This paper questions to what extent particular calculative practices used for inter‐organisational decision‐making help or hinder boundary spanners meet performativity ideals. It uses programmatic rationalities of government as a framework to study reciprocity between them and the conditions of performativity. Empirical data were collected from healthcare commissioning spaces of English National Health Service (NHS). Data triangulation was achieved through documentary analysis, data collected through interviews, and observation notes taken in local commissioning meetings and national conferences. Findings revealed an apparent lack of reciprocity between programmatic rationality and calculative practices surrounding the commissioning activities of boundary spanners. As a consequence, in local commissioning situations boundary spanners with formal roles used calculative practices differently than semi‐formal boundary spanners. Unlike their formal counterparts, who used mainly accounting information in their calculative practices, semi‐formal boundary spanners incorporated non‐accounting information and devised alternative calculative practices. In addition, while formal boundary spanners on NHS Committees used calculative practices in maintaining clear boundaries between commissioning and provider organisations, semi‐formal boundary spanners made use of the data of both parties in order to reach inter organisational decisions. The study has three main contributions. First, it differentiates boundary spanners and explains differences in their interaction with calculative practices. Second, it introduces the concept of reciprocity to inter‐organisational studies in accounting. Third, it shows how conditions of performativity reflected in micro‐settings influenced how semi‐formal boundary spanners used calculative practices (and other supplementary information) to achieve performance ideals of government programmes.

中文翻译：

---

边界扳手和计算方法

本文质疑组织间决策所使用的特定计算实践在多大程度上帮助或阻碍了边界扳手满足绩效理想。它以政府的程序合理性为框架来研究政府与程序性条件之间的相互关系。从英国国家卫生局（NHS）的医疗保健委托空间收集了经验数据。数据三角测量是通过文献分析，通过采访收集的数据以及在本地调试会议和全国性会议上获得的观察记录来实现的。调查结果表明，围绕边界扳手调试活动的程序合理性与计算实践之间显然缺乏对等。作为结果，在本地调试情况下，正式角色的边界扳手使用的计算方式与半正式的边界扳手不同。与正式同事在计算实践中主要使用会计信息不同，半正式边界扳手结合了非会计信息并设计了替代计算实践。此外，尽管NHS委员会的正式边界扳手使用计算方法来维护委托和提供者组织之间的明确边界，但半正式边界扳手却利用了双方的数据来达成组织间的决策。该研究有三个主要贡献。首先，它区分了边界扳手，并解释了它们与计算实践的交互作用。第二，它在组织间的会计研究中引入了互惠的概念。第三，它显示了微观环境中反映的性能条件如何影响半正式的边界扳手如何使用计算方法（以及其他补充信息）来实现政府计划的绩效理想。