12 This last point brings out important differences in social scientific voice evident in these four papers.
It is a difference which can be characterized in terms of an orientation which is external to practice and critical versus one which is internal, proximate and nor-matively motivated by the need to try to ‘make things better’.
The former expands the context of our understanding of Business risk auditing, the latter expands its content.
The former draws on sociological ideas and points to strategies of legitimation, the latter draws more on decision science and points to efforts at improvement.
The reader of this collection is invited to judge how these two different voices engage each other or whether the luxury of social critique and commentary removed from the necessity of action is fundamentally different from making a pragmatic and nor-mative case for change.