預(yù)算編制外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯中英文2020

#預(yù)算編制外文翻譯中英文2020英文Budgetmaking:Thetheatricalpresentationofaccountingdiscourse

LawrenceCorriganAbstractThisinterpretativeresearchengageswithcallsforavisualturninaccountingbypresentingstagyempiricalillustrationsofmunicipalbudgetingthatdrawuponGoffman'sdramaturgicalframework.Thebudgetistheorizedasvisualandtheatrical.Analysisofvideorecordingsofbudgetmeetingsandon-sceneobservationofbudget-makingatasiteofcitymanagementrevealvisualtriggers,rhetoric,andframingthatconstitutebudgetingasvisualdiscourse.Acentralimpressionpresentedinthispaperisthatofuncontrollability.Theapparatusofbudgetingiscomplexandgrowsinanundisturbedway,giventhatbudgetactorsseemtobepassiveintakingleadershiprolestosubstantivelypromotechange.Thispaperdrawsattentiontonumerouselementsofbudget-makingthathighlightvisualaccountingaspartofitsapparatus.ThisviewisincontrasttoclassictheoriesofcontrollabilitythatclaimWeberianbureaucraticidealsofrationality,efficiency,andprofessionalism.Twoscholarlycontributionsareclaimed.First,thispaperjoinsagrowingacademicconversationaboutvisualaccounting,andextendsthisdiscussionwithanexemplarofmanagementaccounting.Untilrecently,thevisualhasbeeninappropriatelyneglectedinaccountingresearch,particularlyinstudiesofthepublicsector.Second,thispaperappliesGoffman'sdramaturgy,anunderusedperspectiveintheaccountingliteratureandathought-provokingmethodologywithacapacityforwhatmayberegardedas“visualcritique”.Keywords：Visualaccounting，Municipaladministration，Budget，Dramaturgy，AccountingdiscourseIntroductionTheaccountingmilieu,andsociallifeingeneral,isimmenselyvisual.Thispapercallsattentiontoinfluentialvisualmaterialinperformancesofaccountingauthorityandcontributestoanascentacademicconversationaroundcriticalvisualanalysisinaccounting(Brown,2010,Davison,2015,Davisonetal.,2015,MalschandGendron,2009,Meyeretal.,2013).Abroaddefinitionofthevisualisemployedinthispaper;forexample,pictures,diagrams,spreadsheets,ritualenactments,videos,webpages,televisionscreens,graphs,andartefactsinthephysicalspaceswhereinteractiontakesplace.Accountingresearchershavebeeninterestedinthevisualforatleastseveraldecades.However,unlikeotherdisciplinessuchasthehumanitiesandsocialstudies,thisstreamofresearchhasnotbeenprominent.“Visualityhasbeenneglecteddespiteaccountinghavingastrongvisualresonance”(Brown,2010,p.486).ThecallformorevisualresearchinaccountingbeganinearnestwithaspecialissueofAccounting,Auditing&AccountabilityJournal(AAAJ,2009).Itwassuggestedthat“therewasablindspotwithregardtothevisualinbothaccountingandorganizationstudies”(Davison&Warren,2009,p.845).Davison(2015)alsoarguesthatuntilrecentlythevisualhasbeenmostlyabsentinaccountingstudies.Importantforthefocusofmypaper,Davison's(2015)synthesisof83articlesinthevisualaccountingfield,whichrevealsaninfrequentuseofdrama-basedtheoreticalapproaches,claimsthattherehasbeen“noworkonthepublicsectororonmanagementaccounting”(p.148).ThisopinionissupportedbyMeyeretal.(2013)whoclaimthatvisualmodesofmeaning????pT???p?constructioninorganizationandmanagementresearchremaininactiveandrequiremorequantityandcontrastingtypesofmethodologies.Lapsley,Miller,andPanozzo(2010,p.305)callforaccountingresearchbasedon“visualizingandcalculatingthecity”becausetheyhavefoundthatmunicipalitieshavereceivedlittleattentionregardingthevisual.Thus,thevisualturn,nearlyadecadeafteritsintroductioninAAAJ,isstillinneedofavarietyofempiricalillustrationsofitstheoreticalconcepts.Thispaperanswersthecallforavisualturninaccountingbypayingattentiontohowactorsinmunicipaladministrationusevisualimagestoachievefinancialpatronage1inbudgetpractices.Itdoessointertextuallybybringingdramaturgy(Goffman,1959,Goffman,1967,Goffman,1974)explicitlyintotheemergingliteratureonvisualaccounting.Thefollowingsamplingofarticlesillustratestherathereclecticnatureofthisliterature.Bettner,Frandsen,andMcGoun(2010)discusstheprevalentvisualcultureofaccounting—aculturethatteachesushowtovisuallyseeknowledgepatterns.Theyclaimthatitispossibletoalso“hear”patterns(listeningtoaccounting)toaurallyfindknowledge.Brown(2010)consideredchallengesandprospectsofaccountingandvisualculturalstudies.Sheconcludedthatthisconfluenceenablesstrategicaccountingtocritiqueandresistdominantmodesofthinking.Meyeretal.(2013)showhowvisualsdisguisedasinformation,ratherthanargument,becomereified—enhancingtheirpowertodominate,eventhoughsuchdominationisseldommadeexplicit.Ithasbeensuggestedelsewherethatvisualaccountinginannualreportsisladenwithvestigesofarchaicreligioussymbolism(Davison,2004),includingvisualsthatoftenadoptsacredimagesofascension.Visualaccountabilityhasalsobeenexploredinthecontextofaccountingformunicipalprojects(Czarniawska,2010);thearticlediscussesinterpretativeframeworksforstudyingcitymanagementandenrichesthediscussionbyincludingvisualreportingoftheauthor'sphotographs.Althoughtheaboveintroductionindicatesalackofvisualaccountingliteratureusingdrama-basedtheory,especiallyrelatedtothepublicsector,someextantstudiesareparticularlyrelevanttothispaper.Mueller(2017)notedthataccountingresearchhasoccasionallycalleduponGoffmanianideas(Muellerlistssevenarticleswithpublicationdatesreachingbackto1985)butheclaimsthatnosystematicworkhasyetbeenofsignificanceinthefieldofaccounting.Mueller(2017)addressesthatgapbytakingdramaturgyseriouslyandapplyingaspectsoftheinteractionordertotheperformanceofstrategyinorganizations.ThedramaturgyofinteractionsisathemethatrunsthroughoutGoffman'swork.Intheareaofsocialaccounting,Jones(2011)usesGoffman'sconceptofimpressionmanagementtoassesstheuse,abuse,andvisualimpactofgraphsinenvironmentalaccounting.Jones(2011)notestheextensiveaccountingliteratureconcernedwithearningsmanagementandhebroadensthisideatowardpresentationalmanagementsuchasaccountingnarrativesandgraphs.Followingadramaturgicalframework(Goffman,1959),myresearchexaminesthebudgetprocessesofHalifaxRegionalMunicipalitywhereoperationalboundariesgiverisetofiercecontestsconcerningpoliticalallocationofscarceresources.“Theatrical”analysisofaccountingdiscoursehelpsusrealizethatimpressionmanagementinbudgetinginvolvesskillfuluseofimagery.Thispapercontributestovisualaccountingbyfocusingonmunicipalbudgeting.Specifically,accountingresearchersareencouragedtounderstandbudget-makingasvisualandtheatricalratherthanuncriticallyseeingbudgetingasanall-too-mundaneadministrativepractice.Ifonewishestoimagineaccountingasavisualtheatricalperformance,whatsucceedsatreceiving(orwhatfailstoreceive)publicfundingshouldbeofgreatinterest.ThebudgetprocessesoftheHalifaxCityCouncilmaybeseenastheatricalexperiencewhereinterestsoftheactorsaresustainedonlybysubmittingtostagedperformancesinanorganizeddisputeoveroperatingandcapitalfinancing.Thispaperexamineshowthevisualisinvolvedinargumentandcounter-argumentsurroundingtheformalperformanceofmunicipalbudgetratification.Goffmanreferstotheseperformancesas“expressiongames”(1969,p.10),wherethestructureofinteractionsisdependentonthecontrolandasymmetryofinformation.Accordingly,“thebudget”issociallyconstructedandcomplex;itcanswiftlyconvertfromasingleobjectintoawebofthousandsofindividualbudgetlineitemsandahostofassumptions,calculations,legalcommitments,andwildguesses.Municipalbudgetingisalsoaffectedbyapolyphonicvoice3(Bakhtin,1981)becausemanycompetingbitsandpiecesofadvice(mostlyunaskedfor)independentlyreachtheearsofelectedofficialsinthelead-uptoformalmeetingsoftheCouncil.Strategicvisualization(numbers,words,images,aswellasaccountingstorytelling)isneededtorespondtopolyphonicovertonesandtocommunicateoverwhelmingbudgettexts.IntheHalifaxbudgetstorytofollow,theplayers(municipalmanagement,electedofficials,staffmembers,thenewsmedia,others)visuallyandtheatricallyperforma“good”budgeteventhoughitimposesanunwantedtaxincrease.Highertaxratesareembeddedinacomplexsetofaccountingcalculationsandableto“disappearfromview”eventhoughthesubjectoftaxationremainsinplainsightofthemunicipalactors.Theoreticalframework—dramaturgyDramaturgyisaqualitativeresearchtraditionthatgrewfromGoffman's(1959)notionofsocialperformances.Dramaturgyacceptsafundamentalbeliefinthetheatricalityoforganizingandresonateswithdramaticvisualelementsthatareintegraltobudgetaccounting.Goffmanusedthelanguageoftheatreandcalleduponnumerousdramaturgicaltermstoexpoundonthepresentationofselfinsocialsituations.Goffman'sontologicalstanceincludesthenotionthattheindividualisacrafteroftheself.Inthisrespect,Goffmanstands-outamongsymbolicinteractionistsasonewholeanstowardasubjectivistorientation(althoughnotallwouldagreewithacategorizationofGoffmanasasymbolicinteractionist,asdiscussedinBaert,1998).Indeed,dramaturgyisdifficulttosituateparadigmatically.Thephilosophicalassumptionsunderlyingdramaturgyarisefromanontologicalpositionthatimpliesnominalismwhilealsoapproachinganobjectiveattitudetowardrealism.Asindicatedintheprevioussection,dramaturgyhasbeensparinglyappliedinaccountingresearch.Goffman'sdramaturgicalframeworkhasbeenusedtoquestiontaxablebusinessprofits(Edgley,2010),examineauditorfacework(Johed&Catasus,inpress),problematizethedevelopmentofaccountingnarratives(Beattie,2014),understandstigmarelatedtoaccountingprofessionalism(Jeacle,2008),andexposeaspectsofimpressionmanagement(Sk&rb&k&Tryggestad,2010).Todate,dramaturgyhasnotbeenmeaningfullyusedtoengagewiththevisualturninaccountingsince“thevisualhasoftenbeen(erroneously)regardedeitherasemptydecorationorastransparentinformation”(Davison,2015,p.122).Thisissurprisingbecause,theoretically,dramaturgyandvisualstudiesshareseveralfundamentaltenets—Chart1outlinessevenkeyconceptsofvisualstudies,alongwithselectedcitationsthatelaboratetheseideas.Eachofthesevenvisualstudiesconceptsismatchedwithacomparativedramaturgicalconcept.ThesedrawuponseminalGoffmanpublicationsthatfundamentallyrecognizethetheatricalityandvisualityofsociallife.AcentralpatternevidentfromthecomparisonoutlinedinChart1isthatdramaturgicalandvisualartefactshaveacapacitytoestablishandorganizewhatcomestobeacceptedasknowledge.Thisoftenmanifestsastelling“astoryofthesituation”(Lorino,Mourey,&Schmidt,2017,p.43)inawaythatismeaningfulforfutureaction.Forthispaper,fourselecteddramaturgicaltoolsarecentral.Eachoftheseisbrieflyoutlinedbelow.?Regions:(seeBenford&Hunt,1992)Accordingtodramaturgy,performancesdependuponsegregationofsocialspaceintothefrontregionandbackstage.Thefrontregionisaphysicalspaceassociatedwithvisualmasks,orpersona.Thefrontregioncontainsavarietyoffixedtrappingscalledasettingandfeaturesfrontsofhumanactors,whichincludepersonalappearance,manner,clothing,badges,gender,race,age,gestures,voice,credentials,andahostofothervisualinsignia.Actorsdonotnecessarilycontinuethesameperformancewhentheaudienceisnotpresent.Thebackregionistheplace“wheretheimpressionfosteredbytheperformanceisknowinglycontradictedasamatterofcourse”(Goffman,1959,p.115).Dramaturgyhasitthatone'sauthenticselfisusuallyfoundinthebackstageofsociallife.?Performance(seeBiehl-Missal,2011):Performancemaybethoughtofasallactingthatservestoinfluenceotherparticipants.Performancesinvolvetheeffortsofindividualstowardconvincingothers(andthemselves)thattheirclaimsaregenuine.Performanceincludesseveralelementsasfollows.Dramaticrealizationistheprocesswherebyindividualsinfusetheiractivitywithsignstomoreconvincinglyconvey“facts”thatotherwisemightremainambiguous.Idealizationisthetendencyofactorstopresent“officiallyaccreditedvalues”(Goffman,1959,p.45)fortheiraudiencetowitness.Mystificationinvolvesthemaintenanceofritualsandvisualization.Thesecreateanapprovingaudienceinaweoftheperformance.?Audience(seeHogan,2010):Impressionsarescriptedforthebenefitofanaudience.Fromavisualpointofview,theatresitescanbedisorderly.Theyincludemostlyappreciativeoutwardsignalssuchasapplauseorshoutsofbravo.Booingandhecklingisalsopossible,asistheneutral,albeitannoying,propensityofaudiencememberstoforgettoturnofftheircellphones.Critiquebythemunicipalaudienceisoftenrestrainedbydramaturgicaltechniquesinthebudgetprocess.MunicipaltaxpayersandcitizenlobbyistsareabletoresistthroughperformancesoftheirownthroughsocialmediaandbypoliticaleffortsbeyondtheformalmeetingsintheCouncilChamber.?Impressionmanagement(seeGoffman,1971,Solomonetal.,2013):Goffmandiscussestwotypesofmanagementofimpressions:whatwesay,andwhatwedo.Theformerisinformationthatwe“give”,andisbelievedtobesubstantiallyunderourcontrol;thoseimpressionsthatarecommunicatedinwhatwedowhilewesaythings,i.e.,theinformationthatwe“giveoff”,arebelievedtobelessunderourcontrol.Thusaudienceshaveaccesstovisualandtacitsignsthattheperformerisunabletomanage.Thesesignsmaybeusedasacheckofexpressivebehaviourthatisgivenfrombehindamask.Scholarshavegoneasfarastosaythat“impressionmanagementmaybecalleduponasageneralumbrellaframeworkforvisualanalysis”(Davison,2015,p.134).ConclusionThispapercontributestotheconversationaroundvisualanalysisinaccountingresearch(Davison,2015,Davisonetal.,2015,Jones,2011,MalschandGendron,2009).Thecallforcriticalvisualresearch,especiallyinthefieldofmanagementaccountingandpublicsectormanagementstemsfromadeficitofthevisualincase-basedstudiesofaccounting.The“visualturn”hasproducedapersuasivetheoreticalgroundinganddiscussionoverthepastdecade.However,thevisualturninaccountingisstillinneedofavarietyofempiricalillustrationsofitstheoreticalconcepts.ByexaminingthebudgetprocessesoftheHalifaxRegionalMunicipality,T??T???TT????p?thispaperpaysattentiontohowactorsinmunicipaladministrationusevisualimagesinpractice.FollowingGoffman'sdramaturgicalframework,thisresearchacceptsthenotionthatmunicipalbudgetingisdramatic.Thereputationofbudgeting(andaccountinggenerally)asmundaneadministrativeworkisunwarranted(Jeacle,2008).Seeingaccountingdiscourseas“theatrical”helpsusrealizethatGoffman'sconceptsofperformingregions,performance,audience,andimpressionmanagementinbudgetinginvolveskillfuluseofimagery.Sincethemunicipalbudgetisasocially-constructedvisionofacontestedandever-changingreality,itsconstructiondependsuponhowmunicipalactorsperformtheiraccountingauthority.Theseperformancesareinfusedwithabroadrangeofvisualphenomena.Acentralimpressionpresentedinthispaperisthatofuncontrollability.Theapparatusofbudgetingiscomplexandgrowsinanundisturbedway,giventhatbudgetactorsseemtobepassiveintakingleadershiprolesinordertosubstantivelypromotechange.Power(2013)understands“apparatus”inthecontextofFoucault's(1977,p.195)notionof“dispositif”,whichisasystemofthinkingthathasadominantstrategicfunctionasnegotiationsproducedispositions.Isupportthisviewbydramaturgicallycallingattentiontonumerouselementsofbudget-makingthathighlightvisualaccountingaspartofitsapparatus.Thisincludesbudgetprocessdiagrams,accountingspreadsheetswithdetailedbudgetline-items,engineeringphotographsofcapitalprojectsites,ritualenactmentsofdramatisticmanagers,videos“explaining”taxpolicy,municipalwebpages,televisionscreensshowingtheelectedofficialsinaction,andothervisualizationsthat“constructcontrollabilityboundaries”(Gendron&Spira,2009,p.97).Thisviewisincontrasttoclassictheoriesofcontrollability.Forexample,Ouchi(1979)considersvariousapproaches18thatinfluencetheboundariesofcontrollability,includingabureaucraticcontrolphilosophybasedonWeber's(2002)“ideal”bureaucracy.Thismodelischaracterizedbyhierarchicalauthorityrelations,personalscrutiny,anddefinedspheresofcompetencesubjecttoimpersonalrules.Theoretically,theWeberianbureaucraticgoalistoberational,efficient,andprofessional.Thus,thebudgetprocessmaybeseenasacontrolmechanismforbehaviour.Ouchi(1979)stressesthatitisoffundamentalimportancetoestablishwhichformofcontrolismostefficient.However,thispaperdoesnotemphasizeefficiencyorrationalcontrol.Ifocusinsteadontryingtounderstandthecomplexityofbudgetcontrol.Ontheonehand,visualaccountinghighlightsritualenactmentsthatcollectivelyconstructa“metaimage”thatthebudgetisundercontrol.Ontheotherhand,thispaperindicatesabackstage(ascapturedthroughanalysisofthefrontstage)inwhichtheindividualactorsinvolved,especiallythecouncillors,seemtolacksufficientpowerto“control”thebudget.Thisimpressionofuncontrollabilityraisesanimportantquestion:Isbackstageuncontrollabilityofthebudgetinlinewithdemocraticaccountability?Thispaperhasdramaturgicallyengagedwiththisquestionbyshowingthatstakeholderviewsofrealitymaybeconstructedwithvisualaccounting,andthatcorporatedramamayinterferewithclassicnotionsofcontrollability.Theresearchmilieuforthispaperhasseverallimitationsaswellasopportunitiesforfurtherelaboration.First,theareastudiedinthisresearchwasasinglesector,citygovernment.SinceHalifaxRegionalMunicipality,andonlythatmunicipality,iswhereIperformedfieldworkandgatheredartefacts,fromaconservativeperspectiveitmightbearguedthatthelevelofanalysisistoomicro.AsimilarcomplaintwasheldagainstGoffmanwhowasseenas“adiscovereroftheinfinitelysmall”(Bourdieu,1983,p.112).Althoughatightfocusmaybealimitationforsome,thecasestudydoesprovideausefulplatformtodemonstratetheoreticalideasrelatingtovisualaccounting.Casestudiesofferanuancedunderstandingofsituationsofuncertaintyandinstability(Cooper&Morgan,2008)aswellassheddinglightonwhataccountantsactuallydointheirworksetting(Power&Gendron,2015).Therearemanyaspectsofmunicipalorganizationallifethatcouldhavebeenexplored.Forexample,differencesofbigandsmalladministrations,differencesofurbanandruraldistricts,differencesofstrongmayorversusstrongmanagerstructures,themunicipalityofthepresentandthemunicipalityofthepast,silenceasacounterpointtodiscourse.Anabundanceofdichotomies.However,Ifoundthatthispaper'scontributiontovisualaccountingcouldbeaccommodatedinasinglemunicipalunitinHalifax.Iconcludethispaperwithasuggestionforfutureresearch.Criticalaccountingstudies,whendealingwiththevisualatall,havetendedtofocusontechnicalvisualforms(Davison,2015)suchasfilm,architecture,diagrams,colour,webpages,graphs,andothervisualforms.However,visualaccountingresearchhasbeguntosurfaceideasconcerningtheaccountant'sprofessionalidentity(e.g.,Jeacle,2012,Picardetal.,2014).Furtherresearcheffortsshouldbeextendedtotheaccountantpersonagiventhehighimpactthatprofessionalshaveonsociety.Ausefulresearchquestionwouldbe:“Howdoesthevisualconstitutetheaccountant'sself?”Mead'sseminalpublication,Mind,SelfandSociety(1934)conceptualizedtheselfandexplicitlyrecognizedtherole-playingcapacityoftheself.Meadianrolesthatpeopleplayinsocietyare“firstrehearsedinthetheatreofthemindandlaterperformedinthetheatreoflife”(Czarniawska-Joerges&Jacobsson,1995,p.377).Accountantscanbeanaudienceoftheirownperformance,andtheselfcanbetheorizedasaproductofvisualperformances.Thissuggestionforfutureresearchcould,forexample,berelatedtotheimportantmatterofaccountingtransparency.AsstatedbyRoberts(2009,p.964),“thepoweroftransparencyliesinthepossibilitythatIand/orotherswillidentifywiththeimageoftheselfthatsuchtransparencyoffers:thatIwillrecognizemyselfand/orberecognizedinitscategories”.Thus,futureresearchcouldmakeacontributiontotheideathataccountingactorsrequireanunderstandingoftheselftoexploretensionbetweentheseenandtheunseeninaccountingidentityandroles.Finally,itshouldberecalledthatcriticalaccountingresearchersareactorsintheconstructionofknowledge(Golden-Biddle&Locke,2007).Tryingtoactasadramaturge,Isoughttoshowhowvisualsymbolssuchasmunicipalflags,prayerinvocations,poetry,impressivestacksofbudgetpapers,para-militaryuniforms,thestandardbusinesssuit,andavarietyoftextsplayaroleinthevisualpresentationofamunicipalbudget.Understandingthisroleisrequiredformakingevidentbothmundaneandproblematicperformancesofaccounting.“Seeingandvisualizingareimplicatedinstrategiesforknowing,fordesiringandfortheexerciseofpower”(Brown,2010,p.483).Inthispaper,Iuseddramaturgicalconceptsandvisualaccountingtoexposefractiouspowerrelationsamongmunicipalstakeholdersandtoidentifytheasymmetryofbudgetinformationskewedinfavourofmanagement.Thispaperalsoreenactedvisualdramathatotherwiseplaysexpressiongames,silencesrivals,andpromotesversionsofrealityconstructedinthebackstageofpowerrelations.Thus,thisdramaturgicalresearchengagedwithcallsfora“visualturn”inaccountinganddidsobyprovidingacriticalperspectiveonmunicipalbudgeting.中文預(yù)算編制：會(huì)計(jì)話語(yǔ)的展示

勞倫斯?科里根摘要這項(xiàng)解釋性研究通過(guò)在哥夫曼戲劇性框架的基礎(chǔ)上，呈現(xiàn)出對(duì)市政預(yù)算的平凡經(jīng)驗(yàn)性例證，從而呼吁對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)進(jìn)行可視化轉(zhuǎn)變。預(yù)算在理論上是視覺(jué)和戲劇性的。對(duì)預(yù)算會(huì)議的錄像和對(duì)城市管理現(xiàn)場(chǎng)的預(yù)算制定進(jìn)行現(xiàn)場(chǎng)觀察的分析表明，視覺(jué)觸發(fā)，言辭和框架構(gòu)成了預(yù)算，是視覺(jué)論述。本文提出的主要印象是不可控性。預(yù)算編制者很復(fù)雜，并且不受干擾地增長(zhǎng)，因?yàn)轭A(yù)算參與者似乎在擔(dān)任領(lǐng)導(dǎo)角色以實(shí)質(zhì)性地促進(jìn)變革方面是被動(dòng)的。本文提請(qǐng)注意預(yù)算編制的許多要素，這些要素強(qiáng)調(diào)視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)作為其工具的一部分。這種觀點(diǎn)與聲稱韋伯式的官僚主義理性，效率和專業(yè)主義理想的可控性經(jīng)典理論形成鮮明對(duì)比。要求兩項(xiàng)學(xué)術(shù)貢獻(xiàn)。首先，本文加入了有關(guān)視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)的日益增長(zhǎng)的學(xué)術(shù)討論，并以管理會(huì)計(jì)為例擴(kuò)展了這一討論。直到最近，在會(huì)計(jì)研究中，特別是在公共部門的研究中，視覺(jué)一直被忽視。其次，本文運(yùn)用了戈夫曼的戲劇性，會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)文獻(xiàn)中未被充分利用的觀點(diǎn)以及一種發(fā)人深思的方法論，該方法具有被視為“視覺(jué)批判”的能力。關(guān)鍵詞：視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)，市政管理，預(yù)算，Dramaturgy，會(huì)計(jì)話語(yǔ)引言會(huì)計(jì)環(huán)境和整個(gè)社會(huì)生活都是極為視覺(jué)化的。本文呼吁人們注意影響會(huì)計(jì)權(quán)威績(jī)效的視覺(jué)材料，并為圍繞會(huì)計(jì)中關(guān)鍵視覺(jué)分析的新生學(xué)術(shù)對(duì)話做出貢獻(xiàn)（Brown，2010，Davison，2015，Davisonetal。，2015，MalschandGendron，2009，Meyeretal等人，2013年）。本文采用了廣泛的視覺(jué)定義。例如，發(fā)生交互的物理空間中的圖片，圖表，電子表格，儀式，視頻，網(wǎng)頁(yè)，電視屏幕，圖表和人工制品。會(huì)計(jì)研究人員對(duì)視覺(jué)的興趣至少已有幾十年了。但是，與其他學(xué)科（如人文和社會(huì)研究）不同，這一研究流并不突出。“盡管視覺(jué)效果很強(qiáng)，但視覺(jué)效果卻被忽略了"（Brown，2010年，第486頁(yè)）。認(rèn)真呼吁對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)進(jìn)行更多視覺(jué)研究的呼聲始于《會(huì)計(jì)，審計(jì)與責(zé)任雜志》（AAAJ,2009年）。有人建議“在會(huì)計(jì)和組織研究中都存在視覺(jué)上的盲區(qū)"（Davison&Warren,2009,p.845）。Davison（2015）還認(rèn)為，直到最近，會(huì)計(jì)研究中幾乎都沒(méi)有視覺(jué)效果。對(duì)于我的論文而言，重要的是，戴維森（Davison（2015））總結(jié)了視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域的83篇文章，該文章揭示了基于戲劇的理論方法的很少使用，并聲稱“在公共部門或管理會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域沒(méi)有任何工作”（第148頁(yè)）。這種觀點(diǎn)得到了Meyer等人（2013）的支持。他認(rèn)為組織和管理研究中的視覺(jué)意義建構(gòu)模式仍然不活躍，需要更多數(shù)量和對(duì)比類型的方法。Lapsley,Miller和Panozzo（2010，p305）呼吁基于“可視化和計(jì)算城市”的會(huì)計(jì)研究，因?yàn)樗麄儼l(fā)現(xiàn)市政當(dāng)局很少關(guān)注視覺(jué)。因此，在將其引入AAAJ后將近十年的視覺(jué)轉(zhuǎn)向，仍需要對(duì)其理論概念進(jìn)行各種實(shí)證說(shuō)明。本文通過(guò)關(guān)注市政行政部門的行為者如何使用視覺(jué)圖像來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)預(yù)算實(shí)踐中的財(cái)務(wù)贊助，來(lái)回應(yīng)會(huì)計(jì)中的視覺(jué)轉(zhuǎn)變。它通過(guò)將戲劇性（哥夫曼，1959年；哥夫曼，1967年，哥夫曼，1974年）明確地帶入新興的關(guān)于視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)的文獻(xiàn)，來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)互文性。以下文章樣本說(shuō)明了該文獻(xiàn)的折衷性質(zhì)。Bettner，F(xiàn)randsen和McGoun（2010）討論了流行的會(huì)計(jì)視覺(jué)文化-這種文化教會(huì)了我們?nèi)绾我砸曈X(jué)方式看到知識(shí)模式。他們聲稱，也有可能“聽”模式（聽會(huì)計(jì)）以通過(guò)聽覺(jué)找到知識(shí)。布朗（2010）考慮了會(huì)計(jì)和視覺(jué)文化研究的挑戰(zhàn)和前景。她的結(jié)論是，這種融合使戰(zhàn)略會(huì)計(jì)能夠批判和抵制主流思維方式。Meyer等（2013）展示了如何將偽裝成信息而不是論據(jù)的視覺(jué)化，從而增強(qiáng)了它們的統(tǒng)治力，盡管這種統(tǒng)治很少是明確的。在其他地方有人提出，年度報(bào)告中的視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)充滿了古老的宗教象征主義的痕跡（Davison，2004）,包括通常采用神圣提升形象的視覺(jué)。在對(duì)市政項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行會(huì)計(jì)核算的同時(shí)，還探索了視覺(jué)問(wèn)責(zé)制（Czarniawska,2010年）；本文討論了用于研究城市管理的解釋框架，并通過(guò)包括對(duì)作者照片的視覺(jué)報(bào)告來(lái)豐富了討論。盡管以上介紹表明缺乏基于戲劇的理論的視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)文獻(xiàn)，特別是與公共部門有關(guān)的視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)文獻(xiàn)，但是一些現(xiàn)有的研究與本文特別相關(guān)。Mueller（2017）指出，會(huì)計(jì)研究偶爾會(huì)引用Goffmanian的思想（Mueller列出了七篇文章的發(fā)表日期可以追溯到1985年），但他聲稱尚未有系統(tǒng)的工作在會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域發(fā)揮重要作用。Mueller（2017）通過(guò)認(rèn)真對(duì)待戲劇性并將互動(dòng)順序的各個(gè)方面應(yīng)用于組織戰(zhàn)略績(jī)效來(lái)解決這一差距。互動(dòng)的戲劇性貫穿整個(gè)戈夫曼的作品。在社會(huì)會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域，Jones（2011）使用高夫曼的印象管理概念來(lái)評(píng)估圖形在環(huán)境會(huì)計(jì)中的使用，濫用和視覺(jué)影響。瓊斯（2011）注意到與收益管理有關(guān)的廣泛會(huì)計(jì)文獻(xiàn)，他將該思想擴(kuò)展到了諸如會(huì)計(jì)敘述和圖表之類的呈現(xiàn)管理。遵循戲劇化的框架（Goffman,1959年），我的研究考察了哈利法克斯地區(qū)自治市的預(yù)算流程，在該流程中，業(yè)務(wù)邊界引發(fā)了關(guān)于稀缺資源的政治分配的激烈競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。會(huì)計(jì)話語(yǔ)的“戲劇性”分析有助于我們認(rèn)識(shí)到預(yù)算中的印象管理涉及對(duì)圖像的熟練使用。本文通過(guò)關(guān)注市政預(yù)算為視覺(jué)會(huì)計(jì)做出了貢獻(xiàn)。特別是，鼓勵(lì)會(huì)計(jì)研究人員將預(yù)算編制理解為視覺(jué)和戲劇形式，而不是不加批判地將預(yù)算編制視為一種過(guò)分的行政實(shí)踐。如果希望將會(huì)計(jì)想象成一種視覺(jué)的戲劇表演，那么成功獲得（或失敗獲得）公共資金的事物應(yīng)該引起人們的極大興趣。哈利法克斯市議會(huì)的預(yù)算流程可以看作是戲劇體驗(yàn)，在這種體驗(yàn)中，只有通過(guò)在有關(guān)運(yùn)營(yíng)和資本融資的有組織的爭(zhēng)端中進(jìn)行上演才能維持演員的利益。本文研究了視覺(jué)如何參與圍繞市政預(yù)算批準(zhǔn)的正式績(jī)效的論證和反議。戈夫曼將這些表演稱為“表達(dá)游戲”（1969，第10頁(yè)），其中互動(dòng)的結(jié)構(gòu)取決于信息的控制和不對(duì)稱性。因此，“預(yù)算”在社會(huì)上是復(fù)雜的；它可以迅速地從單個(gè)對(duì)象轉(zhuǎn)換成包含成千上萬(wàn)個(gè)單獨(dú)預(yù)算訂單項(xiàng)以及大量假設(shè)，計(jì)算，法律承諾和瘋狂猜測(cè)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)。市政預(yù)算也受到復(fù)音3的影響（Bakhtin,1981年），因?yàn)樵诶硎聲?huì)正式會(huì)議召開之前，許多相互競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的點(diǎn)點(diǎn)滴滴（大部分未征求意見）都獨(dú)立地當(dāng)選官員的耳朵。需要戰(zhàn)略可視化（數(shù)字，單詞，圖像以及會(huì)計(jì)講故事）來(lái)響應(yīng)復(fù)調(diào)，并傳達(dá)壓倒性的預(yù)算案文。在隨后的哈利法克斯預(yù)算故事中，參與者（市政管理人員，民選官員，工作人員，新聞媒體等）在視覺(jué)和戲劇上執(zhí)行“良好”預(yù)算，即使這會(huì)造成不必要的稅收增加。較高的稅率包含在一組復(fù)雜的會(huì)計(jì)計(jì)算中，即使稅收主體仍在市政參與者的視線范圍內(nèi)，也可以“從視線中消失”。理論框架-戲劇學(xué)戲劇學(xué)是一種定性研究傳統(tǒng)，源于高夫曼（1959）的社會(huì)表演概念。戲劇學(xué)接受組織戲劇性的基本信念，并與預(yù)算會(huì)計(jì)不可或缺的戲劇性視覺(jué)元素產(chǎn)生共鳴。戈夫曼用戲劇語(yǔ)言來(lái)呼喚許多戲劇性的術(shù)語(yǔ)，以闡明在社會(huì)場(chǎng)合中自我的表現(xiàn)。戈夫曼的本體論立場(chǎng)包括個(gè)人是自我創(chuàng)造者的觀念。在這方面，戈夫曼在象征主義的互動(dòng)主義者中脫穎而出，因?yàn)樗麅A向于主觀主義的取向（盡管并非所有人都同意戈夫曼作為象征性的互動(dòng)主義者的分類，正如Baert,1998年所討論的）。的確，戲劇學(xué)很難以范式來(lái)定位。戲劇學(xué)的哲學(xué)假設(shè)源于本體論立場(chǎng)，它暗示了唯名論，同時(shí)也對(duì)客觀主義持客觀態(tài)度。如前一節(jié)所述，戲劇學(xué)已很少應(yīng)用于會(huì)計(jì)研究。高夫曼的戲劇框架被用來(lái)質(zhì)疑應(yīng)稅營(yíng)業(yè)利潤(rùn)（Edgley,2010）,檢查審計(jì)師的工作面貌（Johed和Catasus,印刷中），對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)敘事的發(fā)展提出質(zhì)疑（Beattie,2014）,理解與會(huì)計(jì)專業(yè)化有關(guān)的污名（Jeacle,2008年），并展示了印象管理的各個(gè)方面（Sk&rb氏k和Tryggestad,2010年）。迄今為止，戲劇學(xué)還沒(méi)有被有意義地用于處理視覺(jué)轉(zhuǎn)折，因?yàn)椤耙曈X(jué)經(jīng)常被（錯(cuò)誤地）視為空洞的裝飾或透明的信息”（Davison,2015,第122頁(yè)）。這是令人驚訝的，因?yàn)閺睦碚撋现v，戲劇學(xué)和視覺(jué)研究具有幾個(gè)基本原則-圖1概述了視覺(jué)研究的七個(gè)關(guān)鍵概念,以及闡述這些思想的精選引文。七個(gè)視覺(jué)研究概念中的每一個(gè)都與比較戲劇的概念相匹配。這些借鑒了高夫曼（Goffman）的開創(chuàng)性著作,這些出版物從根本上認(rèn)可了社會(huì)生活的戲劇性和視覺(jué)性。從圖1概述的比較中可以明顯看出,一種中心模式是,戲劇和視覺(jué)手工藝品具有建立和組織將被接受為知識(shí)的東西的能力。這通常表現(xiàn)為以一種對(duì)未來(lái)行動(dòng)有意義的方式講“局勢(shì)的故事”（Lorino,Mourey和Schmidt，2017年，第43頁(yè)）。在本文中,四個(gè)選定的戲劇工具是核心。下面簡(jiǎn)要概述了每個(gè)方法。?地區(qū)：（請(qǐng)參閱Benford＆Hunt,1992）根據(jù)戲劇學(xué),表演取決于社會(huì)空間在前部區(qū)域和后臺(tái)的隔離。前部區(qū)域是與視覺(jué)蒙版或角色相關(guān)聯(lián)的物理空間。前部區(qū)域包含各種固定的陷阱,稱為環(huán)境,并具有人類演員的陣線,其中包括個(gè)人外貌,舉止,衣服,徽章,性別,種族,年齡,手勢(shì),聲音,證書和其他許多視覺(jué)標(biāo)志。當(dāng)觀眾不在時(shí),演員不一定會(huì)繼續(xù)相同的表演。后面的區(qū)域是“表演所帶來(lái)的印象被理所當(dāng)然地矛盾的地方”（Goffman,1959,第115頁(yè)）。戲劇學(xué)認(rèn)為人們的真實(shí)自我通常出現(xiàn)在社交生活的后臺(tái)。?績(jī)效（見Biehl-Missal,2011年）：績(jī)效可被視為影響其他參與者的所有行為。表演涉及個(gè)人努力說(shuō)服他人（和他們自己）他們的主張是真實(shí)的。性能包括以下幾個(gè)要素。戲劇性的實(shí)現(xiàn)是一個(gè)過(guò)程,在此過(guò)程中,個(gè)人將自己的活動(dòng)充滿跡象,以更令人信服地傳達(dá)“事實(shí)”,否則這些事實(shí)可能仍然模棱兩可。理想化是演員趨向于呈現(xiàn)“官方認(rèn)可的價(jià)值觀”（Goffman,1959,第45頁(yè)），以供觀眾見證的趨勢(shì)。神秘化涉及維護(hù)儀式和形象化。這些令敬畏的表演贏得了認(rèn)可的觀眾。?受眾（請(qǐng)參閱Hogan，2010年）：印象的編寫是為了觀眾的利益。從視覺(jué)上看，劇院區(qū)可能是無(wú)序的。它們主要包括贊賞的外在信號(hào)，例如掌聲或贊美聲。冒充和亂叫也是可能的，聽眾成員中立的，盡管令人討厭的傾向也有忘記忘記關(guān)閉手機(jī)的傾向。在預(yù)算過(guò)程中，市政觀眾的批評(píng)常常受到戲劇技術(shù)的束縛。市政納稅人和公民說(shuō)客能夠通過(guò)自己在社交媒體上的表現(xiàn)以及在安理會(huì)會(huì)議廳舉行的正式會(huì)議以外的政治努力進(jìn)行抵制。?印象管理（見Goffman,1971；Solomon等，2013）：Goffman討論了印象管理的兩種類型：我們說(shuō)什么和我們做什么。前者是我們“提供”的信息，被認(rèn)為在我們的控制之下。人們認(rèn)為在我們所說(shuō)的事情中所做的事情所傳達(dá)的印象,即我們“給予”的信息,在我們的控制之下較少。因此,觀眾可以看到表演者無(wú)法管理的視覺(jué)和默示標(biāo)志。這些符號(hào)可以用作檢查從面具后面給出的表現(xiàn)行為的標(biāo)志。學(xué)者們甚至說(shuō)“印象管