Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this research is to explore the role of accounting in the reform process of a continuously evolving governmental agency in the Australian state of New South Wales. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on two complementary organizational change models, the paper investigates how the shifting objectives of the Department of Public Works and Services (DPWS) rendered its financial management and accountability systems inadequate and how “new” accounting technologies introduced to anchor the reform process clashed with bureaucratic procedures to create a very challenging context for the organization's management. The paper uses multiple research methods including interviews, archival material and observation to understand the reform process at the DPWS and its implications for public sector accounting and public sector management. Findings The paper finds that the unique history and continuously evolving nature of the DPWS makes it an important context for re‐examining the dynamics of change processes and the contribution of accounting technologies within that context. Since the late 1980s, the DPWS has transformed itself from a budget‐dependent bureaucratic governmental agency to a business‐oriented commercialized agency operating in a competitive environment. Research limitations/implications Future research could be directed at understanding how cultural fragmentations are mended in this extremely challenging reform process. Further case studies employing the two organizational change models could provide additional insights in this area. Practical implications The paper argues that the cultural fragmentation that is introduced by the reform of the Public Works Department and the diverse and often conflicting obligations of the sector have added to the complexities of managing the organization. Perhaps a transformational leadership‐style might be appropriate for managing such a challenging context. Originality/value This paper would be of value to researchers and practitioners with an interest in public sector reform and management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".