How important is practice-relevant management accounting research?

Citation

Scapens, R.W. (2012), "How important is practice-relevant management accounting research?", Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Vol. 9 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/qram.2012.31409caa.009

How important is practice-relevant management accounting research?

Article Type: Commentary From: Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Volume 9, Issue 3

In recent years I have become particularly concerned about the relevance of management accounting research. In a response to the Polyphonic Debate published in Critical Perspectives on Accounting in 2008, I wrote a response which raised issues about this topic (Scapens, 2008). Over the years during which I have been an accounting researcher, many lessons have been learnt about management accounting practice. When I started in the 1970s, it was assumed that economic and operational research models could identify optimal solutions to management problems and the information that should be provided by management accountants. The belief seemed to be that academics had the right answers, and these needed to be communicated to practitioners who, once they learned “how to do it”, would adopt the optimal solutions provided by the academics.

However, in the 1980s, it became increasingly clear that practitioners were not adopting the techniques and optimal solutions that academics were providing. Indeed, questions were raised about whether academic accounting researchers knew what practice was really like. Consequently, researchers began to study management accounting practice. At first, they used questionnaire surveys (particularly in the early 1980s) and then, from the mid-1980s, case studies and fieldwork became quite popular with a largely European group of management accounting researchers. Some of these researchers continued to adopt the economic approaches that had been used previously, but many adopted social and organisational approaches.

Over the years, a considerable amount has been learnt about the nature of management accounting practice. Researchers have provided rich understandings of management accounting practices. These researchers are able to explain why companies come to have the systems and practices that we observe. Some studies were quite descriptive, but many, particularly those published in the top international research journals, were highly theorised, using a broad range of organisational and social theories. But an important question is now being asked: so what? In other words, what do we do, or indeed what should practitioners do, now we have these highly theorised explanations of management accounting practice?

In general, the research in the academic journals follows practice. It describes, explains and theorises what has been observed in case studies and other fieldwork. However, generally these studies do not provide implications for practice. Furthermore, academic researchers have been critical of the “consultant researchers”, who provide solutions for practitioners, but not theories for other academics. However, who has had the most impact on management accounting practice in the last 20-30 years? If we are thinking about academics, I suspect that everyone would agree that it is Bob Kaplan. However, he is not regarded as an academic researcher by many traditional accounting researchers. Nevertheless, his work has had a very significant impact on practice; an impact which is infinitely greater than most of the management accounting research that has appeared in the top accounting journals. So how can we extend the relevance of management accounting research?

Before addressing this question, it is important to distinguish different schools of (management) accounting research. One school of researchers offers managerial critiques of accounting practices. Researchers in this school are concerned primarily with the role of management accounting in the management of organisations. Another school of researchers offers social critiques of accounting practices. These researchers are more concerned with the social role of accounting and its consequences for individuals and society more generally – usually people who often do not have a voice in debates about the nature and role of accounting. Although these two schools address different issues, they both have the potential to be practice-relevant. In the latter case, however, it is not a matter of relevance for management accounting practitioners, but relevance for society more generally.

Personally, I would like to see academic papers giving more attention to the practical implications of the findings of management accounting research. These could be implications for managers and others within organisations, or they could also be implications for policy makers, politicians, and others in society with a public interest in (management) accounting. At present, such implications are not developed to any significant extent in research papers. There is clearly considerable scope for researchers to reflect on the practical implications of their work, and these reflections do have a place in academic research papers.

However, I do not expect research papers to be read by management accounting practitioners, managers, and/or the general public. Research papers are the place to develop ideas theoretically and to study issues “rigorously” – although “rigour” will depend greatly on the nature of the research undertaken. The peer-review process should ensure that appropriate research methods are used and that researchers provide compelling arguments and have sufficient evidence to support their conclusions. As academics, we have various ways in which we do this. Our emphasis on appropriate methodology and methods, and our use of jargon (which can be helpful within a particular research community), is likely to be off-putting to non-academic readers.

I have always believed that it is a mistake to try to write papers or reports that are designed to appeal to both academics and practitioners (or the public more generally). This usually means that academic standards are not maintained, and poor quality research can result, while at the same time still putting off the non-academic reader. This means that there needs to be different modes of communication. Academics should continue to use their research papers as a way of communicating with each other, and as a means of providing peer review of the quality of research. However, at the same time, researchers should engage with others beyond their fellow academic researchers. It is only through such engagement that researchers will be able to really demonstrate the practical relevance of their research. However, the nature of this engagement may differ according to the concerns and aims of the researchers. I mentioned the two schools of accounting research above; clearly these will have to engage in different ways.

Researchers who are doing work that has potential relevance for managers may engage in interventionist research. In such research, academics and practitioners work together to provide practical solutions, while at the same time developing theoretical understandings. Other researchers in this school could write articles for practitioner journals, or take part in the activities of professional bodies – thereby finding a wider audience for the findings of their research. However, such articles would have to be written in a form that engages with the concerns of practitioners and does not simply summarise academic research. In addition, such practice-relevant research could be used in executive education and/or MBA teaching. We should not underestimate the role of education and teaching in communicating the practical relevance of management accounting research.

The (management) accounting researchers who are concerned with social issues would need to communicate with a broader audience. This might be achieved by becoming involved in political and other public debates; for instance, by providing evidence to regulators, government committees, policy makers, and so on. Researchers might write in professional journals, but should probably be taking their debates more widely; for instance, to the newspapers and the types of journals and magazines that deal with public issues. They could also engage through new technology that enables them to reach a wide audience; blogs, internet forums, and so on.

Some researchers do these sorts of things. But, most do not! Furthermore, the numbers who are involved in these sorts of things seems to be declining. This is probably because of the increasing emphasis on journal rankings and the pressure on young academics to publish papers in top international journals. Whilst this is undoubtedly very important, such researchers should also be encouraged to write other papers/articles for audiences beyond their fellow academics, and/or to take part in other forms of engagement.

To conclude, whilst I feel that there is a need for researchers to give greater attention to the practical implications of the research when they are writing papers for academic journals, this is not a way to communicate the practice-relevance of the research to a wider audience. This has to be done outside the academic journals. Publication in academic journals should be seen as a way of ensuring that high-quality research is undertaken, but this should not be an end in itself – at least not in the practical subject such as (management) accounting. The benefits of this high-quality research will only be obtained if researchers are prepared to engage with others beyond the academic community – and if deans and universities allow time and give credit for such engagement.

Finally, I have deliberately not distinguished different types of research. I believe all types of management accounting research should be encouraged. Researchers should be able to select the most appropriate methods, qualitative or qualitative, for their research. Practical relevance is not determined by the research methods that are used, but by the nature of the research questions and the intentions of the researchers. Management accounting is a practical subject and most (if not all) management accounting research could have practical implications, if the researchers seriously reflect on what they are doing.

Robert W. Scapens