Author:
J. ter Bogt Henk,Jan van Helden G.
Abstract
Purpose
– This paper aims to discuss the question of how the possible gaps between academic and practical accounting research can be reduced and how academics could make a contribution to solving the practical problems of organizations.
Design/methodology/approach
– A reflection on Van de Ven and Johnson's ideas about “engaged scholarship” as a way for overcoming the gap between academic and practical knowledge creation, illustrated with examples coming from public sector accounting research.
Findings
– Although academic consultant/researchers, who conduct research of direct relevance to practice, ideally must have research objectives in mind that go beyond the practical problems of the organization in order to address academically relevant goals, this is often not feasible. This is due to the fact that academically relevant research questions can often only be identified when a practice-oriented research project has already taken shape. The authors argue and illustrate that a pragmatic form of engaged scholarship in public sector accounting research implies that such research results in a variety of outputs. Some of the outputs will have direct relevance to the practitioners and others to the academics involved, whilst the outputs that are relevant to each of these two groups will only partly show connections and overlaps.
Practical implications
– The preoccupation of academic researchers with publications in high-ranking journals, due to pressures from their universities and peer groups, threatens research projects with a potential relevance for practice, because their publication opportunities are uncertain in advance. The authors welcome researchers who want to take this type of risk, and the authors challenge university officials and journal editors to broaden their view on excellence in research beyond the scope of their traditional academic domains.
Originality/value
– The paper offers a realistic way out of serving two seemingly different research goals, practice-relevance and academic rigour.
Subject
Accounting,Business and International Management
Reference22 articles.
1. Argento, D.
and
van Helden, G.J.
(2009), “Reforming the Dutch water chain: how radical ambitions turned into a moderate pace of change”, Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 321-343.
2. Dijstelbloem, H.
,
Huisman, F.
,
Miedema, F.
and
Mijnhardt, W.
(2013), “Why science does not work as it should and what to do about it?”, available at: www.scienceintransition.nl/over-science-in-transition/position-paper (accessed 16 September 2013).
3. Gendron, Y.
(2008), “Constituting the academic performer: the spectre of superficiality and stagnation in academia”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 97-127.
4. Grafton, J.
,
Lillis, A.M.
and
Mahama, H.
(2011), “Mixed methods research in accounting”, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
5. Gulbrandsen, M.
and
Smeby, J.C.
(2005), “Industry funding and university professors' research performance”, Research Policy, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 932-950.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献