We are currently in a transition moving from a linear economy grounded on economic value maximization based on material transformation to a circular economy. Core of this transition is organising value preservation from various yet interlinked perspectives. The underlying fundamental shift is to move away from mere financial value maximization towards multiple value creation (WCED, 1987; Jonker, 2014; Raworth, 2017). This implies moving from mere economic value creation, to simultaneously and in a balanced way creating ecological and social value. A parallel development supporting this transition can be observed in accounting & control. Elkington (1994) introduced the triple bottom line (TBL) concept, referring to the economic, ecological and social impact of companies. The TBL should be seen more as a conceptual way of thinking, rather than a practical innovative accounting tool to monitor and control sustainable value (Rambaud & Richard, 2015). However, it has inspired accounting & control practitioners to develop accounting tools that not only aim at economic value (‘single capital’ accounting) but also at multiple forms of capital (‘multi capital’ accounting or integrated reporting). This has led to a variety of integrated reporting platforms such as Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Integrated Reporting Framework (IIRC), Dow Jones Sustainable Indexes (DJSI), True Costing, Reporting 3.0, etc. These integrated reporting platforms and corresponding accounting concepts, can be seen as a fundament for management control systems focussing on multiple value creation. This leads to the following research question: How are management control systems designed in practice to drive multiple value creation?
MULTIFILE
This article describes experiences with a qualitative research project into teachers’ learning from innovating their own educational practices. Decades of New Public Management (NPM) in the Netherlands, with its top-down and businesslike approach to areas of public interest, obscured the learning and innovating capacity of teachers, teams, and schools. Merely studying the learning processes which take place at a teacher level would present insufficient insight into the deeper mechanisms which hinder or stimulate learning from innovation in a bottom-up manner. We, therefore, focused on the relations between different layers (individual, systemic) within schools. A high-quality design was required for answering the research question: How and what do teachers learn from innovating their own educational practices? This article elaborates upon this design and discusses the methodological findings and complications of this type of research.
DOCUMENT
The current study analyzed blogs written by four Dutch parents of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities, with the aim of deepening the understanding of the parents’ concerns. Thematic analysis was conducted and five main themes were identified: Dealing with uncertainties addressed the impact of unpredictability present in the everyday lives of parents, Love and loss described the complexity of concurrently cherishing the child and grieving various types of loss, Struggling with time, energy and finances detailed imbalances and struggles related to parents’ personal resources, Feeling included in communities and society specified social consequences, and Relating to professional care services reflected on stress and support associated with professional care delivery. The study findings demonstrate how care professionals should acknowledge parents’ vulnerabilities by being aware of their existential distress and empowering parents to exercise control of family thriving.
DOCUMENT
