IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/qrampp/v5y2008i2p139-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using grounded theory in interpretive management accounting research

Author

Listed:
  • Ali M. Elharidy
  • Brian Nicholson
  • Robert W. Scapens

Abstract

Purpose - The aim of this paper is to assess and explain the role of grounded theory (GT) in interpretive management accounting research (IMAR) and seeks to answer the question: can interpretive researchers use GT? And if so, how? Design/methodology/approach - This is a theoretical paper that attempts to investigate how researchers can use GT in relation to their ontological stance, methodological position and research methods. Findings - The paper suggests that GT offers a balance between the expediency of the research findings, thereby allowing researchers freedom to interpret management accounting practices, and the development of rigorous theory from IMAR. Research limitations/implications - The paper provides an analysis of GT from an interpretive perspective and, clearly, there are other research perspectives which could have been discussed. Practical implications - GT can be a powerful tool that researchers could use to collect and analyse empirical data. However, researchers need to align GT with the broader paradigm they adopt when researching social phenomena. The paper provides some general guidelines for IMARs who want to use GT in their research. Originality/value - This paper shows that GT can offer interpretive researchers a way of balancing the need to develop theory, which is grounded in everyday practices, and the recognition that the research process is inherently subjective. However, it is argued that in interpretive research GT cannot provide a simple “recipe book” which, if followed rigorously, will result in a high‐quality research (i.e. valid, reliable and unbiased). Nevertheless, the guidelines provide a way for IMARs, who use GT to improve the quality of their research findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali M. Elharidy & Brian Nicholson & Robert W. Scapens, 2008. "Using grounded theory in interpretive management accounting research," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(2), pages 139-155, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:qrampp:v:5:y:2008:i:2:p:139-155
    DOI: 10.1108/11766090810888935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/11766090810888935/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/11766090810888935/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/11766090810888935?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trevor Hopper & Andrew Powell, 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, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 429-465, September.
    2. Ahrens, Thomas & Chapman, Christopher S., 2006. "Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: Positioning data to contribute to theory," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 819-841, November.
    3. Kakkuri-Knuuttila, Marja-Liisa & Lukka, Kari & Kuorikoski, Jaakko, 2008. "No premature closures of debates, please: A response to Ahrens," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 298-301.
    4. Ahrens, Thomas, 2008. "Overcoming the subjective-objective divide in interpretive management accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 292-297.
    5. Bruce Gurd, 2008. "Remaining consistent with method? An analysis of grounded theory research in accounting," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(2), pages 122-138, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Turienzo, Javier & Cabanelas, Pablo & Lampón, Jesús F., 2023. "Business models in times of disruption: The connected and autonomous vehicles (uncertain) domino effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    2. Vassili Joannides & N. Berland, 2008. "Reactions to Reading 'Remaining Consistent with Method? An Analysis of Grounded Theory Research in Accounting': A Comment on Gurd," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00676581, HAL.
    3. Larissa von Alberti‐Alhtaybat & Khaldoon Al‐Htaybat, 2010. "Qualitative accounting research: an account of Glaser's grounded theory," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 208-226, June.
    4. Rolf Brühl & Nils Horch & Mathias Orth, 2008. "Grounded Theory und ihre bisherige Anwendung in der empirischen Controlling- und Rechnungswesenforschung," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 299-323, December.
    5. Mary A. Malina & Hanne S.O. Nørreklit & Frank H. Selto, 2011. "Lessons learned: advantages and disadvantages of mixed method research," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(1), pages 59-71, April.
    6. Vassili Joannidès & Nicolas Berland, 2008. "Reactions to reading “Remaining consistent with method? An analysis of grounded theory research in accounting”," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(3), pages 253-261, October.
    7. Gunjan Sharma & Kushagra Kulshreshtha & Naval Bajpai, 2022. "Getting over the issue of theoretical stagnation: an exploration and metamorphosis of grounded theory approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 857-884, April.
    8. Vassili Joannides & N. Berland, 2008. "Reactions to Reading 'Remaining Consistent with Method? An Analysis of Grounded Theory Research in Accounting': A Comment on Gurd," Post-Print hal-00676581, HAL.
    9. Lukka, Kari & Modell, Sven, 2010. "Validation in interpretive management accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 462-477, May.
    10. Rolf Brühl & Mathias Osann, 2010. "Stakeholdertheorie und Neoinstitutionalismus und ihre Beiträge zur Erklärung der freiwilligen Berichterstattung am Beispiel der immateriellen Ressourcen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 277-298, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lukka, Kari & Modell, Sven, 2010. "Validation in interpretive management accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 462-477, May.
    2. Kakkuri-Knuuttila, Marja-Liisa & Lukka, Kari & Kuorikoski, Jaakko, 2008. "No premature closures of debates, please: A response to Ahrens," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(2-3), pages 298-301.
    3. Larissa von Alberti‐Alhtaybat & Khaldoon Al‐Htaybat, 2010. "Qualitative accounting research: an account of Glaser's grounded theory," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 208-226, June.
    4. Matthew Egan, 2015. "Driving Water Management Change Where Economic Incentive is Limited," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 73-90, November.
    5. Ivo De Loo & Alan Lowe, 2011. "Mixed methods research: don't – “just do it”," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(1), pages 22-38, April.
    6. Pankaj Kumar Baag & Kavitha P, 2017. "Philosophies and tradition of accounting research," Working papers 260, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    7. Ulrike Schmidt & Thomas Günther, 2016. "Public sector accounting research in the higher education sector: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 235-265, December.
    8. Parker, Lee D., 2012. "Qualitative management accounting research: Assessing deliverables and relevance," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 54-70.
    9. Juhani Vaivio, 2008. "Qualitative management accounting research: rationale, pitfalls and potential," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 64-86, March.
    10. Vassili Joannides, 2011. "Apports De L'Ethnicite A La Culture En Sciences De Gestion," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00676555, HAL.
    11. Olle Westin & Hanno Roberts, 2010. "Interventionist research – the puberty years: an introduction to the special issue," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(1), pages 5-12, April.
    12. Smith, Julia A. & England, Claire, 2019. "An ethnographic study of culture and performance in the UK lingerie industry," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 241-258.
    13. Helen Irvine & Michael Gaffikin, 2006. "Getting in, getting on and getting out: reflections on a qualitative research project," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 19(1), pages 115-145, January.
    14. Vassili Joannides & N. Berland, 2008. "Grounded theory: quels usages dans les recherches en contrôle de gestion?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00676580, HAL.
    15. Mohammad Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2009. "Exploring auditor independence: an interpretive approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 221-246, January.
    16. Ilse Svensson de Jong, 2021. "When Wrong Is Right: Leaving Room for Error in Innovation Measurement," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    17. Dambrin, Claire & Lambert, Caroline, 2012. "Who is she and who are we? A reflexive journey in research into the rarity of women in the highest ranks of accountancy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-16.
    18. Karen Maas & Kellie Liket, 2011. "Talk the Walk: Measuring the Impact of Strategic Philanthropy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(3), pages 445-464, May.
    19. Lorino, Philippe & Mourey, Damien & Schmidt, Géraldine, 2017. "Goffman's theory of frames and situated meaning-making in performance reviews. The case of a category management approach in the French retail sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 32-49.
    20. Walid Cheffi, 2008. "Etude Des Roles De La Comptabilite De Gestion Pour Les Managers : Le Cas D'Un Grand Groupe Automobile," Post-Print halshs-00522472, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:qrampp:v:5:y:2008:i:2:p:139-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.