Pacific Accounting Review

Evaluating qualitative research in management accounting using the criteria of

“convincingness”
Nizar Mohammad Alsharari, Mohammed Al-Shboul,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Nizar Mohammad Alsharari, Mohammed Al-Shboul, (2019) "Evaluating qualitative research in
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

management accounting using the criteria of “convincingness”", Pacific Accounting Review, https://
doi.org/10.1108/PAR-03-2016-0031
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-03-2016-0031
Downloaded on: 13 March 2019, At: 00:56 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 128 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 29 times since 2019*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:479148 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0114-0582.htm

The criteria of
Evaluating qualitative research in convincingness
management accounting using the
criteria of “convincingness”
Nizar Mohammad Alsharari
Higher Colleges of Technology, Sharjah Men’s Campus, Business Department,
Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, and
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Mohammed Al-Shboul
University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Abstract
Purpose – 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.
Design/methodology/approach – 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.
Findings – 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.
Research limitations/implications – 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.
Originality/value – 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.
Keywords Qualitative research, Accounting research, “Convincingness” criteria, Finance research,
Interpretive paradigm
Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction Pacific Accounting Review

Qualitative research methods are being used increasingly to inquire into management © Emerald Publishing Limited
0114-0582
accounting not only as an adjunct to quantitative methods but also as research approaches DOI 10.1108/PAR-03-2016-0031
 PAR in their own right (Parker, 2003). Qualitative research methods can provide a clear
understanding of how meanings and rules in accounting practice are socially generated and
sustained (Hopwood, 1983; Kaplan, 1983; Kaplan, 1984; Hopper and Powell, 1985; Kaplan,
1986; Scapens, 1990; Humphrey and Scapens, 1996; Ryan et al., 2002; Navarro Galera and
Rodríguez Bolívar, 2007; Tikk and Almann, 2011).
Management accounting scholars have found that qualitative methods, particularly
interpretive case studies, can yield rich more explanation of the social world based on the
evidence of human experience and the meanings attached to actions in actors’ language.
Johnson and Christensen (2007) point out that the appropriate sites of business research and
where theories relating to the complexities of change and its longer-term implications can be
developed, are the organizations and institutions where business takes place. The
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

interpretive case study approach, therefore, enables researchers to make sense of the
evolution of accounting processes and its languages, as social practices with reference to
surrounding institutions and underpinning routines (Nahapiet, 1988) on the basis of direct
knowledge.
However, how qualitative interpretive research should be evaluated is a contested topic
as conceptions of interpretive research continue to evolve. This is by “Considerable
controversy surrounds the issues of evidence, criteria, quality, and utility” (Denzin and
Lincoln, 2012, p. 21) at the broadest level of social science research. In the field of
management accounting, the potential for the development of theory and leading to practice
through qualitative research is stymied by a reprise of quantitatively empirical conventions.
This is indicative of a retreat into “value-free objectivist science” (Carey, 1989, p. 104)
characterized by technical rationalities in reaction to poststructuralist assertions of
multitudinous, layered truths. Because such resistance in predominantly positivist academic
research environments to qualitative inquiries that rely on their authority on the textual
authority of description and explanation, potentially significant avenues of inquiry pertinent
to business, government and society may be neglected.
This paper proposes that the multiple realities and shared understandings that populate
the findings of research using interpretivist methods are ultimately convincing precisely
because of their “allegorical register” (Clifford, 1986, p. 103; White, 1987, p. 172). Assessment
criteria beyond positivist measures of “objectivity” such as reliability, validity and
generalizability imply that research is trustworthy, credible, confirmable and transferable;
nonetheless, these are general terms not readily qualified. Therefore, this research proposes
that authenticity, plausibility and criticality are salient and specific criteria of the
“convincingness” of qualitative research. Further, it is the textual figuration of these
qualities ultimately imparts the “look of truth” (Geertz, 1988, p. 3; Baxter and Chua, 2008).
The study proposes the interpretive case study to be the optimal means of tracking
different paths of accounting change and its effects over time (Brignall and Modell, 2000) as
positioning all types of information in time is a key to assessing its usefulness and value.
The relevant methodological issues are discussed in the context of social science research
philosophy and paradigmatic consistency. The paper then gives an overview of appropriate
research approach, strategy and design for conducting an interpretive case study in the
management accounting domain. The criteria of textual “convincingness” are introduced
and their relationship to the process of qualitative data analysis is discussed prior to the
conclusion.

2. Research philosophy and paradigm

As “an overarching term relating to the development of knowledge and the nature of that
knowledge” (Saunders et al., 2009, p. 107), research philosophy reflects the researcher’s
 worldview as a container of assumptions about the world that will then inform the research The criteria of
strategy and the methods that will best serve that approach (Blumberg et al., 2008; Saunders convincingness
et al., 2009), recognizing the significance of pragmatic thinking (Blumberg et al., 2008).
Differences in philosophical stance will influence thinking about the research process such
that knowledge and understanding in a particular area is advanced (Saunders et al., 2009).
Underlying a knowledge claim (what the researcher believes to be the case and is willing to
assess its validity), the research paradigm (Creswell, 2003) represents a way of thinking
about the nature of organizations (Gioia and Pitre, 1990) and signifying the investigative
method. Burrell and Morgan (1979, p. 1) proposed that “all theories of organization are based
upon a philosophy of science and a theory of society.” The philosophical (worldview), the
social (strategy) and the technical (method) are the dimensions of the assumptions about the
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

nature of social science consisting of four interrelated elements.

The following figure explains the elements of social science pertaining to
knowledge: ontology (what knowledge is); epistemology (how knowledge is known);
human nature (expressed in relationships between people and their environment); and
methodology (ways of investigating phenomena and ultimately and creating
knowledge) (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Hopper and Powell, 1985; Gioia and Pitre, 1990;
Creswell, 2003).
Figure 1 sets out Burrell and Morgan’s (1979) sequence of the subjective–objective
dimension from the qualitative emphasis of the subjectivist position, to the quantitative
inclinations of the objectivist stance. In the latter, nomothetic methods used in the natural
sciences use hypothesis testing, in quantitative techniques such as surveys and
questionnaires, personality tests and standardized research instruments of all types (ibid.).
Its subjectivist counterpart, the idiographic method seeks insight through direct knowledge
in processes of self-disclosure such as interviews (ibid.).
The second dimension of analysis considers two approaches to the nature of society. One
approach concerns regulation, order and stability elements of social cohesion, while the
other approach concerns divisions of interest and unequal power distributions underlying
the potential for “radical change”. Figure 2 shows the four standpoints, namely, the
functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist and radical structuralism paradigms – resulting
from the relation of the independent dimensions of social science and society.
In the analysis of social phenomena, the researcher’s sociological perspective can be
plotted on the subjective–objective horizontal axis and on the vertical sequence of

The subjectivist The subjective- The objectivist

approach to social objective dimension approach to
science social science

Nominalism Ontology Realism

Anti-positivism Epistemology Positivism

Voluntarism Human nature Determinism Figure 1.

A Scheme for
Ideographic Methodology Nomothetic analyzing
assumptions about
the nature of social
science
Source: Burrell and Morgan (1979, p. 3)
 PAR THE SOCIOLOGY OF RADICAL CHANGE

Radical Radical
humanist structuralist

SUBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE

Interpreve Funconalist
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Figure 2.
Burrell and Morgan’s THE SOCIOLOGY OF REGULATION
(1979) Framework:
four paradigms
Source: Burrell and Morgan (1979, p. 22)

assumptions about society ranging from regulation to radical change (Burrell and
Morgan, 1979; Cooper, 1983). In general, these four paradigms as presented above
correspond to four conceptual areas, where subjectivism draws out social actors’ perceptions
of social phenomena, objectivist positions view social actors as existing externally to social
entities (Saunders et al., 2009). At the critical extreme of radical change, disruption of the
status quo contrasts the explanatory regulatory approach to problems of social organization
that seeks to work within extant arrangements (ibid.).
More recent models of interpretive paradigms describe social and political change
based on race, class, gender and emancipatory identities. These elaborations of
paradigmatic perspectives apply in all social science and humanities disciplines (may,
indeed, apply in management accounting research, for example, in developing
economies with colonial institutional legacies). The current study finds, however, that
Burrell and Morgan’s (1979) model better suits its purpose of placing accounting
research in the interpretive stream, which emphasizes the social values and
implications of its “technical” norms and procedures and to develop the rationale for its
evaluation using “convincingness” criteria.
Three accounting research perspectives are produced from the model of social
science research paradigms as described above: mainstream, interpretive and critical
(Ryan et al., 2002, p. 43). The mainstream (functional) research paradigm implicitly
accepts and supports the status quo by reproducing ideology in the form of science,
thus neglecting the “commonsense understandings” imposed by wider social and
political collectivities (Hopper and Powell, 1985). The interpretive and critical
approaches critique the functional perspective, based on the absence of descriptions of
social change from the mainstream approach and thus, its lack of cumulative capacity
in studies of organizational change (Otley and Berry, 1994). In addition, by focusing on
subjectivity of meanings (Lukka, 2010), the interpretive paradigm recognizes that
organizational change involves relationships that are socially constructed (Ryan et al.,
2002; Lukka, 2010). The interpretive approach has therefore been useful in questioning
functionalism’s epistemological and ontological assumptions and introducing new
perspectives of accounting, providing not only the social context of accounting practice
but also social accounts of the business.
 2.1 An appropriate paradigm for accounting research The criteria of
Scapens (1999) proposes that the interpretive paradigm can advance management convincingness
accounting research into the social science mainstream. Where the conventional perspective
sees accounting as “a rather static and purely technical phenomenon” (Hopwood, 1976, p. 1).
Interpretive approaches diverge in their purpose of investigating “the complexities of [. . .]
the dynamics process of accounting [and] even what might be the quite significant ritualistic
role of many accounting systems” (Hopwood, 1976, p. 3).
Because accounting shapes are shaped by wider social processes (Hopwood, 1983;
Burchell et al., 1985; Chapman et al., 2009), context is filtered through an organization rather
than standing externally to it. In their focus on organizational change, interpretive
researchers can gain insight into how management accounting evolves from mechanistic or
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

technical forms to post-mechanistic processes. Institutional theories (Wickramasinghe and

Alawattage, 2007) are drawn on to create new contextual perspectives in a sociological
register (Ryan et al., 2002). This study draws on institutional frameworks variously
constructed by Alsharari et al. (2015), Dillard et al. (2004) and Burns and Scapens (2000). A
considerable number of accounting researchers have conducted their studies in the spirit of
the interpretive paradigm (Kakkuri-Knuuttila et al., 2008; Lukka, 2010; Lukka and Modell,
2010) to understand the nature of management accounting practices, and how practitioners
exercise their knowledge (Scapens, 2008). Oliveira (2010) develops a “conceptual contextual
framework” and triangulates three theoretical approaches to a management accounting
change.
Interpretive accounting research, with its potential to generate explanations of change
with a subjectivist emphasis (Lukka and Modell, 2010) can therefore, be portrayed “as a
loose alliance of many possible futures” (Baxter et al., 2008), in which more meaningful
evaluative criteria may be identified. This study aims to establish “convincingness” criteria
for the assessment of qualitative research in the management accounting and organizational
change literature, namely, authenticity and plausibility as core validators, along with the
criticality of qualitative interpretive research. The following sections discuss the
designation of research approach, strategy and design.

3. Research approach (methodology)

The research methodology in the current study is based on an interpretive research setting
in the context of explaining management accounting change to examine the interplay
between the contexts and functions of management accounting practice. It sets out the
rationale for adopting qualitative, interpretive methodologies in management accounting
based on collecting and analyzing rich, contextual and detailed data. The methodological
issues related to qualitative research design, analysis and evaluation focus on providing
details of the procedures of an interpretive case study. Notions of research philosophy and
paradigm, research design and gathering and systematically analyzing the evidence are
examined in the context of evaluation by its internal validity or “convincingness”. The
emphasis on these criteria over those of quantitative validity and reliability can assist new
researchers to provide more coherent and plausible analyzes and results in management
accounting research.
According to Seale et al. (2004), procedural issues define how qualitative methodology
produces knowledge about the world. In schematic terms, inductive thinking informs
qualitative research (Thorne et al., 1997) and develops theory from observed reality (Collis
and Hussey, 2009). Generalizations or patterns construed in theoretical statements from
empirical findings, aim to interpret and explain the occurrences of phenomena (Otley and
Berry, 1994). In the deductive approach, the explanation of causal relationships between
 PAR variables relies on quantitative data (Saunders et al., 2009). Thus, in logical and
psychological terms, both inductive and deductive approaches require distinct modes of
thought (Goel and Dolan, 2004). The subjective interpretive paradigm conceptualizes theory
as an aid to explaining human intentions. To explain the “black box” of phenomena,
qualitative research invokes various data collection methods, including the socialization of
the researcher into those processes, which continuously define (and redefine) an
organization’s characteristics (Patton, 1989; Pallot, 1992; Yin, 2003). Consistent with
institutional theory, accounting theory aims to explain practice and to understand how
social order is produced and reproduced (Chua, 1986) in socially constructed contexts. Thus,
in seeking to “describe, decode, translate, and otherwise come to terms with meaning”
(Easterby-Smith et al., 2008, p. 421), “qualitative research is an approach rather than a
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

particular set of techniques, which derives its suitability from the nature of the social
phenomena to be explored” (Morgan and Smircich, 1980, p. 491). By this rationale, the
interpretive study tends to prefer both qualitative and inductive approaches to understand
and provide a rich explanation of management accounting change, particularly of the
meanings attached to actions in the language of the actors.
Filstead (1992) argues that a qualitative research approach specifies, in more than a
technical description of the accounting system (Roberts and Scapens, 1985), a way of
explaining the empirical social world as it actually is. Using a field-based study is further
justified by the qualitative method’s capacity to reveal institutional pressures on
organizational activity (Hopper et al., 2001). Operating within a vast field of organizational
phenomena (Lapsley et al., 2009), such pressures cannot be understood in isolation (Caba-
Perez et al., 2009).

3.1 The case study as research strategy

In qualitative research, methodological strategy should be guided by its aptness in relation
to the research subject (Flick, 2009). Among types of field studies, the explanatory
(interpretive) case study is the preferred research strategy where the main research
questions require “detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions
and their relationships” (Carlström, 2012). A case study is “an empirical inquiry that
investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context [. . .] when the
boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin, 2003, p. 23).
Therefore, it is a relevant method in the management accounting context, given that
“organizational change involves patterns of engagement across organizational lines” (Kihn
and Ihantola, 2015, p. 230).
The case study method is criticized for a lack of rigor that precludes generalization of
results (Dixon and Smith, 1993; Baker and Bettner, 1997; Yin, 2003; Lukka and Modell,
2010), and further, that interpretive theories can be generated only in relation to the
organization or subject of study. Johnson (1992) advocates for the particular relevance of
fieldwork to business studies, stating that “[g]oing inside and studying intensely over a long
period the working of a real business organization is certainly the most important research
any business professor can do” [. . .] only a very narrow concept of “‘scientific’ investigation
[. . .] denies the validity no, the primacy of field-based research” (p. 189). Lukka and
Kasanen (1995) found the considerable potential for generalizing from high-quality case
studies and Gummesson (2000) points to the utility of this strategy in generating theoretical
generalizations as the basis for future research. Other critiques refer to the difficulty of
containing the social reality of organizations within realistic bounds to the degree that
objectivity may be compromised by the researcher bias given that “[the] social reality must
be interpreted by the researcher” (Scapens, 1990, p. 277). It may be argued that the problem
 of objectivity inheres in all research methods to varying degrees, and moreover, that all The criteria of
methods are ultimately interpretative. convincingness
The interpretative case study approach enables researchers to comprehend the
complexities and progress of accounting processes as social practices with reference to their
surrounding institutions and bases of routines (Nahapiet, 1988). The descriptive, illustrative,
experimental, exploratory and explanatory functions of interpretive case studies are not
based on pre-specified theories (Scapens, 1990). Their findings are nothing if not pluralistic
because they are undertaken in real world settings in which shared understandings arise
from the inter-subjectivity of researcher/participant relationships. Evaluations of their
legitimacy must, therefore, pertain to the authenticity and plausibility of reportage.
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

4. Research design
In a coherent research design, the purpose of the study is articulated, an initial set of
questions formulated and the data and methods that will supply answers determined (Yin,
2003). It is important that the researcher “also specifies how the investigator will address the
two critical issues of representation and legitimation” (Denzin and Lincoln, 2017, p. 21).
While the research process delineated in six sequential steps identified by Ryan et al. (2002)
is a useful guide, a more porous scheme of research phases, which includes “the researcher”,
describes relationships between elements of each phase (Denzin and Lincoln, 2017). This
scheme the better reflects the continuous back-and-forth interaction between data collection,
analysis and theory development.
A logical research plan begins with a review of the literature, particularly of the existing
theories that pertain to the research aims to develop the research questions and the selection
of one or a number of cases (Crosthwaite et al., 1997). Connecting and gaining access to
appropriate sites and sources of data may depend on the researcher’s having existing and
developing new contacts within target organizations. Providing a clear account of the
purpose and competencies and of the research project and highlighting benefits potentially
accruing to the participants is but a first step toward access. A primary concern of
organizations is the security of their confidential information and the use of their time and
resources and access will be conditional on the integrity of the project. Oliveira (2010) points
out that access may be limited or its continuity through the proposed study period not
assured and researchers should be pragmatic and adaptable in their theoretical purposes
from the outset.
The case study strategy implies the likely need to collect evidence from multiple sources of
data and to triangulate the findings of each (Saunders et al., 2009). This will not only “help the
researcher to generate rich field data with internal checks of its validity” (Modell, 2005, p. 482)
but also considers the relative strengths and weaknesses of single sources. While archival
records, for example, may offer evidence of contextual change (Saunders et al., 2009) in the
language and attitudes of the past, their validity is contingent upon the authenticity, accuracy
and completeness of particular documents (Creswell, 2003). The procedures of triangulation
give weight to procedural validity or the assurance that “the researcher has adopted
appropriate and reliable research methods and procedures [. . .] and another person could in
principle, at least, examine what has been done” (Scapens, 2004, p. 268). In addition to its
validating role, triangulating sources make a broader and a deeper understandings of
management accounting practices possible (Hopper and Hoque, 2006).
In the organizational contexts where accounting change takes place, relationships within
organizations and the impacts of external forces are rarely simple or linear (Hong, 1991;
Bhimani, 2001). Interpreting the evidence calls for contextual analysis and the development
of theory whose evaluation by the nominally standard criteria of reliability and validity.
 PAR Scapens (2004), therefore, proposed that the procedural reliability, contextual validity and
transferability of the research could establish its legitimacy. Lukka and Modell (2010) found
authenticity, plausibility and transferability, as suggested by Atkinson (1990), to be
appropriate yardsticks in the evaluation of qualitative research (Golden-Biddle and Locke,
1993; Carpenter and Hammell, 2000; Hammell, 2002; Baxter and Chua, 2008). In addition,
creating a database of all documentation in an evidence chain emerging from field work will
support the procedural validity of the research (Yin, 2003).

4.1 Collecting the evidence

Unstructured in-depth interviews have been used extensively in management accounting
literature to explore the dynamics of accounting change (Lapsley and Pallot, 2000; Scapens
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

and Jazayeri, 2003; Ezzamel et al., 2007; Lukka, 2007). The more informal approach of the in-
depth interview, in contrast to the closed questions of the structured interview, aims to
generate and expand lines of inquiry in the flow of conversation (Browne, 2005). The
dialogic quality of interviews, which Russell and Kelly (2002) characterize as “a reflexive
relationship with data” is a salient feature of critical qualitative inquiry (Denzin and Lincoln,
2017), based on the collaborative principles borrowed from community-based researches.
Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) identify three mechanics of interview conduct – recording
data, writing notes and producing evidence through transcription, analysis, verification and
reporting. Audio recording creates a permanent record that others can use (Patton, 2001;
Saunders et al., 2009), while allowing the interviewer to attend closely to participants’
responses and more flexibly direct the conversation. The recorded voice reveals tone,
inflections, hesitancies and emphases, while handwriting or keyboard records notes on
gestures and body language thoughts for subsequent questions or interviews (Mack et al.,
2005). Response bias can be avoided by pausing the off-the-record comments (Easterby-
Smith et al., 2008). In the transcription phase, the researcher can re-listen to the recording
and retrieve the unique speech acts of participants which, in direct quotation, provide
invaluable data (Patton, 2001). The presence of a voice recorder can, however, influence the
interviewer-subject relationship; the perception of a status or power differential may
potentially limit interpretation of the data. Transcription of audio is a time-consuming
process and depending on the recording quality, the transcript may require independent
proofreading to verify content accuracy.
From observation, a method of recording, describing, analyzing and interpreting human
behavior in natural settings situational knowledge that interviewees may not have or omit
or refuse to discuss may emerge (Garner, 1976; Hoepfl, 1997). Data sourced from observation
has an ostensibly descriptive purpose, but “the meanings of what is observed from the
perspective of the participants” (Hoepfl, 1997, p. 53) may be more relevant to the research
aim. Therefore, direct and participant observation are commonly used in qualitative
research (Browne, 2005) with the purpose of discovering the meanings people attach to their
actions, while structured observation is a quantitative method recording the frequency of
particular actions (Saunders et al., 2009).
In direct and participant observations, researchers must disclose their identities before
observing setting or event sources of data collection (e.g. they are employed by the
organization for research but do not take part in or influence the organization’s activities
(Ryan et al., 2002). This format is known as participant observation and is selected over
complete participant, complete observer and participant-as-observer methods when the
researcher is constrained by time and resources. Participant observations (the researcher as
a participant) can provide unusual opportunities for collecting case study data (Yin, 2003).
At the same time, however, documenting (recording) the data can be problematic and
 depending on the attention and perceptivity of the observer (Mack et al., 2005), the evidence The criteria of
may ultimately lack validity (Browne, 2005) as reconstructions of events may be less than convincingness
accurate. Hoepfl (1997) recommends note taking as an aid to memory immediately after
observation periods, which when enlarged can contribute to research themes and questions
for follow-up interviews. The researcher can use a range of analytical aids (i.e. interim
summaries, self-memos and a researcher diary) to recall the context and content of
interviews or observations and to inform analysis (Saunders et al., 2009).

5. Assessing the evidence by “convincingness” criteria

Perhaps in response to the reemergence of claims that exploratory qualitative methods cannot
represent “truth”, some researchers allude to a “crisis of validity”, based on a lack of agreement
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

about the evaluation of qualitative interpretive research (Kihn and Ihantola, 2015, p. 230). To
extend the knowledge claim of management accounting research using qualitative methods,
particularly the interpretive case study, this paper argues that evaluative criteria should
specifically relate to the “convincingness” of research demonstrated in its textual authority,
conferred by clarity and precision.
According to Atkinson (1990), the correspondence of research findings with reality does
not imply a lower empirical register:
Rather than detracting from our scholarly endeavors [. . .] an understanding of our textual
practices can only strengthen the critical reflection of a mature discipline [. . .] [i]f we comprehend
how our understandings of the world are fashioned and conveyed (Atkinson, 1990, p. 176).
Researchers, therefore, must convince readers that their identification with and understanding
of the real-life world of organizational members is the result of their having “been there.” The
satisfaction of these data collection criteria, together with the appropriate mobilization of
theory, then permits researchers to develop the “thick” explanations underscoring the value of
interpretive research (Lukka and Modell, 2010; Herbert and Seal, 2012).

5.1 Authenticity
In qualitative research “there are no canons, decision rules, algorithms or even agreed-upon
heuristics” (Miles and Huberman, 1984, p. 230). Textual authenticity aligns with the
interpretive research methodology of providing “inside” accounts of the meanings found in
people (Lukka and Modell, 2010). The “evidence of [authorial] involvement” (Myers, 1999,
p. 12) is validated by the disciplined pursuit, collection and analysis of data. As the first
dimension of “convincingness”, authenticity is the authority deriving from the researcher’s
presence at the site of research (Geertz, 1988). This first-hand experience of immersion will
be manifest in rich descriptions which impart an emic (internal) quality (Golden-Biddle and
Locke, 1993). The case study is a textual enterprise of writerly and authorial activities
(Atkinson and Hammersley, 1994; Jeffcutt, 1994), which entails some “calculative” reckoning
the precise time spent in the field, the number and type of informants and the quantum of
data collected (Briers and Chua, 2001). The field itself, it should be acknowledged, does not
come with any immanent form of coherence; instead, “disconnected” activities are
configured by the authorial imagination into a convincing account of it (Agar and Hobbs,
1982; Hammersley, 1983).
Authenticity is also availed by drawing questions and considerations from the data to
extend analysis and guide ethical decisions (Manning, 1997). Strategies for achieving
authentic resonance include particularizing the everyday life of organizational members
delineating the researcher–participant relationship and acknowledging personal biases.
Consequently, authenticity inheres in the trustworthiness of the research process contingent
 PAR on the role of the researcher-as-biographer that will be expressed in the depth of engagement
with the subject and participants, the factors that influence collection and analysis of the
evidence and openness to different theoretical perspectives (Strauss and Corbin, 1990, 2008;
Myers, 1999).
Sandelowski (1986, p. 30) suggests that the mark of authenticity of a qualitative study is
its presenting “such faithful descriptions or interpretations of a human experience that the
people having that experience would immediately recognize it from those descriptions or
interpretations as their own” (Hammell, 2002). Thus, the significance of identification with
the situations described in a case study by readers and other researchers (Burns, 2000)
makes explicit the transferability of case study findings (Pozzebon, 2003) to other contexts.
Clear, detailed and in-depth description enables others to identify resonances and transfer
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

them to other organizational settings (Hammell, 2002). Authenticity validates interpretive

research through textual richness, which has value for the literature of the field
(Hammersley, 1992). Plausibility, the second dimension, addresses its “contextual validity”
(Scapens, 2004).

5.2 Plausibility
The credibility of explanations developed within a theoretical framework is determined by
the analysis and reportage of interpretive research findings (Schultze, 2000). Textual
plausibility implies that interpretation cannot overstep the limits of the evidence. According
to Eyles (1988, p. 11), plausibility results when “principles of validation are internal to the
discourse itself [. . .] so much depends on the coherence of argument and the reason,
consistency and honesty of the theorist.”
As it is essentially a measure of sensemaking, the plausibility of interpretation will rely
on the degree to which “the findings of the study, whether in the form of description,
explanation or theory, ‘fit’ the data from which they are derived” (Sandelowski, 1986, p. 32).
A text that convinces in terms of its plausibility exhibits a form of literary authority or
vraisemblance, the appearance of truth (Atkinson, 1990, p. 39). Defined as the ability of the
text to connect with the reader’s worldview (Walsham and Sahay, 1999) – both personal and
disciplinary – plausibility invokes rhetorical strategies used to compose a text that resonates
with the target audience and is relevant to their concerns (Schultze, 2000).
In structural terms, plausibility relies on the interconnection of comprehending and
challenging assumptions. Strategies will refer to the logical and stylistic structure of the
research and to conformity with academic conventions such as citing previous research
(Schultze, 2000), with the objective of disciplinary coherence. For interpretive research to
generate new knowledge that has implications outside the original research setting
(transferability) (Klein and Myers, 1999), case study inferences should be assessed not only
by their representativeness but also by the plausibility of explanations. Thus, case studies
are likely to talk about tendencies (Walsham, 1995) rather than in terms of “law-like”
generation of knowledge assumed in positivist stances. In a technical sense distinctive
research contribution, the result of identifying a gap in the literature and its expression via
the development of a theoretical framework will fundamentally contribute to the plausibility
of both quantitative and qualitative studies. As a dimension of the “convincingness” of
interpretive research, however, plausibility may inhere in the textual ability to normalize
unorthodox methodologies, recruit the reader, legitimate different situations, justify
contestable assertions, build dramatic anticipation and differentiate the findings (Golden-
Biddle and Locke, 1993). Moreover, the plausibility of research results will be an important
determinant of its translation into practice.
 Thus, plausibility must also be evaluated by considering the proportion of data that has The criteria of
been selected for analysis and interpretation. That data have been selectively extracted to fit convincingness
a chosen theoretical or interpretive framework will rely on an assessment of whether
interpretations arise from or are imposed on the data (Robson, 1993; Hammell, 2002). The
key is, “as in quantitative research, [. . .] to ensure rigor [. . .] and self-conscious research
design, data collection, interpretation and communication” (Mays and Pope, 1995, p. 110).
Assessment of the value of the knowledge claim of any empirical research is determined
by both originality and relevance may often be subjective: for whom is the research new and
relevant? Plausibility and textual authenticity are partially interdependent in the evaluative
context. By introducing possible alternative explanations of an observed phenomenon, the
impression of authenticity is, in turn, the first step in convincing readers of the plausibility
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

of particular explanations (Lukka and Modell, 2010).

5.3 Criticality
The first two criteria of both authenticity and plausibility are essential to any interpretive
research (Golden-Biddle and Locke, 1993) because they deal with the empirical material and
its interpretation. Criticality has been deemed an optional criterion (Pozzebon, 2003),
concerned with the imaginative possibilities that may emerge from field research (Golden-
Biddle and Locke, 1993). However, given the wide discussion of critical perspectives such as
advocacy, participatory and pragmatic ideas (Creswell, 2003), the ability of the text to
prompt a reexamination of accepted ideas suggests criticality to be a defining dimension of
“convincingness”. This is to accept Denzin and Lincoln’s (2017, p. 19) assertion that “[a]ll
research is interpretive and [. . .] interpretation itself may be defined in terms of art, practices
and politics”. The importance of the research design, methods and paradigmatic stance in
the procedural validity of qualitative research is thus affirmed.
As an evaluative criterion then, criticality encompasses reflexivity, reflection, recognition
and examination of differences leading to the visualization of potentialities. Criticality infers
the possibility that readers will construct a larger and more enduring theoretical referent in
the field (White, 1987). Crucially, the general must be well-rooted and articulated in
explanations of the local (Ahrens and Chapman, 2006) to convincingly demonstrate the
socially constructed nature of scientific knowledge that underpins processes. More
specifically, however, a critical interpretation must convince that the world of the subject
has been understood. A critical perspective is offered by the multiple-narrative aspect of
case studies (Garcia and Quek, 1997), especially when they focus on institutional and
individual perceptions of accounting change. Here, the role of the researcher is significant in
progressing thinking about the ways in which organizational stability or resistance is
understood and interpreted and making the knowledge contribution clear (Golden-Biddle
and Locke, 1993).
As a criteria of research “convincingness”, the critical interpretation of results should
“speak to our human and organizational conditions of existence in ways that we find useful
and desirable” (Clegg, 2006, p. 861) and alert the reader to new ways of thinking (Schultze,
2000) and the possibilities of change. Golden-Biddle and Locke (1993) found the measure of
criticality to be whether readers are challenged to pause and think about a particular
situation and provoked to question their own assumptions. From a critical perspective, good
case study research will enable a qualitatively new understanding of particular social
realities and suggest new paths of social action (Alvesson and Skoldberg, 2000).
Management accounting researchers can consider the value of criticality in revealing
fallacious bases of organizational rituals, for example, to achieve more integrated
understandings of accounting as a social science. It has been found that in interpretive case
 PAR studies of social and environmental accounting “[t]he highest level of quantified, high-
quality disclosures relate to community actions” (Duff and Guo, 2010, p. 11). The social and
environmental accounting agenda extends beyond merely communicating legitimating
actions, such as by making (descriptive) disclosures, justifying cost reduction strategies or
costing non-financial impacts in competitive environments. As “holding entities accountable
is, after all, what accountants do as a matter of course” (ibid.), the underlying rules,
conventions and mechanisms of management accounting in regulatory contexts will
increasingly be called upon to more closely capture the impact costs of business. Critical
interpretive research explaining the accounting discipline’s social contribution can follow
from the analysis of management accountants’ perceptions of how they “account for their
actions in (or not making) this contribution” (Tilt, 2009, p. 28).
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Conceptualizing criticality recalls the research paradigm reflective of the researcher’s

philosophical position underlying a strategy of challenging accepted thinking. Reframing
the way in which organizational phenomena are perceived and interpreted anticipates
qualitative data analyzes as “a systematic search for meaning [that] always involves [. . .]
‘mind-work’” (Hatch, 2002, p. 148).

6. Qualitative data analysis

Despite the seemingly “mysterious” nature of qualitative data (Campbell and Gregor, 2004;
Bradley et al., 2007, p. 1760), there is a common agreement that it is a dynamic and
continuous process that begins at the outset of research when the direction of evidence
gathering is set. The interpretive method makes explicit the interrelationship of data
collection, analysis and theory. In the inductive approach, important themes, patterns and
connections arise progressively from iterative comparisons of data patterns. This
scrupulous interrogation of the data “is a way to process qualitative data so that what has
been learned can be communicated to others” (Hatch, 2002, p. 148), which is a hallmark of
textual authority.
Data analysis can also be strengthened by external referents such as comparing each
aspect of the evidence with extant findings and rival explanations and soliciting feedback
from study participants to confirm the accuracy of interpretations (which may itself add
nuance to insights). Apart from the desirability of validation through a close data-theory
alignment, the significance of this concurrence is its capacity to generate empirically valid
theory deriving from insights gleaned from the data (Eisenhardt, 1989). While theory can
provide an analytic prism for viewing data, its prior specification may potentially result in
“premature closure on the issues to be investigated, as well as [. . .] the theoretical constructs
departing excessively from the views of participants in a social setting” (Bryman, 1988,
p. 81). As different theories should be applied to initiate and develop thick explanation
(Lukka and Modell, 2010), reliance on the most likely explanation for what is observed, the
quantitative benchmark of generalizability, is in this aspect not entirely appropriate to
evaluating case study findings.
Given the centrality of meaning to interpretative research, several strategies for the
reduction and analysis of qualitative data have been proposed (Patton, 1987; Miles and
Huberman, 1994; Yin, 2003; Saunders et al., 2009). According to Saunders et al. (2009), three
main processes can be applied to the analysis of the evidence with the aim of strengthening
interpretation summarizing (condensation) of meanings; categorization (grouping) of
meanings; and structuring (ordering) of meaning using description. Patton (1987, p. 144)
suggests “category construction”, to order evidence in a process of ascribing meaning and
significance to the analysis. Expandable diagrammatic models are useful to allocate
 emerging themes and linkages and identify gaps, inconsistencies and areas warranting The criteria of
further investigation. convincingness
Integrating data into an explanatory framework is the “major avenue to valid qualitative
analysis” (Miles and Huberman, 1994, p. 11). Data can be dealt with from multiple angles
using data display techniques that may be time- or case-ordered, matrices of explanatory
effects or case dynamics, causal or event-state network matrix, event-state network and
conceptually ordered displays, etc. The selection of data visuals will depend on the specific
objectives of the research and the relationships being investigated.
As data collection is cumulative and noncurrent, there are time management implications
for data is organized and analyzed organization (Saunders et al., 2009). Coding software such
as NVivo is a tool for organizing and managing massive amounts of data from different
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

sources. NVivo helps researchers to manage data by gathering content in visual displays
such as tree maps, to make comparisons based on attributed values. Coding tools are
particularly appropriate for data derived from multiple structured interviews (Scapens,
2004). Analysis of the discursive content of unstructured interviews may, however, benefit
by the researcher working with the interview transcripts, in which participants’ expressions
of subjectivity may elicit deeper meanings and invite a more critical interpretation than does
scanning for predetermined categories. Most importantly, cautions that using coding
software may be a false economy of effort as instead of the “harder [mind] work of
generating themes [. . .] or making data-theory links [. . .] the choice of themes remains the
responsibility of the researcher”, whose aim is to convince through textual authenticity and
plausibility (Walsham, 2006, p. 325).

7. Conclusions
This paper aims to extend the knowledge claim of management accounting research using
qualitative research methods and its evaluation using “convincingness” criteria. It concludes
that qualitative research strategies, which consider the complex settings of accounting
change and practice are found to offer deep understandings and convincing explanations of
accounting change. It also affirms that accounting is firmly established as a social science,
the paper finds that the authenticity, plausibility and criticality of research in this field.
In the positivist view, management accounting and control are unproblematic; in the
conventional wisdom of management accounting, context is a given and one in which
individuals and organizations assume only passive roles (Hopper and Powell, 1985). Thus, a
quantitative approach to research is appropriate to its technical functions, which can be
addressed by such considerations as rationality and efficiency. As this paper has argued,
however, the quantitative research ignores the dynamic and human processes of accounting
practice in different contexts. Investigations of the complexities of contextual relationships
in management accounting change call for qualitative research strategies that aim for their
comprehension. The interpretive case study is specified for this purpose. The continuing
relevance and development of this methodology in accounting research requires the
adoption of criteria that more precisely reflect its aims of objectives. The implications for
practice arising from interpretive research should therefore be evaluated based on their
“convincingness”. Guided by the criteria of authenticity, plausibility and criticality,
management accounting scholars are enabled to produce better understandings of the
practical field and present results that can be evaluated for their accurate reflections of
organizational experience.
By placing accounting firmly within the social science field, the paper has highlighted
both the philosophical and methodological issues pertaining to qualitative studies and set
out the rationale for adopting a single interpretive paradigm, an inductive approach and the
 PAR interpretive case study method. It has shown how internal procedural validity inheres in
each step of research conduct and how the transferability of findings is linked to the
authenticity and plausibility of the text. When the subjects of accounting research are
brought to life in an authentic textual figuration, the audience is convinced of the
researcher’s direct knowledge. The plausibility of explanations allows readers to connect
their own experience to the evidence, makes the transferability of findings to other contexts
explicit. Finally, critical interpretations challenge the claims of “value-free” research as
having greater validity by demonstrating the existence of multiple realities and offering
alternative theories and explanations of phenomena.
The current paper extends the earlier contributions to the management accounting
literature by broadening the scope for using interpretive research in the field. Its
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

descriptions of the logic and construction and methodological implications of the

interpretive case study strategy as they relate to the “convincingness” of research can
benefit new and emerging management accounting researchers. Experienced researchers in
management accounting and related disciplines may be stimulated to reflect on the value
and possibilities of qualitative interpretive research.
The main limitation in this paper is, it is a conceptual paper and lacks empirics. The
possible avenue for future research is to undertake case studies by applying new
“convincingness” evaluation criteria in empirical works. This application would be useful to
acquire a deep understanding of their responses about the importance of evaluation criteria.
This study might also be used as guidelines for qualitative research.

References
Agar, M. and Hobbs, J.R. (1982), “Interpreting discourse: coherence and the analysis of ethnographic
interviews”, Discourse Processes, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 1-32.
Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C.S. (2006), “Doing qualitative field research in management accounting:
positioning data to contribute to theory”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31 No. 8,
pp. 819-841.
Alsharari, N.M., Dixon, R. and Youssef, M.A.E.A. (2015), “Management accounting change: critical
review and a new contextual framework”, Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change,
Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 476-502.
Alvesson, M. and Skoldberg, K. (2000), Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research,
Sage Publications, London.
Atkinson, P. (1990), The Ethnographic Imagination: Textual Constructions of Reality, Routledge,
London.
Atkinson, P. and Hammersley, M. (1994), “Ethnography and participant observation”, in Norman K.D.
and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 105-117.
Baker, C.R. and Bettner, M.S. (1997), “Interpretive and critical research in accounting: a commentary on
its absence from mainstream accounting research”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 8
No. 4, pp. 293-310.
Baxter, J., Boedker, C. and Chua, W.F. (2008), “The future(s) of interpretive accounting research a
polyphonic response from beyond the metropolis”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 19
No. 6, pp. 880-886.
Baxter, J. and Chua, W.F. (2008), “The field researcher as author-writer”, Qualitative Research in
Accounting and Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 101-121.
Bhimani, A. (2001), Management Accounting Manual, Croner CCH Group, London.
 Blumberg, B., Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2008), Business Research Methods, McGraw-Hill Higher The criteria of
Education, London.
convincingness
Bradley, E.H., Curry, L.A. and Devers, K.J. (2007), “Qualitative data analysis for health services
research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory”, Health Services Research, Vol. 42 No. 4,
pp. 1758-1772.
Briers, M. and Chua, W.F. (2001), “The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in management
accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based costing”, Accounting,
Organizations and Society, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 237-269.
Brignall, S. and Modell, S. (2000), “An institutional perspective on performance measurement and
management in the new public sector”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 281-306.
Browne, K. (2005), An Introduction to Sociology, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Bryman, A. (1988), Quantity and Quality in Social Research, Unwin Hyman, London.
Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A., Hughes, J. and Nahapiet, J. (1980), “The roles of accounting in
organizations and society”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 5-27.
Burchell, S., Clubb, C. and Hopwood, A.G. (1985), “Accounting in its social context: towards a history of
value added in the United Kingdom”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 381-413.
Burns, A. (2000), “Facilitating collaborative action research: some insights from the AMEP”, Prospect
National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 23-34.
Burns, J. and Scapens, R.W. (2000), “Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional
framework”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 3-25.
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979), Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Heinemann
Educational Book, London.
Caba-Perez, C., Lopez-Hernández, A.M. and Ortiz-Rodríguez, D. (2009), “Governmental financial
information reforms and changes in the political system: the Argentina, Chile and Paraguay
experience”, Public Administration and Development, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 429-440.
Campbell, M.L. and Gregor, F.M. (2004), Mapping Social Relations: a Primer in Doing Institutional
Ethnography, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
Carey, J.W. (1989), Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society, Unwin Hyman, Boston, MA.
Carlström, E.D. (2012), “Strategies for change: adaptation to new accounting conditions”, Journal of
Accounting and Organizational Change, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 41-61.
Carpenter, C. and Hammell, K. (2000), “Evaluating qualitative research”, in Hammell, K.W., Carpenter,
C. and Dyck, I. (Eds), Using Qualitative Research: A Practical Introduction for Occupational and
Physical Therapists, Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp. 107-119.
Chapman, C.S., Cooper, D.J. and Miller, P. (2009), “Linking accounting, organizations and institutions”,
in Chapman, C.S., Cooper, D.J. and Miller, P. (Eds), Accounting, Organizations, and Institutions:
Essays in Honour of Anthony Hopwood, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1-29.
Chua, W.F. (1986), “Radical developments in accounting thought”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 61
No. 4, pp. 601-632.
Clegg, S. (2006), “The bounds of rationality: power/history/imagination”, Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 847-863.
Clifford, J. (1986), “On ethnographic allegory”, in Clifford, J. and Marcus, G.E (Eds), Writing Culture:
The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 98-121.
Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2009), Business Research: A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and
Postgraduate Students, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Cooper, D. (1983), “Tidiness, muddle and things: commonalities and divergencies in two approaches to
management accounting research”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 8 Nos 2/3,
pp. 269-286.
 PAR Creswell, J.W. (2003), Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Crosthwaite, J., MacLeod, N. and Malcolm, B. (1997), “Case studies: theory and practice in natural
resource management”, in Vanclay, F. and Mesiti, L. (Eds), Sustainability and Social Research,
Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, p. 201.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2012), Manual de Investigacion Cualitativa, El Campo de la Investigacion
Cualitativa, Vol. 1, Gedisa, Barcelona.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds) (2017), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage
Publication, London.
Dillard, J.F., Rigsby, J.T. and Goodman, C. (2004), “The making and remaking of organization context:
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

duality and the institutionalization process”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal,
Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 506-542.
Dixon, R. and Smith, D. (1993), “Strategic management accounting”, Omega, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 605-618.
Duff, A. and Guo, X. (2010), Corporate Social Responsibility and the Professional Accounting Firm:
Insights from Firms’ Disclosures, Centre for Business Performance, London.
Easterby-Smith, M., Golden-Biddle, K. and Locke, K. (2008), “Working with pluralism: determining
quality in qualitative research”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 419-429.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research” The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Ezzamel, M., Robson, K., Stapleton, P. and McLean, C. (2007), “Discourse and institutional change:
giving accounts’ and accountability”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 150-171.
Eyles, J. (1988), “Interpreting the geographical world”, in Eyles, J. and Smith, D. (Eds), Qualitative
Methods in Human Geography, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Flick, U. (2009), An Introduction to Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London.
Filstead, W.J. (1992), “Treatment outcome: an evaluation of adult and youth treatment services”, in
Langerbucher, J.W., McCrady, B.S., Frankenstein, W., Nathan, P.E. (Eds), Annual Review of
Addictions Research and Treatment, Vol. 2, Pergamon, New York, NY, pp. 249-278.
Garcia, L. and Quek, F. (1997), “Qualitative research in information systems: time to be subjective?”,
Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 WG 8.2 International Conference on Information Systems and
Qualitative Research, Chapman and Hall, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 444-465.
Garner, S.P. (1976), Evolution of Cost Accounting to 1925, University of AL Press, Tuscaloosa, AL.
Geertz, C. (1988), Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto,
CA.
Gioia, D.A. and Pitre, E. (1990), “Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 584-602.
Goel, V. and Dolan, R.J. (2004), “Differential involvement of left prefrontal cortexin inductive and
deductive reasoning”, Cognition, Vol. 93 No. 3, pp. B109-B121.
Golden-Biddle, K. and Locke, K. (1993), “Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts
convince”, Organization Science, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 595-616.
Gummesson, E. (2000), Qualitative Methods in Management Research, 2nd ed., Sage Publications,
London.
Hammell, K.W. (2002), “Informing client-centred practice through qualitative inquiry: evaluating the
quality of qualitative research”, The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, Vol. 65 No. 4,
pp. 175-184.
Hammersley, M. (1983), The Ethnography of Schooling: methodological Issues, IN Universty Press,
Bloomington.
 Hammersley, M. (1992), “On feminist methodology”, Sociology, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 187-206. The criteria of
Hatch, J.A. (2002), Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings, Suny press, Albany, convincingness
New York, NY.
Herbert, I. and Seal, W. (2012), “Shared services as a new organisational form: some implications for
management accounting”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 83-97.
Hoepfl, M.C. (1997), “Choosing qualitative research: a primer for technology education researchers”,
Journal of Education, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 47-63.
Hong, H.K. (1991), “Management accounting in the public sector”, International Journal of Public Sector
Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 5-17.
Hopper, T. and Hoque, Z. (2006), “Triangulation approaches to accounting research”, in Hoque, Z. (Ed.),
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Methodological Issues In Accounting Research: Theories, Methods And Issues, Spiramus Press
Ltd, London, UK, pp. 477-483.
Hopper, T. and Powell, A. (1985), “Making sense of research into the organizational and social aspects
of management accounting: a review of its underlying assumptions [1]”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 429-465.
Hopper, T., Otley, D. and Scapens, B. (2001), “British management accounting research: whence
and Whither: opinions and recollections”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 33 No. 3,
pp. 263-291.
Hopwood, A.G. (1976), “Editorial”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 287-288.
Hopwood, A.G. (1983), “On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it operates”, Accounting,
Organizations and Society, Vol. 8 Nos 2/3, pp. 287-305.
Humphrey, C. and Scapens, R.W. (1996), “Methodological themes: theories and case studies of
organizational accounting practices: limitation or liberation?”, Accounting, Auditing and
Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 86-106.
Jeffcutt, P. (1994), “From interpretation to representation in organizational analysis: postmodernism,
ethnography and organizational symbolism”, Organization Studies, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 241-274.
Johnson, B. and Christensen, L.B. (2007), Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed
Approaches, Sage Publications, London.
Johnson, G. (1992), “Managing strategic change–strategy, culture and action”, Long Range Planning,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 28-36.
Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M.L., Lukka, K. and Kuorikoski, J. (2008), “Straddling between paradigms: a
naturalistic philosophical case study on interpretive research in management accounting”,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33 Nos 2/3, pp. 267-291.
Kaplan, R.S. (1983), “Measuring manufacturing performance: a new challenge for managerial
accounting research”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 686-705.
Kaplan, R.S. (1984), “The evolution of management accounting”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 59 No. 3,
pp. 390-418.
Kaplan, R.S. (1986), “The role for empirical research in management accounting”, Accounting,
Organizations and Society, Vol. 11 Nos 4/5, pp. 429-452.
Klein, H.K. and Myers, M.D. (1999), “A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field
studies in information systems”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 67-93.
Kihn, L.A. and Ihantola, E.M. (2015), “Approaches to validation and evaluation in qualitative studies of
management accounting”, Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp. 230-255.
Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2009), InterViews: learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing,
2nd ed., Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
Lapsley, I. and Pallot, J. (2000), “Accounting, management and organizational change: a comparative
study of local government”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 213-229.
 PAR Lapsley, I., Mussari, R. and Paulsson, G. (2009), “On the adoption of accrual accounting in the public
sector: a self-evident and problematic reform”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 18 No. 4,
pp. 719-723.
Lukka, K. (2007), “Management accounting change and stability: loosely coupled rules and routines in
action”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 76-101.
Lukka, K. (2010), “The roles and effects of paradigms in accounting research”, Management Accounting
Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 110-115.
Lukka, K. and Kasanen, E. (1995), “The problem of generalizability: anecdotes and evidence in
accounting research”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 71-90.
Lukka, K. and Modell, S. (2010), “Validation in interpretive management accounting research”,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 462-477.
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K. and Namey, E. (2005), Qualitative Research Methods: A Data
Collector’s Field Guide, Family Health International, NC.
Manning, K. (1997), “Authenticity in constructivist inquiry: Methodological considerations without
prescription”, Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 93-115.
Mason, J. (2002), Qualitative Researching, Sage Publications, London.
Mays, N. and Pope, C. (1995), “Rigour and qualitative research”, BMJ (Clinical Research ed.).), Vol. 311
No. 6997, pp. 109-112.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1984), Qualitative Data Analysis: A Source Book of New Methods,
Sage Publications, London.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed.,
Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks, CA.
Modell, S. (2005), “Triangulation between case study and survey methods in management accounting
research: an assessment of validity implications”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 16
No. 2, pp. 231-254.
Morgan, G. and Smircich, L. (1980), “The case for qualitative research”, The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 491-500.
Myers, M. (1999), “Investigating information systems with ethnographic research”, Communications of
the AIS, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 2-19.
Nahapiet, J. (1988), “The rhetoric and reality of an accounting change: a study of resource allocation”,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 333-358.
Navarro Galera, A. and Rodríguez Bolívar, M.P. (2007), “The contribution of international accounting
standards to implementing NPM in developing and developed countries”, Public Administration
and Development, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 413-425.
Oliveira, C. (2010), “Power and organisational change: a case study”, PhD thesis, School of Accounting
and Finance, Dundee University.
Otley, D.T. and Berry, A. (1994), “Case study research in management accounting and control”,
Management Accounting Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 45-65.
Pallot, J. (1992), “Elements of a theoretical framework for public sector accounting”, Accounting,
Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 38-59.
Parker, L.D. (2003), “Qualitative research in accounting and management: the emerging agenda”,
Journal of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 15-30.
Patton, M.Q. (1987), How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation, Sage Publications, London.
Patton, M.Q. (1989), “A context and boundaries for a theory-driven approach to validity”, Evaluation
and Program Planning, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 375-377.
Patton, M.Q. (2001), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, Sage publication, Thousand Oaks,
CA.
 Pozzebon, M. (2003), “Criteria for conducting and evaluating critical interpretive research in the IS The criteria of
field”, Cahier du GReSI, Vol. 3 No. 14, pp. 1-27.
convincingness
Roberts, J. and Scapens, R. (1985), “Accounting systems and systems of accountability–understanding
accounting practices in their organisational contexts”, Accounting, Organizations and Society,
Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 443-456.
Robson, C. (1993), Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioners-Researchers,
Blackwell, Oxford.
Russell, G.M. and Kelly, N.H. (2002), “Research as interacting dialogic processes: implications for
reflexivity”, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 3 No. 3,
Art. 18, available at: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0203181
Ryan, B., Scapens, R.W. and Theobold, M. (2002), Research Method and Methodology in Finance and
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Accounting, 2nd ed., Thomson Learning, London.

Sandelowski, M. (1986), “The problem of rigor in qualitative research”, Ans. Advances in Nursing
Science, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 27-37.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009), Research Methods for Business Students, Pearson
Education Limited, Edinburgh.
Scapens, R. (1999), “Broadening the scope of management accounting: from a micro-economic to a
broader business perspective”, Maandblad Voor A Ccountancy en Bedrijfseconomie, Vol. 73
No. 12, pp. 638-649.
Scapens, R.W. (1990), “Researching management accounting practice: the role of case study methods”,
The British Accounting Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 259-281.
Scapens, R.W. (2004), “Doing case study research”, in Humphrey, C. and Lee, B. (Eds), The Real Life
Guide to Accounting Research: A behind-The-Scenes View of Using Qualitative Research
Methods, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 257-279.
Scapens, R.W. (2008), “Seeking the relevance of interpretive research: a contribution to the polyphonic
debate”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 915-919.
Scapens, R.W. and Jazayeri, M. (2003), “ERP systems and management accounting change:
opportunities or impacts? A research note”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 12 No. 1,
pp. 201-233.
Schultze, U. (2000), “A confessional account of an ethnography about knowledge work”, MIS Quarterly,
Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 3-41.
Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J.F. and Silverman, D. (Eds) (2004), Qualitative Research Practice, Sage
publication, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage publication, Newbury Park, CA.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (2008), Basics of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed., Sage publication, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. and MacDonald-Emes, J. (1997), “Interpretive description: a noncategorical
qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge”, Research in Nursing and Health,
Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 169-177.
Tikk, J. and Almann, A. (2011), “Developments in public sector financial management in Estonia”,
Business and Economic Horizons, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 47-56.
Tilt, C.A. (2009), “Corporate responsibility, accounting and accountants”, in Idowu, S.O. and Filho, W.L.
(Eds), Professional Perspectives of Corporate Responsibility (11-32), Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
Heidelberg.
Walsham, G. (1995), “The emergence of interpretivism in IS research”, Information Systems Research,
Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 376-394.
Walsham, G. (2006), “Doing interpretive research”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 15
No. 3, pp. 320-330.
 PAR White, H. (1987), The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation, The John
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Walsham, G. and Sahay, S. (1999), “GIS for district-level administration in India: problems and
opportunities”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 39-65.
Wickramasinghe, D. and Alawattage, C. (2007), Management Accounting Change: approaches and
Perspectives, Routledge, London.
Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, London.

Further reading
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds) (1994), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., Sage
Downloaded by HIGHER COLLEGES OF TECHNOLOGY At 00:56 13 March 2019 (PT)

Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Jazayeri, M. and Hopper, T. (1999), “Management accounting within world class manufacturing: a case
study”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 263-301.
Scapens, R.W. (1992), “The role of case study methods in management accounting research: a personal
reflection and reply”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 369-383.
Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, John Wiley and Sons,
New York, NY.

Corresponding author
Nizar Mohammad Alsharari can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]