title: Cultural justice, ethics and teaching

authors: Nairn, Ray

subjects: Maori

abstract: Te Tiriti o Waitangi provides both a basis for cultural justice in this society and an explication of the term; each of the articles identifying a significant aspect of cultural justice. First, there is the guarantee to the Maori signatories that the Crown would protect their independence - tino rangatiratanga, (also read as authority, autonomy or self-determination) [Article II]. In Article III Maori are promised that they will also have the “Rights and Privileges of British subjects”. Finally, in Article I, Maori cede to the Crown the right to govern, to make laws to protect all peoples from the evil consequences of lawlessness. The 1835 Declaration of Independence located legislative authority in the Wakaminenga (the gathered rangatira meeting in Congress); and in 1840, in the context of the Crown promises, Maori authorised the Crown to exercise that authority. For Maori Te Tiriti specifies cultural justice for interactions between Maori and settlers in the new society. Maori are guaranteed the right to self-determination (and the economic and social resources to make that practical) in their relations with New Zealand society. They are also entitled to the same opportunities as other citizens. The latter rights, embodied in local legislation and international covenants to which we are signatory, are not alternatives to the prior right of Maori people to their (cultural) autonomy. The exercise of legislative and organisational authority must be exercised in a manner consistent with the promises which clearly requires consultation and negotiation with Maori.

text: Cultural justice, ethics and teaching Te Tiriti o Waitangi provides both a basis for cultural justice in this society and an explication of the term; each of the articles identifying a significant aspect of cultural justice. First, there is the guarantee to the Maori signatories that the Crown would protect their independence - tino rangatiratanga, (also read as authority, autonomy or self-determination) [Article II]. In Article III Maori are promised that they will also have the “Rights and Privileges of British subjects”. Finally, in Article I, Maori cede to the Crown the right to govern, to make laws to protect all peoples from the evil consequences of lawlessness. The 1835 Declaration of Independence located legislative authority in the Wakaminenga (the gathered rangatira meeting in Congress); and in 1840, in the context of the Crown promises, Maori authorised the Crown to exercise that authority. For Maori Te Tiriti specifies cultural justice for interactions between Maori and settlers in the new society. Maori are guaranteed the right to self-determination (and the economic and social resources to make that practical) in their relations with New Zealand society. They are also entitled to the same opportunities as other citizens. The latter rights, embodied in local legislation and international covenants to which we are signatory, are not alternatives to the prior right of Maori people to their (cultural) autonomy. The exercise of legislative and organisational authority must be exercised in a manner consistent with the promises which clearly requires consultation and negotiation with Maori.

year: 1993

title: Māori and Psychology Research Unit (MPRU) annual report 2018-2021

authors: Masters-Awatere, Bridgette

subjects: Māori and Psychology Research Unit

abstract: Annual report of the Māori and Psychology Research Unit (MPRU) 2018-2021. The unit was established in August of 1997. The unit is designed to provide a catalyst and support network for enhancing research concerning the psychological needs, aspirations, and priorities of Māori. The MPRU is well situated to draw together skilled and experienced interdisciplinary research groups by networking and establishing working relationships with staff and students within the Division of Arts, Law, Psychology and Social Science, the University, and the wider community.

text: Māori and Psychology Research Unit (MPRU) annual report 2018-2021 Annual report of the Māori and Psychology Research Unit (MPRU) 2018-2021. The unit was established in August of 1997. The unit is designed to provide a catalyst and support network for enhancing research concerning the psychological needs, aspirations, and priorities of Māori. The MPRU is well situated to draw together skilled and experienced interdisciplinary research groups by networking and establishing working relationships with staff and students within the Division of Arts, Law, Psychology and Social Science, the University, and the wider community.

year: 2022-09-02

title: Accounting for total quality management

authors: Lord, Beverley Rae

abstract: This thesis examines changes to the culture of three manufacturing organisations, two of which had implemented total quality management (TQM), and one in which a TQM implementation was unsuccessful. The effects of this organisational change on accounting systems and accountants were also examined. 

Ethnographic research was carried out in the three organisations, using several methods of evidence gathering: semi-formal and informal interviews and conversations, analysis of documents (such as internal accounting reports, newsletters, non-financial performance measures, production records, and newspaper, magazine and journal articles), and non-participant observation at meetings and in the factories. 

The evidence was viewed from three different perspectives, as promoted by Martin & Meyerson (1988), looking at integration, differentiation and ambiguity. Content themes characteristic of TQM and documented changes to management accounting systems subsequent to TQM implementation were identified in the literature. The practices and artifacts in each organisation were then compared with each other and with the content themes. 

The integration perspective highlights consensus between content themes, practices and artifacts, and between organisational actors. It assumes a unitary culture with a powerful change agent effecting the organisational change. Seen from this perspective, two of the organisations had made cultural changes consistent with TQM characteristics, and had also made many of the changes to accounting systems predicted in the literature. 

However, looking at the evidence from the differentiation perspective uncovered many examples of lack of consensus and conflict both between content themes themselves and between content themes, practices and artifacts. One of the “successful” organisations had made few changes to its accounting systems and had several subcultures which resisted change. 

The simultaneous existence of both harmony and conflict, and consensus and lack of it results in ambiguity for the organisational members. People differ in the way in which they deal with ambiguity, ranging from action paralysis through to using it as a motivation for innovation. The presence of ambiguity provides an explanation for the lack of success in implementing TQM in the third organisation, and for the lack of accounting change in one of the organisations which had successfully changed to TQM. 
This research contributes to knowledge in two ways. Firstly, it uses all three of Martin & Meyerson’s (1988) paradigms to look at TQM environments. This model has not been used in this setting before. Secondly, in using ambiguity to explain cultural and accounting change (or the lack of it), it provides an alternative viewpoint to the literature to date, which has been exclusively integrative and differentiating.

text: Accounting for total quality management This thesis examines changes to the culture of three manufacturing organisations, two of which had implemented total quality management (TQM), and one in which a TQM implementation was unsuccessful. The effects of this organisational change on accounting systems and accountants were also examined. 

Ethnographic research was carried out in the three organisations, using several methods of evidence gathering: semi-formal and informal interviews and conversations, analysis of documents (such as internal accounting reports, newsletters, non-financial performance measures, production records, and newspaper, magazine and journal articles), and non-participant observation at meetings and in the factories. 

The evidence was viewed from three different perspectives, as promoted by Martin & Meyerson (1988), looking at integration, differentiation and ambiguity. Content themes characteristic of TQM and documented changes to management accounting systems subsequent to TQM implementation were identified in the literature. The practices and artifacts in each organisation were then compared with each other and with the content themes. 

The integration perspective highlights consensus between content themes, practices and artifacts, and between organisational actors. It assumes a unitary culture with a powerful change agent effecting the organisational change. Seen from this perspective, two of the organisations had made cultural changes consistent with TQM characteristics, and had also made many of the changes to accounting systems predicted in the literature. 

However, looking at the evidence from the differentiation perspective uncovered many examples of lack of consensus and conflict both between content themes themselves and between content themes, practices and artifacts. One of the “successful” organisations had made few changes to its accounting systems and had several subcultures which resisted change. 

The simultaneous existence of both harmony and conflict, and consensus and lack of it results in ambiguity for the organisational members. People differ in the way in which they deal with ambiguity, ranging from action paralysis through to using it as a motivation for innovation. The presence of ambiguity provides an explanation for the lack of success in implementing TQM in the third organisation, and for the lack of accounting change in one of the organisations which had successfully changed to TQM. 
This research contributes to knowledge in two ways. Firstly, it uses all three of Martin & Meyerson’s (1988) paradigms to look at TQM environments. This model has not been used in this setting before. Secondly, in using ambiguity to explain cultural and accounting change (or the lack of it), it provides an alternative viewpoint to the literature to date, which has been exclusively integrative and differentiating.

year: 2000