Neoliberalism, accounting, and the transformation of subjectivities in social work: A study on the implementation of personal budgets

• Published date: 01 May 2020
• Date: 01 May 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12231
• Author: Danny Chow,Enrico Bracci

Received: 31 January 2019 Revised: 10 October 2019 Accepted: 3 December 2019

DOI: 10.1111/faam.12231

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Neoliberalism, accounting, and the transformation

of subjectivities in social work: A study on the

implementation of personal budgets

Danny Chow1Enrico Bracci2

1YorkManagement School, University of York,

York , UK

2Department of Economics, University of

Ferrara,Ferrara, Italy

Correspondence

DannyChow, YorkManagement School, Uni-

versityof York, FreboysLane, York, YO10 5GD,

UK.

Email:dannychow@me.com

Abstract

This study examines, through the case of Personal Budgets in Eng-

land, the role of accounting in transforming the subjectivities of

social workers through a Foucauldian lens. The findings show how

accounting can reshape the subjectivities of social workers serv-

ing as intermediaries responsible for the frontline implementation

of neoliberal reforms. It does so through an empirical demonstra-

tion on how accounting harnesses an individual’s autonomy and

responsibility to nurture “productive”relationships between citizens

and the state. Furthermore, the findings also highlight the vulner-

ability of social workers’ subjectivities from the installation of an

accounting infrastructure with multiple capabilities. This study con-

tributes to a more nuanced understanding of how neoliberal policies

transform subjectivities in social work and adds to the literature on

accounting’s biopolitical role in the reconstitution of such subjectiv-

ities. It also addresses the relative neglect of studies examining the

role of accounting in neoliberal transformations of social work that,

despite its significance for an ageing society and its attendant conse-

quences for public finances, receives far less attention than health-

care reforms.

KEYWORDS

accounting, Foucault, neoliberal,social work, subjectivity

1INTRODUCTION

Initiatives aimed at radically transformingthe subjectivities of individuals are key issues facing public services operat-

ing in a neoliberalenvironment, such as social care. Such initiatives seek to reconstitute how populations are governed.

Governing or governmentality in this sense does not suggest an overbearing state having coercive control over the

conduct of individuals. Instead, the state seeks to steer individuals, facilitated by technologies of government, to use

Financial Acc & Man. 2020;36:151–170. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/faam c

2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 151

152 CHOW ANDBRACCI

their new freedoms to make choices (Rose, 1993) on public services. In this regard, subjectivity is concerned with the

reconstitution of an individual’s citizenship—in terms of instilling new rights and responsibilities—under neoliberalism.

The granting of rights or the freedom to choose in a neoliberal contextis, however, conditional on individuals mak-

ing “appropriate”choice(s) for themselves. This means that the freedom to choose is subject to certain boundaries or

constraints set by government.However, what is deemed appropriate is historically situated. For instance, freedom of

choice is predicated upon conformance with economic and self-interested rationalities, coupled with the acceptance

of individualized responsibilities for decisions taken.The instillationof such values is being driven by the creation of an

alternate subjectivity in the form of “homo economicus” (Cooper,2015; Hamann, 2009). Neoliberal reforms therefore

seek to transform individuals by reconstituting them as entrepreneurs of the self through the “autonomization” and

“responsibilization” of their citizenship (Cooper,2015).

Accounting facilitates autonomization and responsibilization by establishing control systems that have the ability

to constitute governable individuals (Hoskin & Macve,1986; Miller & O’Leary, 1987). This makes accounting an essen-

tial technology for the operationalization of neoliberal programs (Arnold, 1998; Kurunmäki, Lapsley,& Melia, 2003).

In this regard, accounting affords new “ways of seeing, calculating, and managing” (Miller, 1992), treating individual

subjectivities as both objects and relays of calculation.

However,the tension between entrepreneurial autonomy and ascribed responsibilities raises new questions on the

role of accounting in the (re-)constitution of neoliberalsubjectivities. More specifically, how does an accounting control

system manage the balance between enabling entrepreneurial freedoms to choose and the controls or audits of the

choices made? Tothis end, Cooper (2015, p. 19) calls for future research to examine the extent to which accounting can

and does reshape the subjectivities of individuals is a neoliberalcontext. This study heeds her call by examining the role

of an accounting-based neoliberal reform in transforming subjectivities in an adult social care setting in England.

Social care is defined as “all forms of personal care …provided for individuals who byreason of age, illness, disabil-

ity, pregnancy,childbirth …are in need of such care or other assistance” (Health and Social Care Act [2008], Chapter

14, section 9(3), p. 4). For example,individuals who are typically in receipt of social care include disabled adults and/or

those who lack familial support, as well as vulnerable children. Social care is a major component of local government

spending, accounting for nearly half of its expenditures in 2009–2010 (£23.2 bn out of £49.5 bn), according to esti-

matesfrom the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) (Smith, Phillips, Simpson, Eiser, & Trickey,2016, p. 12). However,despite

its significance from a public expenditure perspective, it remains an area where the transformation of subjectivities

through neoliberal accounting technologies is relatively under-researched, when compared withhealthcare reforms.

The launch of Personal Budgets (PB), a major initiative in England to transform the wayin which adult social care is

delivered, presents an opportunity to address this lacuna. PB makes an appropriate case study because the reform is

reflective of a wider shift toward greater individual freedoms and responsibilities for care choices. PB is said to repre-

sentthe government’s most significant effort yet to align welfare reform along neoliberal values and is set to become its

central policy to deliver adult social care in England (Glasby& Littlechild, 2016). This study, however, does not extend

to the social care of children, as it has a very different set of concerns as its provision is primarily drivenby prescriptive

legislation.

Emergent studies on adult social care have started to observe how the shift toward individual autonomy is accom-

panied by an expandeduse of accounting that redefines the accountability relationship between citizens and the state

(Bracci, 2014; Junne, 2018; Junne & Huber, 2014). Furthermore, the application of accounting is by no means uni-

form in its processes nor outcomes, as the ability to assimilate neoliberal ideas and the adequacy of publicly funded

resources are not universal across all organizations. Bracci and Llewellyn (2012), for example, highlight some of the

consequences stemming from these differences, as they demonstrate the contrast between “people-processing” ver-

sus “people-changing” approaches among different care providers.

Similarly, social work practice(the occupation providing adult social care) in England has long had to contend with

the need for fluid subjectivities to cope with longstanding pressures for reform. Parton (1994) views such fluidity as

something constitutive of what social work is, being situated in an “essentially ambiguous, uncertain, and contested

arena,” occupying the space between law,health, psychiatry, and education (p. 18). The fluidity of subjectivities among