Reactions to Reading 'Remaining Consistent with Method? An Analysis of Grounded Theory Research in Accounting': A Comment on Gurd
Purpose: This paper is a comment on Gurd's paper published in QRAM 5(2) on the use of grounded theory in interpretive accounting research. Methodology: Like Gurd, we conducted a bibliographic study on prior pieces of research claiming the use of grounded theory. Findings: We found a large diversity of ways of doing grounded theory. There are as many ways as articles. Consistent with the spirit of grounded theory, the field suggested the research questions, methods and verifiability criteria. From the same sample as Gurd, we arrived at different conclusions. Research limitations: In our research, we did not verify the consistency of claims with grounded theory. We took for granted that the article authors had understood and made operational the suggestions of the founders of the method. Practical implications: The four canons of grounded theory can be considered as reference marks rather than as the rules of the method. Accordingly, the researcher is free to develop his or her own techniques and procedures. Originality/Value of the paper: This paper stimulates debate on grounded theory based research. On the other hand, it conveys the richness and the variety of interpretive research. Two similar studies, using similar samples and methods, arrive at different (divergent) conclusions.
|Date of creation:||15 Dec 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, Emerald, 2008, 5 (4), pp.253-261|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00676581|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ahrens, Thomas, 1996. "Styles of accountability," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 139-173.
- Jill Frances Solomon & Aris Solomon, 2006. "Private social, ethical and environmental disclosure," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 19(4), pages 564-591, July.
- 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, vol. 5(2), pages 139-155, July.
- Efferin, Sujoko & Hopper, Trevor, 2007. "Management control, culture and ethnicity in a Chinese Indonesian company," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 223-262, April.
- Nicolas Berland & Vassili Joannides, 2009.
"Grounded theory : quels usages dans les recherches en contrôle de gestion ?,"
- 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.
- Andrew Goddard & Mussa Juma Assad, 2006. "Accounting and navigating legitimacy in Tanzanian NGOs," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 19(3), pages 377-404, April.
- Ahrens, T., 1996. "Styles of Accountability," Papers 96-119, University of Southampton - Department of Accounting and Management Science.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:gemptp:hal-00676581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.