Public accountability: a new paradigm for college and university annual reports

By D. Coy, M. Fischer, Teresa P. Gordon. 2001

249 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/26b11b5a605a3aa2ca294c6df03109cd4fde835f

How researchers see this paper

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

1. J. Bisman
2. K. Crofts
3. J. Mack
4. Alpa Dhanani
5. C. Ryan
6. Ciaran Connolly
7. Sebastian Thomas
8. Ingrid E. Fisher

Citations in the corpus

• Interrogating accountability: An illustration of the use of Leximancer software for qualitative data analysis (2010, background): “For example, one article in our set includes the statement that “performance information may be reported on an on-going basis directly to state and federal governments, and these provide further channels of accountability” ( Coy et al. , 2001, p. 14”
• Reflections on the theoretical underpinnings of the general‐purpose financial reports of Australian government departments (2006, background): “A general purpose financial reporting model predicated on “decision-usefulness” is essentially a market based model that assumes that the making of rational decisions, facilitated by the availability of appropriate information, will result in the efficient allocation of resources ( Coy et al. , 200”
• Discharging not-for-profit accountability: UK charities and public discourse (2012, background): “, 2006), it attracts a degree of authenticity not associated with other such media and has become the principal means through which management fulfill their reporting responsibilities (Boyne and Law, 1991; Coy et al., 2001).”
• Public Sector to Public Services: 20 Years of 'Contextual' Accounting Research (2008, unknown): “Work in this area is diverse but a common theme is that of seeking to understand the extent to which changes in the approaches to management or to the accounting information provided enables or restricts accountability in different situations (e.g. Humphrey et al., 1993; Hodges and Wright, 1995; Lev”
• Governance Structures, Voluntary Disclosures and Public Accountability: The Case of UK Higher Education Institutions (2017, unknown): “…boards are able to coordinate and communicate better (Lipton and Lorsch, 1992; Jensen, 1993; Yermack, 1996) and therefore may be more capable at protecting the public interest (public accountability) than larger boards (Coy et al., 1997; Coy et al., 2001; Nelson et al., 2003; Coy and Dixon, 2004).”