 2021 via:
- email to Prof. JM. Sahut, email@example.com
- the submission platform of the DIF 2021 conference: https://dif2021.sciencesconf.org
In a second step, after the conference, the selected papers will be submitted to the CJAS submission platform, no later than July 31, 2021.
Acharya, A., Singh, S.K., Pereira, V. & Singh, P. (2018). Big data, knowledge co-creation and decision making in fashion industry. International Journal of Information Management, 42, 90-101.
Antonio, N., de Almeida, A., & Nunes, L. (2019). Big Data in Hotel Revenue Management: Exploring Cancellation Drivers to Gain Insights Into Booking Cancellation Behavior. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 60(4), 298–319.
Blumenstock,J. , Cadamuro, G., On, R. (2015). Predicting poverty and wealth from mobile phone metadata. Science, 350(6264): 1073-1076.
Boone, T., Ganeshan, R., Hicks, R.L., & Sanders, N. R. (2018). Can Google Trends Improve Your Sales Forecast? Production & Operations Management, 27(10), 1770–1774.
Clim, A., Zota, R.D., & Tinica, G. (2019). Big Data in home healthcare: A new frontier in personalized medicine. Medical emergency services and prediction of hypertension risks. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 12(3), 241–249.
Ludwin, S.K., & Murray, T.J. (2017). Dilemmas in medical ethics in the age of big data. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 23(10), 1306–1308.
Mikalef, P., Krogstie, J., Pappas, I.O., & Pavlou, P. (2020). Exploring the relationship between big data analytics capability and competitive performance: The mediating roles of dynamic and operational capabilities. Information & Management, 57(2), 103-169.
Mishra, S., & Singh, S.P. (2020). Distribution network model using big Data in an international environment. Science of the Total Environment, 707, N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135549
Obermeyer, Z., & Emanuel, E.J. (2016). Predicting the Future – Big Data, Machine Learning, and Clinical Medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375(13): 1216-1219.
Park, E. (2019). Motivations for customer revisit behavior in online review comments: Analyzing the role of user experience using big Data approaches. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 51, 14–18.
Shirdastian, H., Laroche, M., & Richard, M.O. (2019). Using Big Data analytics to study brand authenticity sentiments: The case of Starbucks on Twitter. International Journal of Information Management, 48, 291–307.
van Thiel, D., & van Raaij, W.F. (2019). Artificial intelligence credit risk prediction: An empirical study of analytical artificial intelligence tools for credit risk prediction in a digital era. Journal of Risk Management in Financial Institutions, 12(3), 268–286.
Wamba, S.F., Gunasekaran, A., Akter, S., Ren, S.J.F., Dubey, R., & Childe, S.J. (2017). Big data analytics and firm performance: Effects of dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 356-365.
Wiencierz, C., & Röttger, U. (2017). The use of Big Data in corporate communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 22(3), 258–272.
Zhou, F., Lim, M.K., He, Y., & Pratap, S. (2020). What attracts vehicle consumers’ buying: A Saaty scale-based VIKOR (SSC-VIKOR) approach from after-sales textual perspective? Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(1), 57–78.
Special Issue: Government Accounting, Auditing and Accountability: a Canadian Perspective
Extended Submission deadline: June 30, 2021
Guest Editor: Ron Baker, Associate Professor (Accounting) University of Guelph
Aims and Scope
Government accounting and reporting protects the public interest by helping to hold governments accountable and to manage public money (Chan 2003). In 2018, The Public Sector Accounting Board of Canada released its Statement of Concepts for a revised conceptual framework for the Canadian public sector. The document presents public sector accounting concepts, principles, guidelines, objectives and definitions. This document is the culmination of a considerable amount of work done by the Board and its predecessors since the formation of committee in 1981 to develop government accounting standards. Prior to this, governments in Canada followed their own, often diverse, practices (Baker and Rennie, 2018). In the 1970s, the Auditor General could not provide an opinion on the financial statements of the federal government of Canada due to a lack of standards (ibid). A commentary on the 2017-2018 financial audits, however, noted that the Federal Government’s financial statements had received the 20th clean audit in a row (Office of the Auditor General, 2018).
Yet accounting challenges remain for all levels of government in Canada. For example, the Auditor General of Manitoba identified serious issues with respect to the accounting practices of the provincial government (Auditor General Manitoba, 2018). In Ontario, the Auditor General noted that in the case of The Fair Hydro Plan, legislated accounting did not meet public sector accounting standards (CPA Ontario, 2018). This issue also reached the popular media with the Globe and Mail newspaper publishing an articled entitled “Bad books: How Ontario’s new hydro accounting could cost taxpayers billions” (Globe and Mail, 2018). The benefits of adopting accrual accounting has been questioned (Pollanen & Loiselle‐Lapointe, 2012) as has the independence of state auditors (Gendron et al., 2001).
Internationally, there is recognition for the need for effective accounting standards for governments. Developments in government accounting standards and practices has been characterized as a “global revolution in government accounting” (Chan, 2008 p. 1). The International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) was established “…to serve the public interest by developing high-quality accounting standards and other material for use by public sector entities around the world in the preparation of general purpose financial reports” (International Federation of Accountants, nd). The development of these standards is intended to “…enhance the quality and transparency of public sector financial reporting by providing better information for public sector financial management, accountability and decision making (ibid). While Canada supports and participates in this initiative, it remains committed to its own public sector accounting standards.
The aim of this special issue is to contribute to the dialogue on government accounting through studies of the Canadian perspective on government accounting, auditing and accountability. Studies at any level of government (federal, provincial or municipal) are welcome. Studies from outside of Canada are also welcome given that many of the issues are similar and that these studies could inform practices in Canada as we hope studies from the Canadian perspective can inform the broader, global community.
- Government auditors as agents of change
- The development and implementation of government accounting standards
- Accrual accounting for government
- Financial reporting by governments, including presenting and disclosing relevant information
- Government accounting in the media (i.e. the use of accounting information by governments, opposition parties, political commentators, etc.)
- Use of accounting information for decision-making
- Performance measurements
- Performance and value for money audits
- Budgeting and financial management of government organizations
- Government auditing standards and practices
- Natural Capital including recognizing, measuring, and exchanging of public lands, forests, fresh water, lakes, and wetlands
- Sustainability, including measuring the impact of carbon footprint on governments
- Accounting and reporting for Crown Agencies and other public entities
- Accounting for public/private partnerships
- Public sector specific intangibles, including whether and how to account for air and sea rights, electromagnetic spectrum
- Use of public accounts in assessing accountability, including use of actual performance results along with the budget
- Environmental assessment of the prevalence and types of non-traditional pension plans in the public sector in Canada and internationally
“The Public Sector Accounting Board welcomes this call for papers. Research on the accounting and accountability in Canadian and international public sector gives us the evidence we need to support our decisions – from developing Canadian specific standards to influencing the development International Public Sector Accounting Standards. We are committed to evidence-informed decision making, with research on these topics able to directly inform standard setting and other guidance for the public sector in Canada.”
Charles-Antoine St-Jean, Chair of Public Sector Accounting Board
Submissions that are both empirical and theoretical in nature are welcome. We are particularly interested in studies that can inform and impact accounting practice and standard setting. Prospective authors are encouraged to direct any enquiries to the guest editor at firstname.lastname@example.org
Submission deadline: June 30, 2021. Earlier submissions are encouraged
Auditor General Manitoba, 2018. Auditor General Highlights Concerns with Governments 2017/2018 Financial Statements – News Release, September 28, 2018. Available at: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-deficit-lower-finance-1.4842239 (accessed May 5, 2019).
Baker, R., & Rennie, M. D. (2018). The creation and acceptance of public sector accounting standards in Canada. Accounting History, 23(3), 407-432.
Chan, J. L. (2003). Government accounting: an assessment of theory, purposes and standards. Public Money & Management, 23(1), 13-20.
Chan, J. L. (2008). International public sector accounting standards: conceptual and institutional issues. The Harmonization of Government, 21, 1-15.
CPA Ontario (2018). Presentation by The Auditor General of Ontario, CPA Ontario Public Sector Accounting Symposium, June 20, 2018. Available at: https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/tedrogersschool/cpao-symposium/2018-CPA-Ontario-Symposium-Office-of-the-Auditor-General.pdf (accessed May 5, 2019).
Gendron, Y., Cooper, D. J., & Townley, B. (2001). In the name of accountability-State auditing, independence and new public management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 14(3), 278-310.
Globe and Mail (2018). Bad books: How Ontario’s new hydro accounting could cost taxpayers billions, May 3, 2018. Available at: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/investigations/article-bad-books-how-ontarios-new-hydro-accounting-could-cost-taxpayers/ (accessed May 5, 2019).
International Federation of Accountants (nd). International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board: Terms of Reference. Available at: http://www.ifac.org/node/1503/terms-reference (accessed May 5, 2019).
Office of the Auditor General (2018). Commentary on the 2017-2018 Financial Audits. Available at: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201810_00_e_43161.html (accessed May 5, 2019).
Pollanen, R., & Loiselle‐Lapointe, K. (2012). Accounting reform in the government of Canada: Exploratory evidence on accrual accounting adoption and impact. Financial Accountability & Management, 28(4), 359-377.