Accountability or efficiency – democratic endeavour.

As many have shared, evidence suggests that consumerism has had a profoundly negative impact on the well-being of populations (Craig, Mayo, Popple, Shaw, & Taylor, 2011). Some argue that it is the insatiability linked to consumption that also creates inequality (James, 2007), because of the lack of measure favouring the privileged makes the impact of unsustainable growth inequitable (Ehrenfeld & Hoffman, 2013). It would seem that the way we think about money, as the sole qualifier of human progress. It may be because efficiency and equity are thought to be synonymous, that progress comes at a cost. For there is nothing neutral about financial decisions, they can in fact create their own problems, they can obscure our consideration of the human cost. The argument for greater efficiency, without accountability, can do more harm than good in some people's lives if the impact of activity is dehumanising. If profits can diminish arguments for human rights, then these will be eroded – and abuse justified.  To be sustainable activities need to help communities flourish (sustain-ability), this means living within systems that respect life on earth – not just lowering toxic emissions that threaten survival (Ehrenfeld & Hoffman, 2013).

For many the belief in market neutrality has had an impact on how we think about democratic action (Craig, Mayo, Popple, Shaw, & Taylor, 2011).  As we become ever more passive in our role as consumers we become less engaged in our localities, and less able to empathise, to demonstrate respect (Baron-Cohen, 2011).

In many education settings this has lead to learners believing they are there to receive information - not create their own knowledge (Freire, 1970). I can't help feeling that the more if we accept without question that the point of 'being' is to consume, the more we stop seeing buying as something we do  - consuming – and see it as something we are - a consumer. 

As the figure above tries to illustrate, there are different ways of viewing our lives as educators, as associational networks (community) and professional network (government). I would add paid exchanges (markets) as a third section, but haven't put it on this slide. (Craig, Mayo, Popple, Shaw, & Taylor, 2011). As I tried to suggest in my presentation, it's as if we haven't got a language to support the democratic endeavour that takes place across networks of association. While narratives in professional institutions focus on scant, and diminishing resources, our communities could be viewed as abundant (Diers, 2004) (Block, 2008).

Surely, life viewed through the production lens robs us of shared humanity: our energy, our passion and our power. While I think we cannot escape consumption, we can act as fuller humans, by exercising our citizenship through community endeavour. In short, I feel there is more to life than what we pay for. What needs to be the impact of education in social and environmental terms.  Gray et al describes as a ‘process of communicating the social and environmental effects of organisations’ economic actions to particular interest groups within society and to society at large. As such, it involves extending the accountability of organisations (particularly companies), beyond the traditional role of providing a financial account to the owners of capital (Gray et al., 1987: ix).

Of most concern under the illusion that we are on earth to fuel the myth of production efficiency, how have we come to view those deemed unproductive? I do not think it's any accident that welfare has come under scrutiny in the recession. While I've only been in receipt of a few attacks personally, I'm far more concerned about the negative ideas that fuel hate. Also, while I'm aware that it is myths that fuel such negative ideas, I would help in exposing the stereotypes that may lead some individuals to believe disabled people are too inefficient to work, and therefore pointless to support financially. It seems apparent that the work of disabled people is considered unworthy of appreciation, and in some quarters substandard. Alas, I think these displays of ignorance only fuel the myths blighting our lives. As one person shared in a post recently, talking about benefits assessors - those that hold the very power over our survival - who expect disabled people to be 'dirty, smelly, pathetic, good for nothings '?! From an equality perspective, this unquestioning belief in efficiency only adds adds credence to the view that certain individuals fall short of top marks. That people from labelled groups can’t/won’t/shouldn’t try! Pushed aside on the grounds of assumption, it become far harder to add to or participate in the workplace. And without money how do we exercise citizenship, the community ideal is all well and good, but what of those thrown aside, thereby missing out on shared w/health. 

More importantly, without an articulation of mutual exchange within leadership activity more specifically, any definition of empowerment is oversimplified. To bring humanity into being is a challenge, but it is what makes the endeavour worthwhile! Our being is what we contribute of ourselves to community life - in all ways known to wo/man – our democratic expression. Articulating what is right for what reason - at the right time - demands deep understanding of systematic pressures beyond our institutions. Knowing which groups are at risk of having their rights eroded demands a understanding of those least privileged by circumstances beyond their control. While conversations about financial matters often start with monetary quantities, there is more to decision making than numbers. Ultimately where we spend money, effort and enthusiasm will impact on groups differently. Accountability viewed thus is a capacity, and volition, to articulate the impact of working practice on privilege and agency of certain groups. The ability to account for stories, and people, in human term. Stories are the articulation of human endeavour, the counterbalance to numerical rationality. The provide hope, articulate passion, spread positive energy and contradict despair. While we've struggled to label groups we may feel do not achievement, the stories of success are plentiful

 This view of accountability, the ability to account in order to change emphasis, requires a dialogue. It is intentional, sensitive and mutual. Without these qualities the account will be at best skewed, at worse removed from the lives of the people it serves.  Viewed as a discourse, accountability is the conversation that represents technical know-how as a shared endeavour. It is more than just language, it has potential to reinforce or weaken a group's visibility. The way we talk about individuals from marginalised groups, and the people representing their voice, has potential to change the story about them. 

Acknowledging group authority may be a link between power of groups and unchallenged assumptions within institutions. Talking about what characterises the speaker is not enough, whether they speak on behalf of the group is characterised by their fluency of the group's interest.  it steers us away from talking about the very discrimination that robs people of their humanity.

I have an idea why the market system, viewed outside a system encompassing government and community, not only stifles the lives of whole populations, but it creates critical pressures for those parts of that population that suffer most by the growing depletion it causes. For those who find themselves marginalised by the structure, or are not considered efficient enough to contribute to the workplace, the price is ironically doubly costly. If to produce more further diminishes any possibility of fair the participation and on the other hand blame for lack of participation!?  of marginalised groups within our localities. Through my research I would like to build a vocabulary to give us more ability to qualify these ideas, so that we can start to voice the ideas that elude these hidden aspects of conversations about democracy. ability

Sustainability has become a buzz-word over the past decade. In my work, accounting and research, I've been inspired by  Ehrenfeld of late. He proposes that consumerist ideology, and our overwhelming acceptance of market forces has lead to deeply unsustainable habits. He suggests we need to address unsustainability in an alternative way than ‘green washing’ our increasingly inequitable efficiency. While Ehrenfeld posits that ‘green washing’ may lessen our emotional guilt regarding the unsustainably of world consumption, it also helps obscure our view of the wider inequality of share and relentlessness of world depletion of earths resources. In short, by focusing on more efficient was of producing more, we are becoming less effective at addressing inequality. In fact, he suggests the impact of the market forces that run underneath our belief in the rectitude of efficient production, not only drives our businesses and their arrangements, but seriously robs people of their agency as active citizens where their volition is viewed in the reductionist terms of consumers.  Worldwide, while some gain from the privilege of greater shares, others suffer while they are plundered for the disadvantage. Insatiably is unequal: taking from some to make others poorer erodes rights and denies responsibility. On a local scale, I don't think we can even appreciate the harm our appetites cause. This adds depth and insight to conversations about equality, because evidence does seem to suggest that the price of mounting efficiency is a growing inequality that is oppressive – harming people in some parts - literally.

How we define what isn't paid for, but insures our lives have pleasurable moments, engaging activity and meaningful value, is needed. Some argue that it is in the non-paid activity, or shared endeavour that citizenship is articulated.   I draw on McKnight and Kretzmann work, (ABCD - www.abcdinstitute.org/), which reminds us of the abundance of gifts that reside in our communities. I am particularly interested in the networks and mutuality the exchange of gifts provide. In other words the community endeavour that unites us all in the unpaid spaces between residents of neighbourhoods.

Works Cited

Baron-Cohen, S. (2011). Zero Degrees of Empathy. London: Allen Lane.

Craig, G., Mayo, M., Popple, K., Shaw, M., & Taylor, M. (2011). The Community Development Reader - History, themes and issues. Bristol: The Policy Press.

Denning, S. (2005). The leader's guide to storytelling, Mastering the art and discipline of business naratives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ehrenfeld, J., & Hoffman, A. (2013). Flourishing: A Frank Conversation about Sustainability. Stanford, California: Stanford Business Books.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Pengiun.

Issacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. New York Doubleday. New York: Doubleday.

James, O. (2007). Affluenza - How to be successful and stay sane. London: Vermillion.

Kahane, A. (2010). Power and Love; A Theory and Practice of Social Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. (2003). Building Communities from the Inside Out. Chicago: ACTA Publications.

Molisa, P. (2011). A spiritual reflection on emancipation and accounting . Critical Perspectives on Accounting , 453-484.

Parker, M. (Ed.). (1998). Ethics and organisations. London: Sage.