In this theoretical article I propose that cultural theory (Douglas, 1987; Thompson et al., 1999; Verweij, 1999; Verweij, 2006) can help us understand the non-intentional effects of accounting. In cultural theory three different ways of organising (hierarchism, individualism and egalitarianism) are supposed to underpin all different cultures and organisations. These different principles complement each other and an organisation that lacks one of the principles is unlikely to sustain. From the background of cultural theory I discuss how different forms of accounting crowd-out or crowd-in different ways of organising. Through the article I make references to one example on organisation in order to illustrate the theoretical discussion.

This article is written to follow up on a discussion initiated by Callon and Muniesa (2005) who criticized the distinction between pure calculation (assumed in neoclassical economics) and pure judgment (assumed in ethnographic studies). They suggested a third perspective: calculations are performed by technological devices. Furthermore, they call this process ‘the qualification process’ and claim that it brings calculation and judgment together. However, in this third perspective, the meaning of judgment is reduced and has become synonymous with making distinctions. I argue that an understanding of real markets must consider two parallel processes: a ‘calculative process’ and a ‘judgmental process’. In the real market both a ‘calculative process’ and a ‘judgmental process’ involve a process where the buyer and seller ‘test’ different prices. When it comes to the judgmental process storytelling is an indispensable cultural tool. This is demonstrated using field material collected at a tanker chartering firm