Accounting is an Instrument

Understanding accounting through conceptual metaphor: ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT?Joel Amernic a , , , Russell Craig b Show moreDOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2009.06.004Get rights and content

AbstractThis paper extends the conversation about metaphors in accounting that were presented in this journal by McGoun et al. [McGoun EG, Bettner MS, Coyne MP. Pedagogic metaphors and the nature of accounting signification. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2007a;18:213–30; McGoun EG, Bettner MS, Coyne MP. Money n’ motion—born to be wild. Critical Perspectives on Accounting;2007b;18:343–61.]. Our aim is to promote further critical conversations about how metaphor is implicated in accounting. We assemble and review some of the empirical evidence we have gathered from close readings of discourse about accounting over the past decade. Based on this empirical grounding, we propose that the fundamental conceptual metaphor, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT, has been deployed commonly to describe the essence of accounting. We contend that such deployment has insidious, distortive and confounding outcomes because it encourages belief that accounting is incapable of reporting other than with representational faithfulness; and that it confounds the (alleged) primary qualitative characteristics of accounting information (relevance and reliability) outlined in the Financial Accounting Standards Board's SFAC 2 Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting.KeywordsAccounting; Entailments; Metaphor; Conceptual; Instrument

1. Aims, scope, motivationWe respond to a lament by Cornelissen (2005, p. 751) that “works on metaphor … are still falling short in offering an informed and grounded account of metaphor's workings” [italics applied]. As with McGoun et al. (2007a), our objective is to improve understanding of the way metaphors are implicated in accounting. However, we differ from McGoun et al. (2007a) in two important ways. First, we focus on the workings of metaphor in accounting, as revealed by empirical evidence. Second, we conceive the ACCOUNTING IS A LENS metaphor as an element of a broader, more encompassing conceptual metaphor: ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT.We adopt the view that accounting is a language-like discipline involving figurative expressions and other elusive and perplexing modes of communication. As such, it is ideological, and an important means of persuasion—it is a form of “writing” which yields “no access to reality other than through structures of representation” (Robson, 1992, p. 690). One such “structure of representation” is metaphor. Critical examination of accounting knowledge should involve “not only the employment of literary, rhetorical and discursive analyses, but require[s] interpretation of the … consequences that flow from the operation of … metaphors” (Robson, 1992, pp. 703–4).We draw on a widely accepted theory of metaphor (Lakoff, 1993) and the cognitive semantics paradigm (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, Lakoff and Johnson, 1999, Gibbs, 1994 and Gibbs, 1996) to contend that the “metaphors accounting lives by” are worthy of further investigation. We maintain that awareness of the metaphorical structure of accounting (as revealed in use) is essential to an understanding of “how metaphors define phenomena, how they structure concepts and how they generate inferences” (Fernandez-Duque and Johnson, 1999, p. 112). Just as Miller (2001, p. 379) directs attention to “the ways in which accounting shapes social and economic relations,” we direct attention to the ways metaphor shapes understanding of the essence of accounting—what we refer to here as accounting itself. Not surprisingly, some penetrating considerations of metaphor have appeared in the scholarly accounting literature (for example, Thornton, 1988, Moore, 1994, Walters-York, 1996, Young, 2001, Nörreklit, 2003, Walters, 2004, McGoun et al., 2007a,McGoun et al., 2007b and Walters and Young, 2008). These are insightful studies, but they largely ignore metaphors for accounting itself, which is the focus of the

1

present paper. How accounting itself is conceptualized, as evidenced by metaphor, has importance for the ways accounting is deployed, and for accounting reform.Of the many general reasons for “paying attention to metaphors” identified by Hart et al. (2005, pp. 47–8), the following two related reasons seem most salient for accounting itself.First, metaphors “signal ideological commitments” and “signal latent values.” The metaphors that are used regarding something of interest can provide insight into “beliefs hidden within us” ( Hart et al., 2005, p. 48). Assume we regard accounting, metaphorically, as a sort of scientific instrument; and that if used properly, that instrument would reveal a natural and unchallengeable truth in ways similar to a chemical analysis of water yields (almost) unwavering proportions of hydrogen and oxygen. This metaphor would reflect our commitment to a particular worldview and value set, such as the latent values we have about observedphenomena (economic affairs in general and business in particular), the observer (accountants, and also management), and the user. Such commitment presumes separate categories of “scientific instrument”, “observed”, “observer”, and “user”, and little, if any, interaction among such categories or differentiation within them.Second, metaphors “signal cultural change.” If the metaphors used in talking and writing about a phenomenon change over time, this reflects and sustains evolution in how that phenomenon is amenable to change. Alternatively, if the metaphors do not appear to change, then the potentially subversive role of metaphors in “making it hard to think in old ways” ( Hart et al., 2005, p. 47) will have little effect. In accounting, we argue that the mechanistic metaphor ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT dominates. Thus, accounting language tends not to be conceived as “[a] language of inference and interpretation, resting on the discernment that comes with true expertise…” ( Porter, 1995, p. 91).Our intent is to elicit heightened understanding of how metaphors generate inferences in accounting, and to develop understanding of how we conceive the essence of accounting (or what we refer to as accounting itself) though metaphor. In Section 2 we explain the significance of metaphors in (and about) accounting. In Section 3, we indulge in some proto-theorising to present three presumptions. In Section 4, we explore the fundamental conceptual metaphor, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT, which is conceived widely to reside in accounting itself. Our analysis is grounded principally in empirical evidence assembled as compact case vignettes drawn from five case studies in our published and unpublished close readings of text containing accounting metaphors.We assess this empirical evidence to develop some propositions and explanations. In particular, we highlight whether the inferences and “concept structuring” flowing from the ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT metaphor confirm or confound the essence of accounting that is promoted as the FASB's primary qualities of financial information in SFAC 2 Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information. These primary qualities are relevance (which the FASB maintains is reflected by predictive value, feedback value andtimeliness); and reliability (reflected by verifiability, representational faithfulness, and neutrality). In Section 5we reflect upon the inferences of the conceptual metaphors identified, and then outline the potential of these conceptual metaphors to influence thought. We conclude by discussing how these conceptual metaphors might affect behaviour and subsequent accountings.2. The significance of metaphors in (and about) accountingTextbook writers, accounting scholars and business journalists refer to accounting phenomena and concepts in metaphor-laden ways. This is very conspicuous in references to net profit as “the bottom line”, to accounting as “the language of business”, and to accounting disclosure as “opening the books.” Generally, in the world of commerce, metaphor in accounting-related discourse is deployed for strategic purposes (albeit oftentimes inadvertently).Thornton (1988) discussed the unavoidable metaphorical nature of accounting concepts and language such as “costs attach”, the richness that metaphors endow upon accounting, and the attendant need to “introduce students to the metaphorical nature of accounting as early as possible” (p. 8). Walters and Young (2008, p. 805) explored “the particular metaphors engaged within the stock options discourse over time through reference to dialogues appearing in the professional and popular business press and related hearings.” Although their study (and those by Moore (1994), Walters-York (1996), Young (2001), Nörreklit (2003),Walters (2004) and McGoun et al., 2007a and McGoun et al., 2007b) offers good insight to metaphors embedded in accounting discourse, the focus is not about the essence of accounting (what we callaccounting itself).Metaphors about accounting are important because they affect what people understand to be accounting phenomena and accounting concepts. 1 Such a view is consistent with the idea that metaphor “is an organ of

2

perception” ( Postman, 1996, p. 174). To understand how accounting fashions perception in a particular context, we need to be sensitive to the inferences (or entailments) of the metaphors deployed. (Such an argument has been put, in the context of economics, by Boers (2000, p. 140)). To lack such sensitivity invites being misled dangerously into regarding accounting as merely a technical practice that principally involves observable and mundane activities such as bookkeeping, preparation of financial statements and taxation returns, budgeting, and cost estimation. Greater awareness of important non-technical or abstract aspects of accounting (such as the resonances of metaphors used in accounting) has ample instructive potential. To regard accounting as purely technical suggests acquiescence with a representational perspective by which accounting reports are considered to depict an objective reality. Such a perspective, though still dominant ( Lee, 2006), seems wholly deficient ( Hines, 1988).There is an abundant and oftentimes controversial literature on metaphor (for example, see Holme (2003),Cameron and Low (1999), and Gibbs and Steen (1997)). Metaphor is alleged to strongly influence thought and theorizing, and how people engage with their world (Fernandez-Duque and Johnson, 1999, Schön, 1993/1979 and Lakoff, 1993). Postman (1996, p. 174) captures the importance of metaphor acutely when he asks: “Do I exaggerate in saying that a student cannot know what a subject is about without some understanding of the metaphors which are its foundation?” We should ask a similar question regarding metaphor and accounting—and not just about accounting students, but about accounting practitioners, users, standard-setters, researchers, and others, as well. We should encourage alertness to the idea that accounting is a linguistic symbol system and a language, and that it is inevitably metaphorical (Walters-York, 1996 and Walters, 2004).We encourage understanding of the significance of the metaphors used in accounting by presenting observations of metaphor in accounting that we have gathered over the past decade in a wide variety of contexts and settings. Some of this evidence has been published in this and other scholarly journals, and some is presented here for the first time. We analyse metaphors in context, consistent with Eubanks (1999)and Cameron (2003); and we develop some rudimentary theoretical propositions that are grounded in our applied study of metaphor. We also draw upon metaphor theory and literature on cognitive linguistics to develop the notion that metaphors have the potential to structure thought ( Lakoff, 1993); and that observed metaphors-in-use suggest underlying conceptual mappings ( Lakoff and Johnson, 1980). The more that some metaphors are used in particular discourses, the more that the seemingly natural and uncontroversial entailments of such metaphors are apparent ( Gramm, 1996). The underlying metaphor-assisted conceptual mappings that people have thus assume a default role in structuring thought. This is salient since, as Rorty contends (1979, p. 12), “it is … metaphors … which determine most of our … convictions.”3. Analytical frameworkWe propose that analysis of metaphor in accounting be based on three presumptions. First, that accounting is a language. We agree with Ferraro et al. (2005, p. 9) that “language affects what people see; how they see it, and the social categories and descriptors they use to interpret their reality.” Accounting, the putative language of business, serves as a means of comprehending some important aspects of the world. Lavoie (1987, p. 579) articulates this position as follows:Accounting, as it is often said in elementary textbooks, is the language of business…The methodological approach that is proper for the study of any language – including, I will argue, that of scientists – is not a positivistic search for falsifiable statements, but an interpretive search for intelligible meanings. Accounting theory and practice…are matters of interpretation.Accounting is alleged widely to be “the language of business” and thus a “language.” This is evidenced from the prevalence of the allegation in the following two examples:•From the website of Jacksonville University's accounting program description (http://cirrus.ju.edu/academics/undergrad_accounting.asp; visited May 22, 2009).Accounting is the identification, measurement, and communication of financial information about economic entities to interested parties. Simply put: Accounting is the language of business. An understanding of this language can enhance one's performance in the business world as management decisions are made within the company or financial decisions about the company are made by outside parties.•

3

From the website of Midwestern State University's Accounting Department (http://business.mwsu.edu/accounting/; visited May 22, 2009):The accounting major prepares students for entry into the accounting profession. Accounting is the “language of business” and is important in every type of organization.Second, we presume that language unavoidably involves metaphors ( Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, Lakoff and Johnson, 1999 and Gibbs, 1994). Such a presumption holds, not just for “everyday” language, but rather for all language, including the language of accounting and the language of science ( Fernandez-Duque and Johnson, 2002, p. 153). Gibbs’ (1994, p. 5) conclusion that “Recent advances in cognitive linguistics, philosophy, anthropology, and psychology show that not only is much of our language metaphorically structured, but so is much of our cognition” leads to our next presumption.Third, we presume that the use of metaphors involves cognitive processes which structure thought and behaviour. We subscribe to the view that “How we think about a topic is partly a product of the metaphors through which it is conceptualized” ( Holme, 2003, pp. 13–4). Such potential influence of metaphor is raised in the management literature, for example, through admonitions that “It would be extremely helpful if all readers of academic work were to develop an awareness of the effects of metaphors on their perceptions…” (Ramsay, 2004, p. 154). Gibbs (1994, p. 5) contends that “People conceptualize their experiences in figurative terms via metaphor…” Although this cognitive linguistics paradigm has been both challenged and defended ( Pinker and Lakoff, 2007), and adapted ( Kövecses, 2008), it has broad influence on the study of metaphor and language.Consistent with Lakoff and Johnson (1980), Lakoff (1993), and Gibbs (1994), we regard a metaphor as consisting of two conceptual domains. One domain is understood in terms of another where “part of the structure of a more concrete or clearly organized domain (the source domain) is used to understand and talk about another, usually more abstract or less clearly structured, domain (the target domain)” ( Slingerland et al., 2007, p.56). So, the conceptual metaphor paradigm attempts to show how metaphor is used to enhance a conceptual (target) domain (here, accounting) in terms of another conceptual (or source) domain.Accounting is a source of metaphors used in many non-accounting contexts too. Johnson (1993), for example, has analyzed “the moral accounting metaphor.” He contends that it “defines procedures for determining what we ‘owe’ others and what they ‘owe’ us under various conditions”, based upon the concept that “well-being is understood as wealth” (p. 44). In similar vein, accounting has given life to the metaphoric use of “ledger account” and its constitutive entailments of “plus items”, “minus items” and an ensuing “balance.” The OED (1989) cites several examples of ledger(s) being used metaphorically in non-accounting domains: Coleridge is cited in Friend (1818) as referring to “the ledgers of calculating self-love”; and Hamerton is cited in Intelligent Life (X. viii, 1875; p. 379) as likening the mind to “a merchant's ledger.” Thus, trade in metaphor is a two-way street between accounting and other areas of interest. This makes the understanding of the metaphors about accounting itself even more important, since such metaphors may flow back, perhaps modified, to their original domains.4. A conceptual metaphor of accounting itselfWe propose a conceptual metaphor for accounting itself. In examining the resulting implications, we are consistent with Morgan's (1986) method of “multiple metaphor”, in which a variety of metaphors (of machine, organism, and culture, among others) were applied experimentally to reveal the partial features of a truth and to obtain a holistic understanding of an organization. In similar vein, our aim is for a richer understanding of metaphor in accounting to emerge from discussion of the conceptual metaphor proposed.We do not catalogue all of the conceptual metaphors that could be associated with accounting itself. Rather, like McGoun et al. (2007a), we aim to pique intellectual awareness of the diversity, richness and inferences of the “conceptual framing” ( Llewelyn, 2003, p. 699) that is provided by plausible conceptual metaphors in accounting. Importantly, we direct attention to how conceptual metaphors help define accounting phenomena, structure accounting concepts and generate inferences for those who read accounting text, such as financial reports, CEO letters and a myriad of other internal and external corporate documents and reports that refer to accounting. Such texts are embedded within a web of social relations, and are historically situated, and intertextual (see Chalaby, 1996, Hardy, 2001, Alvesson and Karreman, 2000 and Amernic and Craig, 2000a).Based on our readings of Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 and Lakoff and Johnson, 1999, Gibbs (1994), Cameron and Low (1999), and Steen (2002); and our understandings of the applications of metaphor analysis in a wide variety of settings (including education [Cameron, 2003]; mergers [Vaara et al., 2003]; policy [Schön, 1993/1979]; news

4

discourse [Kitts and Milapides, 1997], economics for English as a second language users [White, 2003]); and our empirical observations, we assign the following conceptual metaphor to accounting itself:

ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT

Table options

This conceptual metaphor infers that accounting is a mechanical device, gauge or similar apparatus; and that it is capable of measuring objectively the effect of an accumulation of economic transactions, recorded in respect of an accounting entity, on financial performance. An important inference is that accounting itselfis an accurate truth telling gauge of financial performance and an inanimate and adept depicter of some underlying financial truth, free from human interference. Because it is conceived as a directing instrument, a guiding device, and a decision tool, this invites observers to conceive accounting as unbiased, dispassionate, ethically sound, and a natural indicator of success.Such a metaphoric conception of accounting was used to strong rhetorical effect in the testimony given by former SEC Chief Accountant, Lynn Turner, to the US Congress's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on October 7, 2008 in a hearing into aspects of the US government's financial bailout of America's largest insurance company, AIG. In response to argument from senior executives of AIG that AIG's financial ills had been due to accounting rules requiring assets to be “marked to market”, Turner invoked the ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT metaphor to respond acerbically and perceptively that such an excuse was “like blaming the thermometer, folks, for a fever” (Turner, 2008).However, as a reviewer of this paper has observed, it would be naïve to presume that this metaphor has a common inference which is free of contradictory inferences or implications; indeed, part of the utility of metaphor rests upon its malleability in extension and (often selective) interpretation. For example, although ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT implies precision, it can also imply occasional imprecision, intermittent malfunction, and dependence on accurate calibration. So, if Turner's thermometer [accounting rules] had malfunctioned or been poorly calibrated, then perhaps it does deserve the blame, in part, at least?Further, we need to be mindful that perhaps some instruments (such as the speed detection instruments used by traffic police) are inherently biased in the way they are designed, operated and calibrated. Instruments based upon basic physical measurements are susceptible to physical and perceptual biases. They are subject also to ideological biases—such as the German use of the Cephalic Index in race classification during the Nazi-era. Instruments based upon paper and pencil tests, such as those allegedly measuring intelligence in psychology, may result in inapt categorization of humans (Flynn, 1997). In accounting, does ideological bent or social conditioning lead to an instrument's indicated measure being read (and conceived) differently by different readers? We need to be mindful of the close relationship between ethics and instruments. For example, the Nazi-era use of the Cephalic Index, based upon highly precise basic physical measurements of the human head (the ratio of the maximum width of the head to its maximum length), was morally bankrupt. Inapt social engineering has resulted from “the abstract conception of human intelligence as a limited number of functional behaviours constitute[ing] reality for psychologists working in social eugenics and mental hygenics over the 20th century…” (Flynn, 1997, p. 240). In similar vein, the layers of construction of even the simplest accounting report serve to highlight that ethics and the ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT metaphor are bound tightly to each other.5. Empirical groundingThe conceptual metaphor we propose for accounting itself (ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT) is grounded principally in the empirical evidence, assembled here, from a variety of settings (including in annual letters to shareholders, corporate websites, corporate communications with employees, an arbitrator's report, and a special investigator's report) and in a variety of accounting entities (including Enron, IBM, Woolworth, Canadian National Railway, Microsoft, and General Electric). We assess this metaphor against the backdrop of the two desired primary qualities of accounting information enunciated in the FASB's SFAC 2Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information, and outlined earlier.5.1. Example 1: IBM corporation: representational faithfulness?In analysing IBM's use of its website to teach accounting, Amernic and Craig (2000b) explored the metaphors in the website's Guide to Understanding Financials (hereafter the Guide) and speculated about their entailments. 2 They highlighted the potential influence of these metaphors on the perceptions of financial accounting that might ensue

5

for the Guide's target audience of accounting neophytes. They found that the metaphor FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE A LENS was pervasive in the Guide, consistent with the conceptual metaphor proposed here, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT. Just as a lens is presumed to give a faithful portrait of any subject, the Guide advises that financial statements can “report the company's financial status accurately and reliably”; and that “the statement of financial position ‘is like a snapshot”’ (and snapshots are created by an “instrument”, the LENS of a camera). Although McGoun et al. (2007a) allude to the “inherent dangers” in reliance on this metaphor, they seem much more sanguine about it than we are. We contend that this metaphor is insidious and distortive because it encourages belief that accounting is incapable of reporting other than with representational faithfulness. Through the uncritical adoption of this metaphor, financial accounting is regarded as a LENS or as an unimpeachable portrayer of the “reality” scores thus revealed. What this prompts is the distorting inference that

LIKE A CAMERA LENS, FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING GIVES AN OBJECTIVE VIEW OF FINANCIAL REALITY

Table options

But even simple camera (converging) lenses distort to some extent. And when the subject of a photograph is selected (which always occurs) and posed (which often occurs), notions of “objectivity” dissolve.5.2. Example 2: Enron: neutrality?Accounting language (including metaphor) was used in the prelude to the demise of Enron in 2001 to structure thought and behaviour (Craig and Amernic, 2004b). The metaphor

ACCOUNTING IS A TRUTH TELLING LENS

Table options

was deployed in the annual letter to shareholders of Enron for the year 2000, as reflected, for example, in the phrase “Enron is laser-focused on earnings per share.” This metaphor was “a powerful rhetorical device in which the ‘lens’ is fickle and sensitive to the interests and sustainability of capitalism” (Craig and Amernic, 2004b, p. 535) and suggested that accounting, as a truth telling LENS, was deployed selectively in the interests of sustaining capitalism:… when reported profits and stock prices are good, accounting is seen as a lens by which an underlying reality may be discerned and CEOs and corporations are compelled to be ‘laser-focused’ on earnings per share. But on the other hand (after companies collapse?), the view is that accounting should assume a persona non grata status; that accounting is something not for the ‘chattering masses’ and the ‘common herd’ of stockholders and stakeholders. Rather, it is something for the cognoscenti, and should be marginalized on the periphery of popular debate because of its technical incomprehensibility. ( Craig and Amernic, 2004b, p. 835)So, whereas ACCOUNTING IS A TRUTH TELLING LENS is consistent with our proposed conceptual metaphor, it was deployed selectively, making a mockery of the inference that accounting is neutral and free from human-induced bias. And indeed, the announced focus of Enron and its leadership on earnings per share, served perverse ends. The accounting measure, imperfect as it was, became (at least in the rhetoric of the company's leadership) the ends, further eroding any possibility of the neutrality of this putative measure and the accounting instrument more broadly.5.3. Example 3: Canadian National Railway: neutrality?Craig and Amernic (2004a) addressed the discursive struggle surrounding the privatization of Canadian National Railway [CN] in 1995. They analysed how accounting language, concepts and information were deployed by Paul Tellier, CEO of CN in the prelude to the privatization of CN. The principal source data were Tellier's articles in 25 issues of CN's monthly tabloid employee news magazine, Keeping Track between 1992 and 1995.CN (through Tellier) was found to have used accounting arguments as part of an arsenal of rhetoric to condition employees to behave in a way that would “properly position” CN for any proposed privatization.Craig and Amernic (2004a) highlighted the accounting metaphors that were important rhetorical devices in the process of constructing a “privatization mentality” and in persuading employees to accept a change in organizational orientation and culture. In particular, they drew attention to Tellier's recurring and far fromneutral use of the metaphor PROFIT IS A DIAGNOSTIC BAROMETER OF WELL-BEING. This metaphor conceived accounting measures

6

of profit as emerging from an instrument (a barometer) in a way that is supportive of the conceptual metaphor advanced here, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT.In a later paper, Craig and Amernic (2008) examined the rhetorical life course of accounting performance measures at CN after privatization: the operating ratio (defined as operating expenses divided by operating revenues) and a free cash flow measure. They concluded that “the narrative framing of success is made rhetorically potent by deploying accounting performance measures…accounting is not an innocent bystander in the political and narrative manoeuvrings associated with a privatization.” (p. 1085). Their conclusions reinforced the contention of Miller and Simmons (1998, p. 529) that “privatization is a language game”, and that the well from which these performance measures were selectively drawn was consistent with the metaphor ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT in ways similar to the non-neutral deployment of intelligence measures so despised by (among many others) Flynn (1997).5.4. Example 4: Woolworth Corporation: reliability and verifiability?In 1994, a Special Committee set up by the Board of Directors of Woolworth Corporation investigated alleged accounting irregularities in the company's interim 8K and 10K reports for the fiscal year 1993. Senior financial officers within a subsidiary company alleged they had been directed to manipulate interim quarterly financial results. One outcome of the special investigation was that the quarterly earnings (loss) per share data for 1993 were amended to remedy “inaccurate reporting” (as described on p. 4 of the Special Committee's resulting report, hereafter “the Report”). The Report, issued on May 18, 1994 is laden with metaphor. The principal root metaphor coursing through it is that

ACCOUNTING (OR 8K OR 10K REPORTING) IS A TRUTH TELLING LENS WHICH IS (OR SHOULD BE) ACCURATE

Table options

This metaphor is consistent with our proposed conceptual metaphor, and is reinforced by powerful rhetoric. For example, in the Report's 670 word summary (pp. 4–6) the word “inaccurate” (as in “inaccurate reporting” or “inaccurate numbers”) is used nine times. The repetition seems directed to encourage readers to concur with the committee's conclusion about the quality of the financial reporting. But there are many potentially misleading entailments of this metaphor, including those of reliability and verifiability.By its use, the authors of the Report propagate a persistent mischief. They infer that there is a finite, singular set of financially related “numbers” that represent “truth” and “accuracy”, with alternative sets of financial representations being “untruthful” or “inaccurate.” Such an entailment is at odds with the multiplicity of GAAP; the wide-ranging assumptions underlying financial representations; the imprecise art of cost allocation; and the crude methods invoked to reflect the time value of money. The authors of the Report regard “inaccurate” reporting as arising from figures other than those contained in general ledger balances—implying that general ledger balances are the epitome of virtue. Such an implication is misplaced. There is little precision in many general ledger account balances (e.g., in respect of depreciation, bad debts, future tax benefits). These balances are the subject of arbitrary processes which often lead to dubious financial representations.5.5. Example 5: Grant Forest Products Corporation and the Canadian Paperworkers’ Union [13 CLRBR (2d), 1992, pp. 115–146]: timeliness and predictive value?The metaphorical structure of the language in accounting-related labour relations discourse harbours important evidence about how labour relations participants conceive accounting. In the arbitrators’ decision in a first contract arbitral award of Grant Forest Products by the Ontario Labour Relations Board [OLRB] in 1992, the company argued it had “inability to pay” increased wages because of “financial difficulties.” The accounting information it relied upon was criticized strongly by the arbitrators. The following excerpt from the arbitrators’ decision is consistent with the proposed conceptual metaphor, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT.…nor was there any balance sheet. This last fact is significant because … the statement of income merely shows whether the vehicle is going backwards or forwards, while the balance sheet provides a view of what it looks like. To determine if the company's wage offer was reasonably justified by its losses, we needed to know the complete financial picture. [paras 57 and 58]The main metaphor adopted by the arbitrators is that FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE A TRUTH TELLING LENS. This is consistent with our proposed conceptual metaphor, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT. The metaphoric

7

conceptualisation of accounting is that it is an instrument, mechanical device, or tool; the numbers in financial reports provide an objective snapshot of some physical economic reality; and accounting is some type of machine. The main metaphor builds upon the following subordinate metaphors:

A COMPANY IS A VEHICLE

Table options

AN INCOME STATEMENT IS A DETECTOR OF FORWARD MOTION [PROFIT] OR BACKWARD MOTION [LOSS]

Table options

A BALANCE SHEET IS A PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGE OF THE FINANCIAL SITUATION OF A COMPANY

Table options

This metaphorical representation profoundly affects perceptions of the apparatus which allegedly measures important features of the company. The mental model a person has of a company influences the conceptualization of the devices used to measure (some property of) that company ( Holland and Quinn, 1987). Indeed, a mental model also influences the selection of those properties and perhaps their creation, as well. Thus, the arbitrators had a mental model of A COMPANY IS A VEHICLE. Accordingly, it is unsurprising that they (subconsciously) regarded the technology of financial measurement (accounting) as manifest in phenomena used to observe and measure various aspects of a vehicle.Like the eye observing whether a vehicle is traveling forward or backward, an accountant's income statement can – at least according to this (metaphorical) cognitive model – do the same thing for a company. And like a picture can be taken of a vehicle to show “what it looks like”, an accountant's balance sheet allegedly is a picture which does the same thing for a company. But this metaphorical edifice leads to self-delusion, and most likely to poor decisions by arbitrators and other users of accounting information. A COMPANY IS A VEHICLE is a dangerously deficient metaphor (or mental model) of a complex, rich human setting ( Morgan, 1986). Financial statements are incapable of reliably indicating movement forward or backward. They are prepared according to accounting standards that are socially constructed ( Hines, 1988), ideologically biased ( Tinker, 1985 and Estes, 1996), and often technically unfit for the purposes to which they are applied (Benston, 1982 and Clarke et al., 1990). They are therefore incapable of providing an accurate, discernible picture.6. ImplicationsThe cases cited provide empirical support for the view that the metaphor, ACCOUNTING IS AN INSTRUMENT, conveys what appear to be understandings of accounting. Evidence from accounting-in-use was adduced of the facility for this metaphor to define phenomena (e.g., financial truth), structure concepts (e.g., objectivity), generate inferences (e.g., about the accuracy and reliability of accounting), and to be accompanied by a rich set of associated metaphors and entailments (e.g., PROFIT IS THE BOTTOM LINE).The preponderant view people have of accounting is structured and reinforced by metaphor. But that view can be misleading—as McGoun et al. (2007a) point out. Metaphor encourages us to conceive accounting as a phenomenon that is accurate, objective and a faithful and complete teller of the truth. Even if we were inclined to regard accounting AS IF it were an instrument, there ought to be wider recognition that it cannot be so in any simple sense. We should recognize that “the calculative technologies of accountancy are complex machines for representing and intervening in social and economic life” ( Miller, 1994, p. 256). Even if there are seemingly attractive (social) reasons for regarding accounting as if it were an instrument, there might also be reasons which are not so attractive, since they support particular ideological commitments and power structures. That is why Lakoff and Johnson (1999, p. 537) urge that metaphor be interrogated: “Cognitive science has something of enormous importance to contribute to human freedom: the ability to learn what our unconscious conceptual systems are like and how our cognitive unconscious functions.”Examining how metaphors are used in various accounting contexts can be productive and illuminating. Further analysis and conversations about metaphor promise to be rewarding. For example, metaphor can be an entry point into theorizing about accounting, and can help focus attention on “the crucial role that power and strategy play in creating the financial portrait of the firm” (Delaney, 1994, p. 514).

8

If accounting is likened to an INSTRUMENT, conceptually and ideologically, by those who learn accounting, teach it, participate in its preparation, use it, and are affected by it, then the many entailments accompanying such a metaphor are in play. The most foundational of these entailments has strong potential to create mischief in both accounting academe and accounting practice—and should be recognised as such. This is the presumption that accounting can represent some pre-existing, objective corporate financial reality. There is considerable benefit in maintaining alertness to the entailments of fundamental conceptual metaphors in accounting.

9

AcknowledgementsWe thank Sue Llewelyn, Dennis Tourish and two anonymous referees for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.References

Alvesson and Karreman, 2000M. Alvesson, D. KarremanVarieties of discourse: on the study organizations through discourse analysisHuman Relations, 53 (9) (2000), pp. 1125–1149

Amernic and Craig, 2000aJ.H. Amernic, R.J. CraigAccountability and rhetoric during a crisis: an analysis of Walt Disney's 1940 letter to stockholdersAccounting Historians Journal, 27 (2) (2000), pp. 49–86

Amernic and Craig, 2000bJ.H. Amernic, R.J. CraigThe rhetoric of teaching financial accounting on the corporate web: a critical review of content and metaphor in IBM's Internet webpage ‘guide to understanding financials’Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 11 (3) (2000), pp. 259–287

Amernic and Craig, 2006J. Amernic, R. CraigCEO-speak: the language of corporate leadershipMcGill-Queens’ University Press, Montreal (2006)

Benston, 1982G.J. BenstonAccounting numbers and economic valuesThe Antitrust Bulletin, Spring (1982) p. 161–215

Boers, 2000F. BoersEnhancing metaphoric awareness in specialized readingEnglish for Specific Purposes, 19 (2000), pp. 137–147

Cameron, 2003L. CameronMetaphor in educational discourseContinuum, New York (2003)

Cameron and Low, 1999L. Cameron, G. LowResearching and applying metaphorCambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1999)

Chalaby, 1996J.K. ChalabyBeyond the prison-house of language: discourse as a sociological conceptThe British Journal of Sociology, 47 (4) (1996), pp. 684–698

10

Clarke et al., 1990F. Clarke, R. Craig, J. AmernicMisplaced trust in reliance on published accounting data for wage negotiation: an international perspectiveInternational Journal of Accounting, 25 (1990), pp. 184–201

Cornelissen, 2005J.P. CornelissenBeyond compare: metaphor in organization theoryAcademy of Management Review, 30 (2005), pp. 751–764 | Craig and Amernic, 2004aR. Craig, J. AmernicThe deployment of accounting-related rhetoric in the prelude to a privatizationAccounting, Auditing, Accountability Journal, 17 (1) (2004), pp. 41–58

Craig and Amernic, 2004bR. Craig, J. AmernicEnron discourse: the rhetoric of a resilient capitalismCritical Perspectives on Accounting, 15 (6/7) (2004), pp. 813–852Craig and Amernic, 2008R. Craig, J. AmernicA privatization success story: accounting and narrative expression over timeAccounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 21 (8) (2008), pp. 1085–1115

| Delaney, 1994K.J. DelaneyThe organizational construction of the ‘bottom line’Social Problems, 41 (4) (1994), pp. 497–518

Espeland and Hirsch, 1990W.N. Espeland, P.M. HirschOwnership changes, accounting practice and the redefinition of the firmAccounting Organizations and Society, 15 (1/2) (1990), pp. 77–96

Estes, 1996R. EstesTyranny of the bottom lineBerrett-Koehler, San Francisco (1996)

Eubanks, 1999P. EubanksConceptual metaphor as rhetorical response: a reconsideration of metaphorWritten Communication, 16 (2) (1999), pp. 171–199

Ferraro et al., 2005F. Ferraro, J. Pfeffer, R.I. SuttonEconomic language and assumptions: how theories can become self-fulfillingAcademy of Management Review, 30 (1) (2005), pp. 8–24

Fernandez-Duque and Johnson, 1999D. Fernandez-Duque, M. JohnsonAttention metaphors: how metaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention

11

Cognitive Science, 23 (1) (1999), pp. 83–116Article | PDF (2933 K) | Fernandez-Duque and Johnson, 2002D. Fernandez-Duque, M.L. JohnsonCause and effect theories of attention: the role of conceptual metaphorsReview of General Psychology, 6 (2) (2002), pp. 153–165Fitzgibbon and Seeger, 2002J.E. Fitzgibbon, M.W. SeegerAudiences and metaphors of globalization in the DaimlerChrysler MergerCommunication Studies, 53 (1) (2002), pp. 40–55

Flynn, 1997M. FlynnThe concept of intelligence in psychology as a fallacy of misplaced concretenessInterchange, 28 (2/3) (1997), pp. 231–244

Gibbs, 1994R.W. Gibbs Jr.The poetics of mind: figurative thought, language, and understandingCambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1994)

Gibbs, 1996R.W. Gibbs Jr.Why many concepts are metaphoricalCognition, 61 (1996), pp. 309–319

Gibbs and Steen, 1997R.W. Gibbs Jr., G.J. SteenMetaphor in cognitive linguisticsJohn Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia (1997)

Gramm, 1996W.S. GrammEconomic metaphors: ideology, rhetoric, and theoryJ.S. Mio, A.N. Katz (Eds.), Metaphors: implications and applications, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ (1996), pp. 147–170

Hardy, 2001C. HardyResearching organizational discourseInternational Studies of Management & Organization, 31 (3) (2001), pp. 25–47Hart et al., 2005R.P. Hart, S.E. Jarvis, W.P. Jennings, D. Smith-HowellPolitical keywords: using language that uses usOxford University Press, New York (2005)

Hines, 1988R.D. HinesFinancial accounting: in communicating reality, we construct realityAccounting Organizations and Society, 13 (3) (1988), pp. 251–261

12

Holland and Quinn, 1987D. Holland, N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1987)

Holme, 2003R. HolmeMind, metaphor and language teachingPalgrave Macmillan, London (2003)

Johnson, 1993M. JohnsonMoral imagination: implications of cognitive science for ethicsUniversity of Chicago Press, Chicago and London (1993)

Kitts and Milapides, 1997E. Kitts, M. MilapidesRead it and believe it: how metaphor constructs ideology in news discourse. a case studyJournal of Pragmatics, 28 (1997), pp. 557–590

Kövecses, 2008Z. KövecsesConceptual metaphor theory: some criticisms and alternative proposalsAnnual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6 (2008) (2008), pp. 168–184

Lakoff, 1993G. LakoffThe contemporary theory of metaphor

A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1993), pp. 202–251B.

Lakoff and Johnson, 1980G. Lakoff, M. JohnsonMetaphors we live byUniversity of Chicago Press, Chicago (1980)

Lakoff and Johnson, 1999G. Lakoff, M. JohnsonPhilosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thoughtBasic Books, New York (1999)

Lavoie, 1987D. LavoieThe accounting of interpretation and the interpretation of accounts: the communication function of ‘the language of business’Accounting Organizations and Society, 12 (6) (1987), pp. 579–604

Lee, 2006T.A. Lee

13

The FASB and accounting for economic realityAccounting and the Public Interest, 6 (2006), pp. 1–21 Llewelyn, 2003S. LlewelynWhat counts as ‘theory’ in qualitative management and accounting research? Introducing five levels of theorizingAccounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16 (4) (2003), pp. 662–708Full Text via CrossRef

McGoun et al., 2007aE.G. McGoun, M.S. Bettner, M.P. CoynePedagogic metaphors and the nature of accounting significationCritical Perspectives on Accounting, 18 (2007), pp. 213–230

1.o McGoun et al., 2007b

o E.G. McGoun, M.S. Bettner, M.P. Coyne

o Money n’ motion—born to be wild

o Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18 (2007), pp. 343–361

o Article

|

PDF (183 K)

|

View Record in Scopus

|

Citing articles (3)

2.o Miller, 1994

o P. Miller

o Accounting and objectivity: the invention of calculating selves and calculable

spaces

o A. Megill (Ed.), Rethinking Objectivity, Duke University Press, Durham, NC (1994), pp. 239–264

o

3.o Miller, 2001

o P. Miller

o Governing by the numbers: why calculative practices matter

o Social Research, 68 (2) (2001), pp. 379–396

o View Record in Scopus

|

Citing articles (115)

4.o Miller and Simmons, 1998

o H.T. Miller, J.R. Simmons

14

o The irony of privatization

o Administration and Society, 30 (5) (1998), pp. 513–532


|

Full Text via CrossRef

|


5.o Moore, 1994

o D.C. Moore

o Feminist accounting theory as a critique of what's ‘natural’ in economics

o P. Mirowski (Ed.), Natural images in economic thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,

UK (1994), pp. 583–610

o Full Text via CrossRef

6.o Morgan, 1986

o G. Morgan

o Images of organization

o Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (1986)

o

7.o Nörreklit, 2003

o H. Nörreklit

o The balanced scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the

balanced scorecard

o Accounting Organizations and Society, 28 (6) (2003), pp. 591–619

o Article

|

PDF (360 K)

|


|


8.o Pinker and Lakoff, 2007

o S. Pinker, G. Lakoff

o Mind games: does language frame politics? Steven Pinker versus George

Lakoff

o Public Policy Research, March–May (2007), pp. 59–71

15


|


|

Citing articles (5)

9.o Porter, 1995

o T.M. Porter

o Trust in numbers: the pusuit of objectivity in science and public life

o Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1995)

o

10.o Postman, 1996

o N. Postman

o The end of education: redefining the value of school

o Vintage Books, New York (1996)

o

11.o Ramsay, 2004

o J. Ramsay

o Trope control: the costs and benefits of metaphor unreliability in the

description of empirical phenomena

o British Journal of Management, 15 (2004), pp. 143–155


|


|


12.o Robson, 1992

o K. Robson

o Accounting numbers as “inscription”: action at a distance and the

development of accounting

o Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17 (1992), pp. 685–708

o Article

|

PDF (2363 K)

|


16

|


13.o Rorty, 1979

o R. Rorty

o Philosophy and the mirror of nature

o Princeton University Press, Princeton (1979)

o

14.o Schön, 1993/1979

o D.A. Schön

o Generative metaphor: a perspective on problem-solving in social policy

o A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1993/1979),

pp. 137–163

o

15.o Slingerland et al., 2007

o E.M. Slingerland, E.M. Blanchard, L. Boyd-Judson

o Collision with China: conceptual metaphor analysis, somatic marking, and the

EP-3 incident

o International Studies Quarterly, 51 (2007), pp. 53–77


|


|


16.o Steen, 2002

o G.J. Steen

o Identifying metaphor in language: a cognitive approach

o Style, 36 (3) (2002), pp. 386–407

o

17.o Thornton, 1988

o D.B. Thornton

o Theory and metaphor in accounting

o Accounting Horizons, 2 (4) (1988), pp. 1–9


17

|

Citing articles (4)

18.o Tinker, 1985

o T. Tinker

o Paper prophets: a social critique of accounting

o Praeger, New York (1985)

o

1.o Turner, 2008

o Turner, L. Testimony of Lynn turner. United States Congress, House of Representatives,

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Hearing on the Causes and Effects of the AIG

Bailout; October 7, 2008. http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2211.

o

2.o Vaara et al., 2003

o E. Vaara, J. Tienari, R. Säntti

o The international match: metaphors as vehicles of social identity-building in

cross-border mergers

o Human Relations, 56 (4) (2003), pp. 419–451


|


|


3.o Walters-York, 1996

o L.M. Walters-York

o Metaphor in accounting discourse

o Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9 (5) (1996), pp. 45–70

o Full Text via CrossRef

4.o Walters, 2004

o M. Walters

o Alternative accounting thought and the prison house of metaphor

o Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29 (2) (2004), pp. 157–187

o Article

|

PDF (374 K)

18

|


|


5.o Walters and Young, 2008

o M. Walters, J.J. Young

o Metaphors and accounting fpr stock options

o Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16 (6) (2008), pp. 805–833

o Article

|

PDF (340 K)

|


|

Citing articles (7)

6.o White, 2003

o M. White

o Metaphor and economics: the case of growth

o English for Specific Purposes, 22 (2003), pp. 131–151

o Article

|

PDF (222 K)

|


|


7.o Young, 2001

o J.J. Young

o Risk(ing) metaphors

o Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12 (5) (2001), pp. 607–625

o Article

|

PDF (203 K)

|


|


19

Corresponding author.

1

Accounting, in turn, plausibly affects how people regard their world. Espeland and

Hirsch (1990, p. 93)contend that “accounting has been central in facilitating and

legitimating important transformations in business.” More generally, Fitzgibbon and

Seeger (2002, p. 40) examine how metaphors were deployed by the management of

Chrysler and Daimler “to help construct a favorable meaning for the merger.” One of

the metaphors recruited was “a marriage of equals”, which supported the pooling

method of accounting for the combination of the two companies.

2

We say “speculated” because entailments are likely to differ from person to person,

depending on their different social construction as individuals. Our interpretations of

the entailments of specific metaphors are unaccompanied by any other authority.

Since “A rich set of entailments can be drawn from any metaphor” (Gibbs, 1994, p.

117), the issue of the plausibility and also the authorial intention regarding

entailments is nontrivial. In this paper we draw upon the experience provided

by Amernic and Craig, 2000a, Amernic and Craig, 2000b and Amernic and Craig,

2006, and Craig and Amernic, 2004a and Craig and Amernic, 2004b.

Copyright © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

20

Documents

Accounting is an Instrument