Search results

This paper's purpose is to provide a commentary on “Qualitative management accounting research: rationale, pitfalls and potential,” a paper by Juhani Vaivio.

The approach is to draw on alternative research paradigms to expand the definition and discussion of qualitative research in management accounting.

The paper endorses many of the prescriptions in Vaivio but expands the definition and discussion of qualitative research in management accounting to recognize the blurred boundaries with field research more generally, and to be more inclusive of qualitative field research from a positivist/functionalist perspective. Similarly, the need for qualitative research to challenge textbook, economics and consulting representations of management accounting is acknowledged, but the range of catalysts is expanded to highlight the potential for qualitative research building on both qualitative and quantitative extant research. This paper also seeks to broaden the discussion of legitimate study design characteristics and data collection methods, and to stress the importance of matching research design with research question.

The paper stresses the value of pluralism and inclusiveness in both methodological and method choices.

The purpose of this Special Issue of Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management is to focus on qualitative research in accounting from a North American perspective. The goal is to highlight the possibility of greater contributions to qualitative research in accounting from researchers based in North America and to highlight some significant contributions produced by authors in North American universities in the qualitative domain.

The paper is conceptual in nature.

This sample of North American qualitative research in accounting provides an example of some of the different types of qualitative work being done. In most respects the articles are similar to qualitative research being done in other parts of the world. Perhaps the key difference is that the research has been undertaken for the most part by senior researchers who have been able to take some risks with a research paradigm that may not be widely accepted at their universities or they may be fortunate to be located at universities which value such research.

The paper broadens the view of qualitative research to North America where it appears that qualitative research has been relatively undervalued in recent years.

The purpose of this paper is to present and analyze the opinions of a number of editors of accounting journals on the value they attach to the practical relevance of management accounting research and the potential role of qualitative methods in conducting this type of research.

This paper collects together commentaries from these journal editors about the theme indicated above, together with an overview and reflections by the editors of this special issue.

The journal editors do not regard a lack of practical relevance in management accounting research as a key concern. Most of them see practice‐relevance and theoretical advancement as complementary, while the latter is given by far the most weight as the core of academic work. Furthermore, most journal editors have no clear preference for either qualitative or quantitative research in relation to the practical relevance issue. Neither do they seem to have strong opinions about the specific benefits of qualitative methods in practice‐relevant studies. In their commentaries, the editors of this special issue advocate a stronger connection between the needs of practitioners and the content of the research, more interventionist research in which practitioners and researchers work together, and a greater focus on communication between academics and practitioners about the practical implications of management accounting research. The special issue editors specifically emphasize the importance of this communication in relation to safeguarding the “support” of various groups in society for academic research.

The paper contributes to the ongoing debate about the practical relevance of management accounting research, and particularly to the role of qualitative methods in practice‐relevant studies.

By collecting and analyzing the opinions of editors of several prominent accounting journals on the practice‐relevance of the research in this field, a contribution is made to the ongoing debate about this issue.

This paper aims to identify specific challenges and opportunities when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. In addition, it offers potential remedies to frequent challenges when conducting such reviews.

This piece is based on recent methodological advice on conducting literature reviews and my own experience when conducting and publishing reviews that primarily cover qualitative accounting research.

The author chart three typical advantages and three typical use cases of literature reviews of qualitative accounting research, as well as the typical process steps and outputs of such reviews. Along with these process steps, The author identifies three overarching specific challenges when conducting such reviews and discusses potential remedies. Overall, this paper suggests that literature reviews of qualitative accounting research feature idiosyncratic challenges but offer specific opportunities at the same time.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to offer advice on the specific challenges and opportunities when conducting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research.

This paper aims to offer an insight into the emergent qualitative methodological profile and its distinctive contribution to accounting and management scholarship, particularly reflecting upon the contribution of Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management (QRAM).

It examines the range of qualitative methodologies employed in the research published across the ten years of QRAM and analyses the methodological discourse and its contribution to the armoury available to qualitative researchers. In association with these methodological developments, the paper offers a critique of the articulated role of theory in contemporary accounting and management qualitative research.

A wide range of qualitative methodologies are found to be in evidence, with considerable scope for further adoption and development of some. Methodological exposition papers are found to be a significant contribution in the past decade and include methodological framework building, methodological applications, methodological critiques, and methodological development exemplars. Alongside methodology, the dual role of theory as either informing or reflecting methodology is presented.

The paper provides a critical analysis and consideration of qualitative methodological literature development in the last ten years of accounting and management research literature, particularly reflected in QRAM. It identifies dominant methodologies in use, as well as opportunities for expanding the methodological menu in accounting and management research. Furthermore, it classifies groups of methodological papers and their contributing perspectives, as well as addressing the often-vexed relationship between theory and methodology.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and articulate concepts and approaches to qualitative generalisation that will offer qualitative accounting researchers avenues for enhancing and justifying the general applicability of their research findings and conclusions.

The study and arguments draw from multidisciplinary approaches to this issue. The analysis and theorising is based on published qualitative research literatures from the fields of education, health sciences, sociology, information systems, management and marketing, as well as accounting.

The paper develops two overarching generalisation concepts for application by qualitative accounting researchers. These are built upon a number of qualitative generalisation concepts that have emerged in the multidisciplinary literatures. It also articulates strategies for enhancing the generalisability of qualitative accounting research findings.

The paper provides qualitative accounting researchers with understandings, arguments and justifications for the generalisability of their research and the related potential for wider accounting and societal contributions. It also articulates the key factors that impact on the quality of research generalisation that qualitative researchers can offer.

This paper presents the most comprehensively sourced and developed approach to the concepts, strategies and unique deliverables of qualitative generalising hitherto available in the accounting research literature.

This paper aims to offer a brief personal reflection upon, and celebrates, the 10th anniversary of Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management (QRAM). More specifically, the author highlights the journal's contributions towards advancing qualitative management accounting research over the last decade, and the author suggests possible future avenues.

This short paper mainly constitutes a review of qualitative management accounting articles published in the first ten years of QRAM's publishing life, plus some personal reflection and suggestions for future directions.

The author celebrates the impressive achievements of QRAM's founding editors, and the author is encouraged to offer the personal views on how the journal might excel further in years to come.

Although the piece is primarily personal reflection, there is hopefully some food for thought with regard to fruitful directions in tomorrow's qualitative management accounting research. In particular, arguments are made for more undertaking of processual qualitative research and also for more targeted focus on the connections between management accounting and other relevant disciplines such as management and organisation studies.

The paper offers no practical implications as such, but does discuss, and in fact heeds some caution against, the apparent trend of (possibly too uncritically) seeking to tease out practical implications from qualitative management accounting research.

Again, while this paper offers no specific discussion on its social implications, the author would add that any qualitative management accounting research paper inherently carries at least some implications for society; management accounting and the wider society are continually intertwined through time.

The author would not claim that there is much that is original in this short piece – most of what is offered simply gathers others' past contributions. But hopefully there will be some values in the ideas offered with regard to the exciting future ahead for qualitative management accounting research in QRAM.

The paper aims to provide an overview of the rationale for qualitative research in management accounting. It discusses how qualitative research could serve the development of theory, and provides guiding principles for qualitative investigation. It also seeks to identify common problems in qualitative studies and lays out avenues for further qualitative inquiry.

The paper relies on critical reflection and deductive logic in its discussion, drawing on a wide range of theoretical pronouncements and methodological literature, as well as on some illustrative field studies in management accounting.

The paper opens a broad panorama: it emphasizes field research as a necessary counterweight to textbook appreciations of management accounting, to idealized economic models and to consultancy‐oriented agenda. It identifies how field research serves theory development in different ways, providing a set of practical principles which assist qualitative efforts. The paper also specifies pitfalls in qualitative studies and shows areas where the future potential of qualitative investigations can be focused.

This is a paper that motivates the “qualitative” management accounting scholar. But it also assists in a pragmatic way the qualitatively oriented management accounting scholar – especially someone with little prior experience in empirical fieldwork and in the theoretical interpretation of qualitative data.

The paper provides a source of inspiration, an instructive reflection and a practical guide for the qualitatively oriented, but still somewhat hesitant, management accounting scholar.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a personal, reflective analysis of publications over the last decade in Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management (QRAM) and to assess the implications for the future development of the journal, the practice of qualitative accounting research and the broader standing of the accounting discipline.

Reviewing QRAM published papers across a range of themes, including the spirit of generated debate, the representation and classification of qualitative research and the range of contributory authors. Using the review to identify important patterns and trends in the standing and practice of qualitative accounting research.

Highlighting the existence and contribution of numerous carefully crafted, thought provoking papers published in QRAM and drawing on them to present a number of important challenges, priorities and attractive opportunities for the future development of qualitative accounting research. Encouraging greater diversity, flexibility and creativity in the undertaking and utilisation of qualitative accounting research.

Emphasising how thinking differently about the emotions and lived experiences of qualitative accounting research(ers) can serve to inspire theoretical development, enhance trust in researcher judgement, and stimulate more fruitful and intellectually rewarding ways of doing qualitative accounting research.

Reminding of the value of reading papers as compared to relying on formal journal rankings. Revealing residing defensiveness tendencies in the undertaking of qualitative accounting research and arguing that restrictive representations and conceptions of “legitimate” qualitative accounting research are constraining what can be achieved and experienced both by individual accounting researchers and the discipline more generally.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the knowledge claim of management accounting research using qualitative research methods, in particular, the interpretive case study, and its evaluation using “convincingness” criteria demonstrating the textual authenticity, plausibility and criticality of case study findings.

Qualitative research in the management accounting field considers both context and function (Burchell et al., 1980). This study sets out the rationale for adopting qualitative methodologies such as interpretive case studies in which rich, contextual and detailed data were collected and analyzed (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Mason, 2002). Methodological issues related to research design, analysis and evaluation are discussed by drawing on frameworks of social science research design. The paper sets out the procedures of an interpretive case study essential to ensuring the procedural validity of research which can be evaluated more accurately using the criteria of “convincingness” rather than positivist measures of the reliability, validity of data and the generalization of results. Textual authenticity, plausibility and critical interpretation, and how these hallmarks of “convincingness” can reflect the procedural validity of accounting research are described.

Qualitative research strategies such as the interpretive case study, which consider the complex settings of accounting change and practice, are found to offer deep understandings and convincing explanations of accounting change. Affirming that accounting is firmly established as a social science, the paper finds that the authenticity, plausibility and criticality of research in this field.

The relevance of qualitative research to contemporary accounting research is considered as an effective method to explicate theory and inform practice, which suggests that new measures to evaluate related research are required to develop the potential of selected qualitative research methodologies in accounting domains.

Qualitative research in management accounting focuses on the interpretation of meanings found in people and organizations that are subject to the influence of contextual variables. Human attributes underpin accounting conventions and change resulting from continuous technological and regulatory advances. This paper’s comprehensive account of interpretive case study research emphasizes the significance of evaluative criteria that relate, beyond reliability, to the richness of the text. This, thus, encourages and supports new and emerging researchers to seek qualitatively coherent and critical interpretations in management accounting research.