Kari Lukka

The problem of generalizability: anecdotes and evidence in accounting research

Generalization in accounting research is always suspect as the social context and institutions of accounting change over time and space. However, exactly for this reason, there are a number of different ways to reach pragmatic and somewhat generalizable results. No research programme or approach has an absolute upper hand in understanding the true dynamics of economic development. The genuine puzzle of inductive reasoning creates a rhetorical element for all attempts to generalize in accounting research. The main rhetorics used in accounting studies are statistical, contextual, and constructive generalization. To put it in broad terms, statistical generalization rhetoric relies on formal arguments brought from a mathematical theory, contextual generalization rhetoric is based on understanding of the historical and institutional context, and constructive generalization relies on the diffusion of innovation. Combining the often silenced opportunities of contextual or constructive generalization rhetorics in...

BUDGETARY BIASING IN ORGANIZATIONS: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

Abstract The purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of budgetary biasing behaviour. The findings are of both a theoretical and empirical nature. The theoretical results provide a framework containing two major parts: an explanatory model of budgetary biasing at the individual level, and an organizational model for budgetary biasing. In the empirical part of the study an attempt is made to test the usability of the framework in a relatively large firm with several profit-centers. Biasing action is found to be a result of an interplay of various inter-related factors. Overall, the framework is considered to provide a valid basis for trying to understand and interpret the budgetary biasing behaviour in the firm studied.

Is accounting a global or a local discipline? evidence from major research journals

Accounting research is torn between two competing forces. On the one hand, a quest for general results and internationalization of financial markets calls for a global approach and international co-operation. On the other hand, domestic institutional settings call for research that deals with the relevant problems of the existing accounting systems. In this paper we address the issue of how global or local the accounting research community currently is through an analysis of empirical studies published by six leading English language accounting research journals from the U.S.A., Europe and Australia, during the period 1984–1993. Our findings indicate that accounting still is a rather local discipline by nature: both empirical evidence and authors are significantly clustered along country lines. We find that 77% of papers fall in a category where the origin of the researcher, data and the journal, is the same. Especially there is a close link between the origin of the researcher and that of the data. The interpretation of the empirical findings lead us to a view of competing research elites. A powerful and currently dominating U.S. academic elite is centred around The Accounting Review, the Journal of Accounting Research and the Journal of Accounting and Economics; and an emerging, mostly European elite around Accounting, Organizations and Society. The functioning of research elites produces competing quality criteria which are intertwined with methodological and cultural issues. The emerging “policentric oligarchy” of research elites helps to remove institutional barriers to the knowledge production process and offers legitimate outlets for a wider range of approaches.

The fragmented communication structure within the accounting academia: the case of activity-based costing research genres

Abstract The major purpose of this study is to examine the communication structures within the management accounting academia, with a view to illustrating and thereby possibly alleviating the difficulties of dialogue between the different discussion circles identifiable within the field. Research on activity-based costing (ABC) is used as an illustrating example case. We distinguish three genres of ABC research (Consulting research, Basic research, and Critical research) and analyse their nature as well as their internal and external communication patterns. We are particularly interested in the interests of knowledge, research methods, argumentation styles, and results of these genres. Also, we will pay attention to their effects both on the progress of science and management accounting practice. The theoretical points of support lean on the ideas of Bourdieu, Gadamer, Habermas, Latour, and Stegmuller. Overall, the field of ABC research appears to be fragmented. Our analysis suggests that the current communication pattern between various research genres is not inclined to enhance the accumulation of accounting knowledge. Applying the ideas of Stegmuller (1969), we conclude that the discussion circles within the accounting academia appear to be estranged to an extent to which the arguments of researchers representing different approaches do not frequently meet each other, resulting in the unfruitful development of knowledge.

There and Back Again: Doing Interventionist Research in Management Accounting

Abstract Interventionist research is not unobtrusive since the researcher deliberately seeks to make an impact on the world in order to gain knowledge. In this Chapter we examine the fundamental nature of interventionist research in management accounting, its philosophical anchoring, variations, and forms of output. We also give brief illustrations. The distinguishing character of this kind of research is the need for the researcher to cross the border between the etic (outsider) and the emic (insider) perspectives—there and back again. This shift between differing logics provides opportunities for new insights since the researcher wants to achieve solutions that work in the field and come back with evidence of theoretical significance.

Cost accounting in Finland: current practice and trends of development

Recent changes in marketing strategies, competition and production environments, and consequent changes in cost structures, have been argued as imposing pressure for change on current cost accounting. Characteristic of the present situation is the serious lack of information concerning the current state of cost accounting practice. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyse the present state, and trends in the development, of cost accounting practices in large and middle-sized Finnish manufacturing units, using a questionnaire survey method. The usable response rate was 44 per cent (135 units). According to the respondents, significant changes have emerged in several areas of their operating environments and strategies during the last few years. Even though these changes have affected a number of cost accounting issues, their most significant effect has been the decrease in the proportion of direct labour costs in unit cost structures. The most important problem areas of cost accounting relate to the allocation of various overhead costs to products. The application of the so-called new cost accounting methods seems to be very infrequent: none of the responding units reported their true application. However, there were indications of current implementation of activity-based costing systems, as well as wide interest in developing them.

Homogeneity or heterogeneity of research in management accounting

Viewing Zimmerman (2001) as propagating for an economics-based monolithic paradigm to be adopted in management accounting research, we examine the nature and implications of such Kuhnian ‘normal science’. Acknowledging that normal science can produce cumulative knowledge efficiently, we examine its risks as well. Similarly as with any normal science, that based on economics also inherently offers a narrow window to the world, and creates areas of ‘non-discussables’. We illustrate how such a regime would limit our abilities to construct and examine interesting propositions and develop meaningful stories about management accounting in its social, organizational and behavioural contexts. Accepting the rule of a monolithic economics-based paradigm would limit our abilities to develop a critical stance, and threatens the ability of management accounting research community for good scientific conversation and progress. Hence, in contrast to Zimmerman, we argue for remaining open for heterogeneity in management accounting research.

Domain theory and method theory in management accounting research

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to distinguish two roles of theories, domain theory and method theory, and examine their relationships in management accounting research. Are these two roles explicitly distinguished in management accounting studies? Can this be achieved in an unambiguous manner? Where do ambitions for theoretical contribution lie in management accounting studies that employ method theories? Design/methodology/approach - – The authors develop a conceptual framework for analysing possible relationships between domain theories and method theories in studies and illustrate the theoretical arguments with examples from management accounting studies employing Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as their method theory. Findings - – There can be various types of relationships between domain theories and method theories, and the theoretical ambition of the analysed studies typically focused on domain theories. However, ambiguity can exist with regard to the location of a studys theoretical ambition. Both domain theories and method theories tend to be moving fields, and their interaction can add to this feature. Research limitations/implications - – The suggested conceptual clarification assists in the reconciliation of extreme perspectives that relate to management accounting and theory. It will also help researchers to systematically design their own work and evaluate that of others. An increased understanding of how a field develops as a result of interaction with method theories might perhaps alleviate concerns regarding the value of mobilizing the latter. Originality/value - – The analysis contributes to the on-going debate on the value and effects of employing method theories, or theoretical lenses, in management accounting research.

Ontology and accounting: The concept of profit

Whenever accounting is discussed it involves dealing with concepts like revenue, cost, depreciation and profit. The question raised in this paper is in what sense do those phenomena that accounting concepts refer to actually exist. Therefore, the underlying assumptions about the existence of reality that are reflected in accounting concepts are discussed. The analysis concentrates on the ontological nature of the concept of profit in accounting. Traditionally, and even today, the general idea of objectivity dominates the thinking in both accounting theory and practice: accounting concepts are usually interpreted as reflecting the reality that exists somewhere “out there.≓ From the ontological point of view, this corresponds to realism in philosophy. However, it seems that this interpretation is insufficient if we wish to gain a more thorough understanding of the significance and the roles of accounting in organizations and society. It is argued that in order to deepen this understanding it will be necessary to reduce the dominant role of realistic ontology in favour of idealistic ontology. In line with this it is suggested that the social constructivist view might offer a common and fruitful basis for the interpretation of the basic nature of accounting concepts. A detailed ontological analysis of the concept of profit is presented to support this basic argument.

Total accounting in action: reflections on sten jonsson's accounting for improvement

Abstract Sten Jonsson’s recent book Accounting for Improvement (1996) examines organizational change processes based on several in-depth case-studies, conducted during a period of about ten years. In this review essay the arguments of the book are placed alongside recent discussions on management accounting practices, which have increasingly discovered the “hidden” potential of accounting and accountants. Jonsson’s book offers exciting insights into organizational improvement processes, which are linked to accounting in a particularly broad, “total accounting” sense. The major limitation of the book is held to be that it places accountants in the background of the analysis, perhaps reflecting problems in empirical research designs of the case-studies. As a result, the relationships and communication patterns between accountants and line personnel remain largely unexamined.