Control and Legitimation in Government Accountability Processes: The Private Finance Initiative in the UK

By J. Broadbent, R. Laughlin. 2001

201 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Public Administration, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/104b91efb154af4afe251001b8bdaa8c6b0acc1d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

1. K. Hussainey
2. Vicente Pina
3. Ana Yetano
4. Lourdes Torres
5. Sebastian Thomas

In Public Administration

1. Vicente Pina
2. Ana Yetano
3. J. Mack
4. C. Ryan
5. Lourdes Torres
6. E. Vigoda-Gadot
7. Sagie Meiri

In Strategy and Management

1. J. Bisman
2. K. Hussainey
3. K. Crofts
4. Vicente Pina
5. Ana Yetano
6. J. Mack
7. C. Ryan
8. Lourdes Torres

Citations in the corpus

• Reflections on the theoretical underpinnings of the general‐purpose financial reports of Australian government departments (2006, background): “In this vein, Broadbent and Laughlin (2003) address the problems posed by the principal/agent relationships and how they may be resolved.”
• Interrogating accountability: An illustration of the use of Leximancer software for qualitative data analysis (2010, background): “), public-private sector distinctions ( Broadbent and Laughlin, 2003”
• Accrual Accounting in EU Local Governments: One Method, Several Approaches (2009, methodology): “Nevertheless, as Broadbent and Laughlin (2003) and Letza et al. (2004) pointed out, in the public sector, accountability relationships between principals and agents are complex and open-ended or not explicitly defined and thus not easily monitored.”
• The board's role in risk disclosure: an exploratory study of Italian listed state-owned enterprises (2016, background): “between citizens and the State-owner is blurred (Broadbent and Laughlin, 2003).”