Advertisement

Where There’s a Will… The Research-Practice Gap in Accounting

  • Laurence Ferry
  • Iris Saliterer
  • Ileana Steccolini
  • Basil Tucker
Chapter
Part of the Public Sector Financial Management book series (PUSEFIMA)

Abstract

In this chapter, I engage with recent empirical research I have been involved with in investigating the important question of how research may become a closer companion to practice and address three questions central to the research-practice debate:
  1. 1.

    How prevalent is the research-practice gap?

     
  2. 2.

    How has the research-practice gap been investigated?

     
  3. 3.

    How, if at all, might research become a closer companion to practice?

     

These questions are by no means restricted to the public sector, and their consideration in a more general context may be valuable for both researchers and practitioners interested in the nexus between research and practice.

Keywords

Research-practice gap Accounting Research relevance Public sector Research policy 

References

  1. Abbott, M., Walton, C., Tapia, Y., & Greenwood, C. R. (1999). Research to practice: A ‘blueprint’ for closing the gap in local schools. Exceptional Children, 65(3), 339–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdellah, F. G. (1970). Overview of nursing research 1955–1968 (v 3). Nursing Research, 19, 239–252.Google Scholar
  3. Arnaboldi, M. (2013). Consultant-research in public sector transformation: An evolving role. Financial Accountability & Management, 29(2), 140–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balakrishnan, R. (2012). Commentary: Journal of management accounting research. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 274–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baldvinsdottir, G., Mitchell, F., & Nørreklit, H. (2010). Issues in the relationship between theory and practice in management accounting. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 79–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Banks, G. C., Pollack, J. M., Bochantin, J. E., Kirkman, B. L., Whelpley, C. E., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2016). Management’s science-practice gap: A grand challenge for all stakeholders. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 2205–2231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. (2014). Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: The paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1181–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baskerville, R. (2009). Preparing for evidence based management (editorial). European Journal of Information Systems, 18(6), 523–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Baxter, W. T. (1988). Accounting research–academic trends versus practical needs. Edinburgh: The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.Google Scholar
  11. Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5), 98–104.Google Scholar
  12. Billingham, J. (1998). Cultural aspects of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Acta Astronautica, 42, 711–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bolton, M. J., & Stolcis, G. B. (2003). Ties that do not bind: Musings on the specious relevance of academician research. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 626–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brennan, R. (2008). Theory and practice across disciplines: Implications for the field of management. European Business Review, 20(6), 515–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Broadbent, J. (2010). The UK research assessment exercise: Performance measurement and resource allocation. Australian Accounting Review, 20(1), 14–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bromwich, M., & Scapens, R. W. (2016). Management accounting research: 25 years on. Management Accounting Research, 31, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burke, L. A., & Rau, B. (2010). The research-teaching gap in management. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(1), 132–143.Google Scholar
  18. Chapman, C. S., & Kern, A. (2012). What do academics do? Understanding the practical relevance of research. Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 9(3), 279–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chevaillier, T., & Eicher, J.-C. (2002). Higher education funding: A decade of changes. Higher Education in Europe, XXVII(1–2), 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooper, C., & Annisette, M. (2012). Critical perspectives on accounting. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 282–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Covey, S. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Denis, J. L., & Langley, A. (2002). Introduction to the forum. Health Care Management Review, 27(3), 32–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dostaler, I., & Tomberlin, T. (2013). The great divide between business school research and business practice. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(1), 115–128.Google Scholar
  24. Fey, M. E., & Johnson, B. W. (1998). Research to practice (and back again) in speech-language intervention. Topics in Language Disorders, 18(2), 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fink, R., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Overcoming barriers and promoting the use of research in practice. Journal of Nursing Administration, 35(3), 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gray, R., Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (2002). Rites of passage and the self-immolation of academic accounting labour: An essay exploring exclusivity versus mutuality in accounting scholarship. Accounting Forum, 26(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 775–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Handy, C. (1976). Understanding organizations. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  29. Hemsley-Brown, J. (2004). Facilitating research utilisation: A cross-sector review of research evidence. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(6), 534–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hemsley-Brown, J. V., & Sharp, C. (2003). The use of research to improve professional practice: A systematic review of the literature. Oxford Review of Education, 29(4), 449–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hodgkinson, G. P., Herriot, P., & Anderson, N. (2001). Re-aligning the stakeholders in management research: Lessons from industrial, work and organizational psychology. British Journal of Management, 12, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hopper, T. (2013). Making accounting degrees fit for a university. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(2), 127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hopwood, A. G. (2002). If only there were simple solutions, but there aren’t: Some reflections on Zimmerman’s critique of empirical management accounting research. European Accounting Review, 11(4), 777–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hopwood, A. G. (2007). Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review, 82(5), 1365–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Inanga, E. L., & Schneider, W. B. (2005). The failure of accounting research to improve accounting practice: A problem of theory and lack of communication. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(3), 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jacobs, K., & Cuganesan, S. (2014). Interdisciplinary accounting research in the public sector: Dissolving boundaries to tackle wicked problems. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(8), 1250–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kanter, R. (1983). The change masters. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  39. Kaplan, R. S. (2011). Accounting scholarship that advances professional knowledge and practice. The Accounting Review, 86(2), 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. (1996). The balanced scorecard: Putting strategy into action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  41. Keefer, J. M., & Stone, S. J. (2009). Practitioner perspectives on the gap between research and practice: What gap? Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(4), 454–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kieser, A., Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D. (2015). The practical relevance of management research: Turning the debate on relevance into a rigorous scientific research program. The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 143–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kondrat, M. E. (1992). Reclaiming the practical: Formal and substantive rationality in social work practice. Social Service Review, 67(2), 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lapsley, I. (2012). Commentary: Financial accountability & management. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 291–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lapsley, I., & Skærbæk, P. (2012). Why the public sector matters. Financial Accountability & Management, 28(4), 355–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Laughlin, R. C. (2011). Accounting research, policy and practice: Worlds together or worlds apart? In E. Evans, R. Burritt, & J. Guthrie (Eds.), Bridging the gap between academic accounting research and professional practice (pp. 23–30). Sydney: Centre for Accounting, governance and sustainability, University of South Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Australia.Google Scholar
  47. Lee, T. A. (1989). Education, practice and research in accounting: Gaps, close loops, bridges and magic accounting. Accounting and Business Research, 19(75), 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Leisenring, J. J., & Johnson, L. T. (1994). Accounting research: On the relevance of research to practice. Accounting Horizons, 8(4), 74–79.Google Scholar
  49. Lindeman, C. A. (1975). Priorities in clinical nursing research. Nursing Outlook, 23, 693–698.Google Scholar
  50. Lindsay, R. M. (2012). We must overcome the controversial relationship between management accounting research and practice: A commentary on ken Merchant’s “making management accounting research more useful”. Pacific Accounting Review, 24(3), 357–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Malmi, T., & Granlund, M. (2009). In search of management accounting theory. European Accounting Review, 18(3), 597–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Markides, C. (2010). Crossing the chasm: How to convert relevant research into managerially useful research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(1), 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mautz, R. K. (1978). Discussion. In A. R. Abdel-Khalik & P. F. Keller (Eds.), The impact of accounting research on practice and disclosure. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  54. McKelvey, B. (2006). Response Van de Ven and Johnson’s ‘engaged scholarship’: Nice try, but…. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 830–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Merchant, K. A. (2012). Making management accounting research more useful. Pacific Accounting Review, 24(3), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Middlehurst, R. (2014). Higher education research agendas for the coming decade: A UK perspective on the policy–research nexus. Studies in Higher Education, 39(8), 1475–1487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mitchell, F. (2002). Research and practice in management accounting: Improving integration and communication. European Accounting Review, 11(2), 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mohrman, S. A., & Lawler, E. E., III. (2012). Generating knowledge that drives change. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(1), 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Moser, D. V. (2012). Is accounting research stagnant? Accounting Horizons, 26(4), 845–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Newman, J. (2014). Revisiting the “two communities” metaphor of research utilisation. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 27(7), 614–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D. (2010). That’s relevant! Different forms of practical relevance in management science. Organization Studies, 31(9–10), 1257–1285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nicolai, A. T., Schulz, A.-C., & Göbel, M. (2011). Between sweet harmony and a clash of cultures: Does a joint academic-practitioner review reconcile rigor and relevance? Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(1), 53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ormerod, P. (1994). The death of economics. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  64. Otley, D. T. (2010). Research assessment in the UK: An overview of 1992–2008. Australian Accounting Review, 20(3), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Parker, L. D. (2011). University corporatisation: Driving redefinition. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 22(4), 434–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Parker, L. D. (2012). Beyond the ticket and the brand: Imagining an accounting research future. Accounting and Finance, 52(4), 1153–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Parker, L. D., & Guthrie, J. (2010). Editorial: Business schools in an age of globalization. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Parker, L. D., Guthrie, J., & Gray, R. (1998). Accounting and management research: Passwords from the gatekeepers. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 11(4), 371–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Parker, L. D., Guthrie, J., & Linacre, S. (2011). Editorial: The relationship between academic accounting research and professional practice. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 24(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  71. Pettigrew, A. M. (2005). The character and significance of management research on the public services. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 973–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Philip, K. L., Backett-Milburn, K., Cunningham-Burley, S., & Davis, J. B. (2003). Practising what we preach? A practical approach to bringing research, policy and practice together in relation to children and health inequalities. Health Education Research, 18(5), 568–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  74. Pronovost, P., & Wachter, R. (2006). Proposed standards for quality improvement research and publication: One step forward and two steps back. Quality Safety Health Care, 15(3), 152–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ratnatunga, J. (2012). Ivory towers and legal powers: Attitudes and behaviour of town and gown to the accounting research-practice gap. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 10(2), 1–19.Google Scholar
  76. Ravald, A., & Grönroos, C. (1996). The value concept and relationship marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 30(2), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Reay, T., Berta, W., & Kohn, M. K. (2009). What’s the evidence on evidence based management? Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rousseau, D. M., & McCarthy, S. (2007). Educating managers from an evidence-based perspective. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(1), 84–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., & Daft, D. L. (2001). Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 340–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Scapens, R. W. (2006). Understanding management accounting practices: A personal journey. The British Accounting Review, 38(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Scapens, R. W. (2008). Seeking the relevance of interpretive research: A contribution to the polyphonic debate. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19(6), 915–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Scapens, R. W., & Bromwich, M. (2010). Editorial. Practice, theory and paradigms. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 77–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & Practice of the learning organization. London: Rando House.Google Scholar
  84. SETI Institute. SETI—Frequently asked questions. http://www.seti.org/faq#ata4. Accessed 28 Sept 2017.
  85. Shapiro, D. L., Kirkman, B. L., & Courtney, H. G. (2007). Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Short, D. C., Keefer, J. M., & Stone, S. J. (2009). The link between research and practice: Experiences of different professions and implications for HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(4), 420–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tarter, J. (2001). The search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI). Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 39, 511–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. ter Bogt, H., & van Helden, J. (2012). The practical relevance of management accounting research and the role of qualitative methods therein: The debate continues. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Trahan, E., & Gitman, L. (1995). Bridging the theory-practice gap in corporate finance: A survey of chief financial officers. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 35(1), 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tsui, L., Chapman, S.-A., Schnirer, L., & Stewart, S. (2006). A handbook on knowledge sharing: Strategies and recommendations for researchers, policymakers, and service providers. Alberta: Community-University Partnership for the Study of Children, Youth, and Families.Google Scholar
  91. Tucker, B. P., & Lawson, R. (2017). Moving academic management accounting research closer to practice: A view from US and Australian professional accounting bodies. Advances in Management Accounting, 27, 167–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Tucker, B. P., & Leach, M. (2017). Learning from the experience of others: Lessons on the research–practice gap in management accounting – A nursing perspective. Advances in Management Accounting, 29, 127–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Tucker, B. P., & Lowe, A. D. (2014). Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus? An empirical investigation of the research-practice gap in management accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(3), 394–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Tucker, B. P., & Parker, L. D. (2014). In our ivory towers? The research-practice gap in management accounting: An academic perspective. Accounting & Business Research, 44(2), 104–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Tucker, B. P., & Schaltegger, S. (2016). Comparing the research–practice gap in management accounting: A view from professional accounting bodies in Australia and Germany. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(3), 362–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Unerman, J., & O’Dwyer, B. (2010). The relevance and utility of leading accounting research, research report 120. London: The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.Google Scholar
  97. Van de Ven, A. H., & Johnson, P. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 802–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. van Helden, G. J., & Northcott, D. (2010). Examining the practical relevance of public sector management accounting research. Financial Accountability and Management, 26(2), 213–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. van Helden, G. J., Aardemab, H., ter Bogtc, H. J., & Groot, T. L. C. M. (2010). Knowledge creation for practice in public sector management accounting by consultants and academics: Preliminary findings and directions for future research. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Vermeulen, F. (2005). On rigor and relevance: Fostering dialectic progress in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 978–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Werner, C. A. (1978). Discussion. In A. R. Abdel-Khalik & P. F. Keller (Eds.), The impact of accounting research on practice and disclosure. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Wilkerson, J. M. (1999). On research relevance, professors’ ‘real world’ experience, and management development: Are we closing the gap? Journal of Management Development, 18(7), 598–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Wren, D., Halbesleben, J. and Buckley, R. (2007), “The theory–application balance in management pedagogy”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 484–492.Google Scholar
  104. Yang, R. (2003). Globalisation and higher education development: A critical analysis. International Review of Education, 49(3–4), 269–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurence Ferry
    • 1
  • Iris Saliterer
    • 2
  • Ileana Steccolini
    • 3
  • Basil Tucker
    • 4
  1. 1.Durham University Business SchoolDurham UniversityDurhamUK
  2. 2.Albert Ludwigs University of FreiburgFreiburgGermany
  3. 3.Newcastle University LondonLondonUK
  4. 4.UniSA Business SchoolUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations