Digital Accountability Management Paradox Resolving Controls with AI Blockchain Assurance for Sustainability Performance

Ahmad Rizani; Achmad Daengs GS

doi:10.69725/jebi.v2i4.338

Authors

Ahmad Rizani Department of Economic Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Palangka Raya, Palangka Raya, Indonesia, 74874
Achmad Daengs GS Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas 45 Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia, 60256

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69725/jebi.v2i4.338

Keywords:

Quiet quitting, Burnout, Workplace stressors, Social interaction, Organizational behavior

Abstract

Purpose—This study analyzes how digital capabilities, governance, and accounting translate into sustainability-oriented outcomes via an integrated performance measurement system.
Design/methodology/approach—This model was tested using a unique design to provide a quantitative explanation in terms of structural equation modelling (SEM) of direct effects, mediating effects, moderating effects, and resilience measures.
Findings—The findings show that digital governance does not automatically result in high performance. The same is true of agile principles and controls. The same is true of modern accounting assurance. And the same is true of sustainability control systems. Instead, these outcomes are largely realized through performance measurement capabilities that resolve the paradox of balancing efficiency/accountability and sustainability agendas. This ability is believed to be crucial in turning digital resources and management into a lasting competitive edge and organizational strength. Regulatory and environmental pressures show a marginal level of influence in context, suggesting that a robust internal measurement architecture remains stable across contexts.
Originality/value—This study introduces performance measurement capabilities that resolve the paradox as a unique organizational capability, expanding existing knowledge about digital transformation and sustainability accounting beyond static views of control systems. This paper expands capability-based theories of digital accountability and sustainability performance by synthesizing digital leadership, AI-blockchain assurance, agile governance, and sustainability controls within an integrated explanatory framework.
Implications—Integrating digital and sustainability initiatives into learning-based performance measurement systems is strategically vital. They suggest ways in which digital accountability mechanisms can be used in institutional environments that are under pressure to transform into long-term sustainable value generators.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ahmad Rizani, Department of Economic Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Palangka Raya, Palangka Raya, Indonesia, 74874

Ahmad Rizani is a lecturer and researcher affiliated with the Department of Economic Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Palangka Raya, Indonesia. He holds a multidisciplinary academic background with degrees in Islamic Law, Economics, Engineering, and Development Economics (S.HI., S.E., M.Eng., M.Ec.Dev.). His research interests encompass economic development and regional planning.
Achmad Daengs GS, Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas 45 Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia, 60256

Achmad Daengs GS Dr. Ir. Achmad Daengs GS, S.E., M.M., Dipl.SM., is a senior academic at the Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas 45 Surabaya, Indonesia. With extensive expertise in management and business economics, he actively contributes to academic literature in Indonesia and internationally.

References

Tentu, Pak. Berikut adalah daftar referensi yang sudah dirapikan sesuai format standar APA Style 7th Edition, yang merupakan format paling umum digunakan di OJS (Open Journal Systems).

Anda bisa langsung menyalin daftar ini ke kolom "References" di metadata submission OJS.

Baird, K., Su, S., & Munir, R. (2023). The role of management control systems in sustainability strategy. Journal of Management Control, 34(2), 187–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-023-00354-1

Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Beusch, P., Frisk, J. E., Rosén, M., & Dilla, W. (2022). Management control for sustainability: A structured literature review. Management Accounting Research, 55, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2021.100777

Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world. Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.01.003

Dai, J., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2017). Toward blockchain-based accounting and assurance. Journal of Information Systems, 31(3), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-51804

Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393080

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Duchek, S. (2020). Organizational resilience: A capability-based conceptualization. Business Research, 13, 215–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-019-0085-7

Dumay, J., La Torre, M., & Farneti, F. (2022). Developing trust through integrated reporting and sustainability accountability. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(2), 480–514. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2021-5179

El Sawy, O. A., Kræmmergaard, P., Amsinck, H., & Vinther, A. L. (2020). How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise capabilities for digital leadership. MIS Quarterly Executive, 19(2), 81–97. https://misqe.org/ojs2/index.php/misqe/article/view/1634

Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2020). Ambidexterity for corporate sustainability: A paradox perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 57(2), 235–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12548

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7

Han, H., Shiwakoti, R. K., Jarvis, R., Mordi, C., & Botchie, D. (2023). Accounting and auditing with blockchain technology and artificial intelligence: A literature review. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 48, 100598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2022.100598

Hitt, M. A., Li, D., & Xu, K. (2021). International strategy in emerging markets. Journal of World Business, 56(2), 101143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101143

Integrated reporting quality: A meta-analytic review. (2024). Meditari Accountancy Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-09-2023-2175

Integrated reporting quality: A systematic review and research agenda. (2023). Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(3), 686–712. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2022-1782

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75–85. https://hbr.org/1996/01/using-the-balanced-scorecard-as-a-strategic-management-system

Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Beck, T. E., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2011). Developing a capacity for organizational resilience. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.07.001

Lobschat, L., Mueller, B., Eggers, F., Brandimarte, L., Diefenbach, S., Kroschke, M., & Wirtz, J. (2021). Corporate digital responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 122, 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.006

Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2020). Management control systems as a package. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 86, 101185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2020.101185

Mikalef, P., & Gupta, M. (2021). Artificial intelligence capability: Conceptualization, measurement, and impact on firm performance. Information & Management, 58(3), 103434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103434

Moll, J., & Yigitbasioglu, O. (2019). The role of internet-related technologies in management accounting. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 31(3), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.2308/jmar-52360

Raina, K., Sharma, G. D., Taheri, B., Dev, D., & Chavriya, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence-driven management: Bridging innovation, knowledge creation, and sustainable business practices. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 11, 100860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2025.100860

Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223

Stahl, B. C., Brooks, L., Hatzakis, T., Santiago, N., & Wright, D. (2023). Ethical governance of artificial intelligence systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 190, 122502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122502

Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640

Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z

Van der Byl, C. A., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 54–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575047

Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003

Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001

Zhou, S., Simnett, R., & Green, W. (2022). Does integrated reporting matter to the capital market? Abacus, 58(3), 372–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12243