This research examines intransigence in accounting systems. Using historical research methods and archival sources, it explores intransigence in the Royal Army Medical Corps’ accounting systems in the context of the incidence of shell shock among British Army soldiers fighting at the battlefront during the First World War. The Army did not recognise shell shock as a medical condition and made few changes to its medical accounting systems for soldiers with shell shock. The four factors of system stability of the AGIL scheme (adaptation, goal attainment, integration, latency) are used to understand the limited medical accounting response to shell shock. This research indicates that in addition to historical and internal political reasons for intransigence, intransigence will occur unless a factor in the AGIL scheme is sufficiently impaired to make the accounting system unstable and force system change. This research finding has contemporary relevance, explaining accounting intransigence in response to issues of social concern.

这项研究检查了会计系统中的顽固性。它使用历史研究方法和档案资料，在第一次世界大战期间在战场上作战的英军士兵的炮弹震击事件中，探索了皇家陆军医疗队会计系统中的顽固性。陆军并未将炮击冲击视为一种医疗状况，因此对炮弹冲击的士兵的医疗核算系统几乎没有进行任何更改。AGIL方案的系统稳定性的四个因素（适应性，目标达成性，集成性，等待时间）用于了解对外壳冲击的有限医学核算响应。这项研究表明，除了出于顽固的历史和内部政治原因之外，除非AGIL方案中的一个因素被充分削弱以致使会计系统不稳定并迫使系统发生变化，否则就不会发生不妥协的情况。该研究发现具有当代意义，解释了会计不妥协是对社会关注问题的回应。