ABSTRACT
This chapter sets out to identify patterns at play in boardroom discussions around the design and adoption of an accountability system in a nonprofi t organisation. To this end, it contributes to the scarce literature showing the backstage of management accounting systems (Berry, 2005), investment policy determining (Kreander, Beattie, & Mcphail, 2009; Kreander, Mcphail, & Molyneaux, 2004) and fi nancial planning strategizing (Parker, 2003) or budgeting (Irvine, 2005). The paucity of publications is due to issues raised by confi dentiality preventing attendance at those meetings (Irvine, 2003; Irvine & Gaffi kin, 2006). However, often, the implementation of a new control technology occurs over a long period of time that might exceed the duration of a research project (Quattrone & Hopper, 2001, 2005). Recent trends consisting of having research funded by grants from private institutions or charities have tended to reduce the length of such undertakings to a few months or rarely more than a couple of years (Parker, 2013; Parker & Guthrie, 2005). It is structurally diffi cult to conduct such research projects, unless the researcher is a fi eld actor and attends meetings and discussions in that capacity (Berry, 2005; Irvine, 2005; Joannidès, 2012; Joannidès & Berland, 2013; Parker, 2003). As research usually studies existing accountability systems, this chapter contributes to knowledge by showing how an accountability process within a nonprofi t organisation is decided upon, tested and enriched until it is implemented effectively.
