Search results

1 – 10 of over 73000
Article
Publication date: 2 October 2014

Kari Lukka and Eija Vinnari

The purpose of this paper is to distinguish two roles of theories, domain theory and method theory, and examine their relationships in management accounting research. Are these…

8104

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to distinguish two roles of theories, domain theory and method theory, and examine their relationships in management accounting research. Are these two roles explicitly distinguished in management accounting studies? Can this be achieved in an unambiguous manner? Where do ambitions for theoretical contribution lie in management accounting studies that employ method theories?

Design/methodology/approach

The authors develop a conceptual framework for analysing possible relationships between domain theories and method theories in studies and illustrate the theoretical arguments with examples from management accounting studies employing Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as their method theory.

Findings

There can be various types of relationships between domain theories and method theories, and the theoretical ambition of the analysed studies typically focused on domain theories. However, ambiguity can exist with regard to the location of a study's theoretical ambition. Both domain theories and method theories tend to be moving fields, and their interaction can add to this feature.

Research limitations/implications

The suggested conceptual clarification assists in the reconciliation of extreme perspectives that relate to management accounting and theory. It will also help researchers to systematically design their own work and evaluate that of others. An increased understanding of how a field develops as a result of interaction with method theories might perhaps alleviate concerns regarding the value of mobilizing the latter.

Originality/value

The analysis contributes to the on-going debate on the value and effects of employing method theories, or theoretical lenses, in management accounting research.

Details

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 27 no. 8
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3574

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 4 July 2020

David Swanson, Lakshmi Goel, Kristoffer Francisco and James Stock

General theories have been criticized for their inability to explore the mechanics of more specific domain knowledge and understand how, when and where general theory applies to…

Abstract

Purpose

General theories have been criticized for their inability to explore the mechanics of more specific domain knowledge and understand how, when and where general theory applies to and extends domain knowledge in supply chain management (SCM). Middle-range theorizing (MRT) is a potential solution to this limitation. This paper aims to assist researchers in understanding the relationship between MRT and general theorizing (GT) and connecting MRT research findings to general theory.

Design/methodology/approach

This research provides a structured literature review of 518 articles, from eight journals in logistics, SCM and operations management. Theoretically based articles are analyzed by primary domain and SCM context.

Findings

There are frameworks for conducting MRT; however, the literature does not sufficiently assist researchers in understanding how middle-range (MR) theory should relate to general theory. Findings include a better understanding of underserved areas in SCM, guideline frameworks for understanding when to apply MRT, when to apply GT and how MRT knowledge can be connected to SCM domain knowledge.

Originality/value

This study provides a timely and appropriate compilation of theory research in SCM, including significant implications for both theory and practice, by helping to articulate the evolving philosophy of science in SCM.

Details

The International Journal of Logistics Management, vol. 31 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-4093

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 9 December 2021

Lin Wang and Junping Qiu

The conditions that domain analysis becomes an academic school of information science (IS) are mature. Domain analysis is one of the most important foundations of IS. The purpose…

Abstract

Purpose

The conditions that domain analysis becomes an academic school of information science (IS) are mature. Domain analysis is one of the most important foundations of IS. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and discuss metatheoretical and theoretical issues in the domain analytic paradigm in IS.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper conducts a systematic review of representative publications of domain analysis. The analysis considered degree theses, journal articles, book chapters, conference papers and other materials.

Findings

Domain analysis maintains that community is the new focus of IS research. Although domain analysis centers on the domain and community, theoretical concerns on the social and individual dimensions of IS are inherent in it by its using sociology as its important approach and socio-cognitive viewpoint. For these reasons domain analysis can integrate social–community–individual levels of IS discipline as a whole. The role of subject knowledge in IS is discussed from the perspective of domain analysis. Realistic pragmatism that forms the philosophical foundation of domain analysis is argued and the implications of these theories to IS are presented.

Originality/value

The intellectual evolving landscape of domain analysis during a quarter century is comprehensively reviewed. Over the past twenty-five years, domain analysis has established its academic status in the international IS circle. Being an important metatheory, paradigm and methodology, domain analysis becomes the theoretical foundation of IS research. This paper assesses the current state of domain analysis and shows the contributions of domain analysis to IS. It also aims to inspire further exploration.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. 78 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 25 March 2008

Mark D. Agars, James C. Kaufman and Tiffany R. Locke

Organizational creativity and innovation are inherently complex phenomena, and subject to a myriad of broad contextual and social influences. As the evidence grows for the link…

Abstract

Organizational creativity and innovation are inherently complex phenomena, and subject to a myriad of broad contextual and social influences. As the evidence grows for the link between innovation and organizational effectiveness and, ultimately, organizational survival, there is no doubting the need for theoretical and practical advances in our understanding. The complex nature of these constructs, however, requires that such efforts utilize a multi-level lens. This chapter discusses key aspects of creativity and innovation in organizations, including fundamental construct definition issues, which underscore the need for a multi-level perspective. It also reviews extant theoretical perspectives for their contributions to a multi-level understanding, and the research in two key areas of social influence – group factors and leadership – that have received substantial attention in the organizational literature. The review and discussion of these areas reveal not only numerous advances, but also substantial limitations that must be resolved through more complex and comprehensive (i.e., multi-level) approaches. The chapter concludes with several recommendations intended to guide and inform future work in the organizational creativity and innovation field.

Details

Multi-Level Issues in Creativity and Innovation
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-84950-553-6

Article
Publication date: 15 February 2016

Kari Lukka and Eija Vinnari

The purpose of this paper is to provide a response to the commentary of Lowe, De Loo and Nama concerning the authors’ previous article, which was published in Accounting, Auditing

889

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide a response to the commentary of Lowe, De Loo and Nama concerning the authors’ previous article, which was published in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Volume 27 Number 8.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors address the main points of the commentary by Lowe et al.

Findings

In addressing each of these issues, the authors point out a few misunderstandings included in the critique as well as make an attempt to further clarify the previous argument.

Originality/value

The authors maintain that distinguishing between domain theory and method theory in accounting research will be of help to researchers in several ways.

Details

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 29 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3574

Keywords

Open Access
Article
Publication date: 25 April 2020

Sebastian Maximilian Dennerlein, Vladimir Tomberg, Tamsin Treasure-Jones, Dieter Theiler, Stefanie Lindstaedt and Tobias Ley

Introducing technology at work presents a special challenge as learning is tightly integrated with workplace practices. Current design-based research (DBR) methods are focused on…

2073

Abstract

Purpose

Introducing technology at work presents a special challenge as learning is tightly integrated with workplace practices. Current design-based research (DBR) methods are focused on formal learning context and often questioned for a lack of yielding traceable research insights. This paper aims to propose a method that extends DBR by understanding tools as sociocultural artefacts, co-designing affordances and systematically studying their adoption in practice.

Design/methodology/approach

The iterative practice-centred method allows the co-design of cognitive tools in DBR, makes assumptions and design decisions traceable and builds convergent evidence by consistently analysing how affordances are appropriated. This is demonstrated in the context of health-care professionals’ informal learning, and how they make sense of their experiences. The authors report an 18-month DBR case study of using various prototypes and testing the designs with practitioners through various data collection means.

Findings

By considering the cognitive level in the analysis of appropriation, the authors came to an understanding of how professionals cope with pressure in the health-care domain (domain insight); a prototype with concrete design decisions (design insight); and an understanding of how memory and sensemaking processes interact when cognitive tools are used to elaborate representations of informal learning needs (theory insight).

Research limitations/implications

The method is validated in one long-term and in-depth case study. While this was necessary to gain an understanding of stakeholder concerns, build trust and apply methods over several iterations, it also potentially limits this.

Originality/value

Besides generating traceable research insights, the proposed DBR method allows to design technology-enhanced learning support for working domains and practices. The method is applicable in other domains and in formal learning.

Details

Information and Learning Sciences, vol. 121 no. 3/4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2398-5348

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 1 July 2020

Hans-Jürgen Bruns, Mark Christensen and Alan Pilkington

The article's aim is to refine prospects for theorising in public sector accounting (PSA) research in order to capture the methodological benefits promised by its…

Abstract

Purpose

The article's aim is to refine prospects for theorising in public sector accounting (PSA) research in order to capture the methodological benefits promised by its multi-disciplinarity.

Design/methodology/approach

The study primarily employs a bibliometric analysis of research outputs invoking New Public Management (NPM). Applying a content analysis to Hood (1991), as the most cited NPM source, bibliographic methods and citation/co-citation analysis for the period 1991 to 2018 are mobilised to identify the disciplinary evolution of the NPM knowledge base from a structural and longitudinal perspective.

Findings

The analysis exhibits disciplinary branching of NPM over time and its imprints on post-1990 PSA research. Given the discourse about origins of NPM-based accounting research, there are research domains behind the obvious that indicate disciplinary fragmentations. For instance, novelty of PSA research is found in public value accounting, continuity is evidenced by transcending contextual antecedents. Interestingly, these domains are loosely coupled. Exploring the role of disciplinary imprints designates prospects for post-NPM PSA research that acknowledges multi-disciplinarity and branching in order to deploy insularity as a building block for its inquiries.

Research limitations/implications

Criteria for assessing the limitations and credibility of an explorative inquiry are used, especially on how the proposal to develop cumulative knowledge from post-1990 PSA research can be further developed.

Practical implications

A matrix suggesting a method of ordering disciplinary references enables positioning of research inquiries within PSA research.

Originality/value

By extending common taxonomies of PSA intellectual heritages, the study proposes the ‘inquiry-heritage’ matrix as a typology that displays patterns of theorisation for positioning an inquiry within PSA disciplinary groundings.

Details

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 33 no. 8
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3574

Keywords

Content available
Article
Publication date: 14 March 2016

There are five factors acting as a barrier to the effective evaluation of educational technology (edtech), which are as follows: premature timing, inappropriate techniques, rapid…

Abstract

Purpose

There are five factors acting as a barrier to the effective evaluation of educational technology (edtech), which are as follows: premature timing, inappropriate techniques, rapid change, complexity of context and inconsistent terminology. The purpose of this paper is to identify new evaluation approaches that will address these and reflect on the evaluation imperative for complex technology initiatives.

Approach

An initial investigation of traditional evaluative approaches used within the technology domain was broadened to investigate the evaluation practices within social and public policy domains. Realist evaluation, a branch of theory-based evaluation, was identified and reviewed in detail. The realist approach was then refined, proposing two additional necessary steps to support mapping the technical complexity of initiatives.

Findings

A refined illustrative example of a realist evaluation framework is presented, including two novel architectural edtech domain reference models to support mapping.

Practical implications

Recommendations include building individual evaluator capacity; adopting the realist framework; the use of architectural edtech domain reference models; phased evaluation to first build theories in technology “context” and then iteratively during complex implementation chains; and community contribution to a shared map of technical and organisational complexity.

Originality

This paper makes a novel contribution by arguing the imperative for a theory-based realist approach to help redefine evaluative thinking within the IT and complex system domain. It becomes an innovative proposal with the addition of two domain reference models that tailor the approach for edtech. Its widespread adoption will help build a shared evidence base that synthesizes and surfaces “what works, for whom, in which contexts and why”, benefiting educators, IT managers, funders, policymakers and future learners.

Details

Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 18 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1328-7265

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 7 September 2018

Christopher R. Penney, James G. Combs, Nolan Gaffney and Jennifer C. Sexton

Theory predicts that balancing exploratory and exploitative learning (i.e., ambidexterity) across alliance portfolio domains (e.g. value chain function, governance modes…

Abstract

Purpose

Theory predicts that balancing exploratory and exploitative learning (i.e., ambidexterity) across alliance portfolio domains (e.g. value chain function, governance modes) increases firm performance, whereas balance within domains decreases performance. Prior empirical work, however, only assessed balance/imbalance within and across two domains. The purpose of this study is to determine if theory generalizes beyond specific domain combinations. The authors investigated across multiple domains to determine whether alliance portfolios should be imbalanced toward exploration or exploitation within domains or balanced across domains. The authors also extended prior research by exploring whether the direction of imbalance matters. Current theory only advises managers to accept imbalance without helping with the choice between exploration and exploitation.

Design/methodology/approach

Hypotheses are tested using fixed-effects generalized least squares (GLS) regression analysis of a large 13-year panel sample of Fortune 500 firms from 1996 to 2008.

Findings

With respect to the balance between exploration and exploitation within each of the five domains investigated, imbalanced alliance portfolios had higher firm performance. No evidence was found that balance across domains relates to performance. Instead, for four of the five domains, imbalance toward exploration related positively to firm performance.

Originality/value

An alliance portfolio that allows for exploration in some domains and exploitation in other domains appears more difficult to implement than prior theory suggests. Firms benefit mostly from using the alliance portfolio for exploratory learning.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 15 February 2016

Alan D. Lowe, Ivo De Loo and Yesh Nama

The purpose of this paper is to constructively discuss the meaning and nature of (theoretical) contribution in accounting research, as represented by Lukka and Vinnari (2014…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to constructively discuss the meaning and nature of (theoretical) contribution in accounting research, as represented by Lukka and Vinnari (2014) (hereafter referred to as LV). The authors aim is to further encourage debate on what constitutes management accounting theory (or theories) and how to modestly clarify contributions to the extant literature.

Design/methodology/approach

The approach the authors take can be seen as (a)n interdisciplinary literature sourced analysis and critique of the movement’s positioning and trajectory” (Parker and Guthrie, 2014, p. 1218). The paper also draws upon and synthesizes the present authors and other’s contributions to accounting research using actor network theory.

Findings

While a distinction between domain and methods theories … may appear analytically viable, it may be virtually impossible to separate them in practice. In line with Armstrong (2008), the authors cast a measure of doubt on the quest to significantly extend theoretical contributions from accounting research.

Research limitations/implications

Rather than making (apparently) grandiose claims about (theoretical) contributions from individual studies, the authors suggest making more modest claims from the research. The authors try to provide a more appropriate and realistic approach to the appreciation of research contributions.

Originality/value

The authors contribute to the debate on how theoretical contributions can be made in the accounting literature by constructively debating some views that have recently been outlined by LV. The aim is to provide some perspective on the usefulness of the criteria suggested by these authors. The authors also suggest and highlight (alternative) ways in which contributions might be discerned and clarified.

Details

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, vol. 29 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0951-3574

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 73000