روش شناسی کیفی در تحقیقات حسابداری مدیریت با تأکید بر چالش ها و فرصت ها
الموضوعات : حسابداری مدیریت
1 - دکتری حسابداری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران
2 - دکتری حسابداری دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران و عضو هئیت علمی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد لاهیجان ،لاهیجان،ایران
الکلمات المفتاحية: پژوهش های کیفی, حسابداری مدیریت, چالش ها و فرصت ها,
ملخص المقالة :
اخیراً تحقیقات حسابداری به سمت روش شناسی کیفی گام برداشته است به نحوی که توسعه مبانی و بسط اندیشه های کیفی و رفتاری در متن پژوهش ها، با توجه به ناشناخته و متغییر بودن مولفه های رفتاری، پژوهشگران این حوزه را با چالش هایی مواجه نموده است. در نوشتار حاضر با تاکید بر رویکرد آرشیوی و استفاده از منابع نظری و عملی متعدد به بررسی کلی ساختار و منطق پژوهش های کیفی در زمینه حسابداری مدیریت و همچنین نقش پژوهش های کیفی که منجر به ارائه نظریه های حسابداری مدیریت گردیده و اصول و راهنمای کلی جهت انجام پژوهش هایی از این دست پرداخته شده است. تأکید نوشتار حاضر بر شناسایی مشکلات و چالش های رایج پژوهش های کیفی و ارائه راه کارهایی برای بهبود و پر کردن آن است. نقدهایی همچون 1) انتزاعی بودن آمار از واقعیت، 2) شبیه سازی، 3) ناتوانی در آشکار سازی ابعاد واقعی یک پدیده و 4) عدم دقت در روش های کمی و مسائلی دیگر همچون سنجش مفاهیم، تعیین علیت، قابلیت تعمیم نتایج، تکرار پذیری و تمرکز بر افراد این سبک از پژوهش ها را مورد توجه محافل حرفه ای قرار داده است. قابلیت های خاص این سبک از مطالعات از طریق کیفی نگری در تحقیق و در موقعیت های مختلف می توانند ما را به سوی خلق دانش منسجم تر، معتبر، مرتبط و رهایی بخش در زمینه حسابداری مدیریت رهنمون باشند، موضوعی که در چند سال اخیر در کشور مورد توجه بیشتری قرار گرفته و رشد کمی پژوهش های کیفی در حسابداری مدیریت چنان بوده است که به عنوان یک پارادایم نوین در تحقیقات می توان از آن یاد نمود.
* ثقفی، علی و برزگر، قدرت اله (1390)، تحقیقات حسابداری مدیریت، با تاکید بر روش تحقیق کیفی، فصلنامه مطالعات حسابداری و حسابرسی، شماره 1.
* رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون و علی اصغر طاهرآبادی (1389)، مشکلات تعامل بین تحقیقات، آموزش و حرفه حسابداری و ارائه یک الگوی جدید، فصلنامه دانش و پژوهش حسابداری، شماره 21، صص از 12 تا 17 و 63 تا 65.
* صالحی، اله کرم، احمدی، محمد علی، هاشمی بلمیری، سمیرا (1396)، تحقیقات کیفی در حسابداری مدیریت با تاکید بر مبانی فلسفی، فصلنامه پژوهش حسابداری، شماره 25، صص 35-55.
* نمازی محمد ( 1385-1386)، چالشها و فرصتهای حسابداری مدیریت، ماهنامه حسابدار شمارههای 180 و 181.
* نیکو مرام، هاشم و فریدون رهنمای رودپشتی و علی بیات (1388)، بررسی دلایل کمبود پژوهشهای تجربی انجام شده در حوزه حسابداری مدیریت در ایران، مجله حسابداری مدیریت، شماره 2.
* Ahrens, T. (2007), “Overcoming the subjective-objective divide in interpretive management accounting research”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33, pp. 292-7.
* Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C. (2006), “Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: positioning data to contribute to theory”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp. 819-41.
* Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C. (2002), “The structuration of legitimate performance measures and management: day-to-day contests of accountability in a UK restaurant chain”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 151-71.
* Ahrens, T. and Dent, J. (1998), “Accounting and organizations: realizing the richness of field research”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 10, pp. 1-39.
* Armstrong, P. (2007), “Calling out for more: comment on the future of interpretive accounting research”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting (in press).
* Baxter, J. and Chua, W. F. (2003). "Alternative management accounting research – whence and whither", Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 28, pp. .97-126
* Baxter, J. and Chua, W.F. (2008), “The field researcher as author-writer”, Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 101-121.
* Birnberg, J., Shields, M. and Young, S. (1990), “The case for multiple methods in empirical management accounting research (with an illustration from budget setting)”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Fall, pp. 33-66.
* Briers, M. and Chua, W.F. (2001), “The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in management accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based costing”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 26, pp. 237-9.
* Burns, J. and Vaivio, J. (2001), “Management accounting change”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 12, pp. 389-402.
* Chua, W.F. (1986), “Radical developments in accounting thought”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 61. No. 4, pp. 601-632.
* Clegg, S. and Palmer, G. (Eds) (1996), The Politics of Management Knowledge, Sage, London.
* Cooper, R. and Kaplan, R. (1988), “Measure cost right: make the right decision”, Harvard Business Review, September/October, pp. 96-103.
* DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1991), “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, in Powell, W. and DiMaggio, P. (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 63-82.
* Delattre Miguel, Ocler Rodolphe, Moulette Pascal and Rymeyko Karine (2009). "Singularity of Qualitative Research: From Collecting Information to Producing Results" ,Tamara Journal, Vol 7 Issue 7. 3 (March)
* Dyer, W.G. and Wilkins, A.L. (1991), “Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: a rejoinder to Eishenhart”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 613-9.
* Eisenhart, K. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, pp. 532-50.
* Eriksson, P. and Kovalainen, A. (2008), Qualitative Methods in Business Research, Sage, London.
* Ezzamel, M. (1994), “Organizational change and accounting: understanding the budgeting system in its organizational context”, Organization Studies, Vol. 15, pp. 213-40.
* Ferreira, L. and Merchant, K. (1992), “Field research in management accounting and control: a review and evaluation”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 3-34.
* Garrett, D. and Hodkinson, P. (1998), “Can there be criteria for selecting research criteria? Hermeneutical analysis of an inescapable dilemma”, Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 515-539.
* Hope, J. and Fraser, R. (2003), “Who needs budgets?”, Harvard Business Review, February, pp. 108-15.
* Hopwood, A. (1983), “On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it operates”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 8, pp. 287-305.
* Hopwood, A. (1986), “Management accounting and organizational action: an introduction”, in Bromwich, M. and Hopwood, A. (Eds), Research and Current Issues in Management Accounting, Pitman, London, pp. 9-30.
* Hopwood, A. (2008), “Management Accounting Research in a Changing World”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 20, pp. 3-13.
* Humphrey, C. and Scapens, R. (1996), “Methodological themes – theories and case studies of organizational accounting practices: limitation or liberation?”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 86-106.
* Institute of Management Accountant, (2008), Definition of Management Accounting Retrieved December 2012.
* Jackson, B. (2001), Management Gurus and Management Fashions, Routledge, London.
* Jazayeri, M. and Hopper, T. (1999), “Management accounting within world class manufacturing: a case study”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 10, pp. 263-301.
* Johnson, H. and Kaplan, R. (1987), Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
* Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M-L., Lukka, K. and Kuorikoski, J. (2008a), “Straddling between paradigms: a naturalistic philosophical case study on interpretive research in management accounting”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33 Nos 2/3, pp. 267-91.
* Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M-L., Lukka, K. and Kuorikoski, J. (2008b), “No premature closures of debates, please: a response to Ahrens”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33 Nos 2/3, pp. 298-301.
* Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. (1996), “Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system”, Harvard Business Review, January/February, pp. 75-85.
* Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. (2001), The Strategy Focused Organization. How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
* Kasurinen, T. (2002), “Exploring management accounting change: the case of a balanced scorecard implementation”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 13, pp. 323-43.
* Keating, P.J. (1995), “A framework for classifying and evaluating the theoretical contributions of case research in management accounting”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 66-86.
* Kihn, Lili-Anne and Ihantola Eeva-Mari , (2015),"Approaches to validation and evaluation in qualitative studies of management accounting", Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Vol. 12 Iss 3 pp. 230 - 255.
* Lambert, R. (2001), “Contracting theory and accounting”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 32, pp. 3-87.
* Laughlin, R. (1995), “Methodological themes – empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for ‘middle-range’ thinking”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 63-87.
* Lillis, A. (2006), “Reliability and validity in field study research”, in Hoque, Z. (Ed.), Methodological Issues in Accounting Research: Theories and Methods, Spiramus, London, pp. 461-475.
* Llewellyn, S. and Northcott, D. (2005), “The average hospital”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 555-83.
* Lukka, K. and Modell, S. (2010), “Validation in interpretive management accounting research”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 462-477.
* McKinnon, J. (1988), “Reliability and validity in field research: some strategies and tactics”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 1, pp. 34-54.
* Macher, M. (1987), “The use of relative performance evaluation in organizations”, in Burns, W. Jr and Kaplan, R. (Eds), Accounting and Management: Field Study Perspectives, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, pp. 295-315.
* Machlup, F. (1967), “Theories of the firm: marginalist, behavioral, managerial”, American Economic Review, reprinted in Microeconomics – Selected Readings, Mansfield, E. (Eds), 4th ed., 1982. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY, pp. 93-108.
* Macintosh, N. and Scapens, R. (1990), “Structuration theory in management accounting”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 455-77.
* Major, M. and Hopper, T. (2005), “Managers divided: implementing ABC in a Portuguese telecommunications company”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 16, pp. 205-29.
* Malmi, T. (1997), “Towards explaining activity-based costing failure: accounting and control in a decentralized organization”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 459-80.
* Malmi, T. and Granlund, M. (2006), “In search of management accounting theory”, paper presented at the Annual Conference of the European Accounting Association, Dublin, March.
* Merchant, K.A. and Van der Stede, W.A. (2006), “Field-based research in accounting: accomplishments and prospects”, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 117-134.
* Merchant, K. (1987), “How and why firms disregard the controllability principle?”, in Bruns, W. Jr and Kaplan, R. (Eds), Accounting and Management: Field Study Perspectives, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, pp. 316-38.
* Modell, S. (2005), “Triangulation between case study and survey methods in management accounting research: an assessment of validity implications”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 16, pp. 231-54.
* Parker, L.D. (2012), “Qualitative management accounting research: assessing deliverables and relevance”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 54-70.
* Polit D. F. and C. T. Back (2007). "Nursing Research: Principles and Methods",New Yourk , Edward Elgar.
* Ryan, B., Scapens, R.W. and Theobald, M. (2002), Research Method and Methodology in Finance and Accounting, 2nd ed., Thomson, London.
* Scapens, R. (1990), “Researching management accounting practice: the role of case study methods”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 22, pp. 259-81.
* Simons, R. (1987), “Planning, control and uncertainty: a process view”, in Burns, W. Jr and Kaplan, R. (Eds), Accounting and Management: Field Study Perspectives, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, pp. 339-62.
* Simons, R. (1991), “Strategic orientation and top management attention to control systems”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 49-62.
* Smith, J.K. and Hodkinson, P. (2005), “Relativism, criteria and politics”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks.
* Schwandt, T.A. (1996), “Farewell to criteriology”, Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 58-72.
* Vaivio, J. (2005), “‘Strategic’ non-financial measurement in an organizational context: a critique”, Accounting in Scandinavia – The Northern Lights, Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press, Kristianstad.
* Vaivio, J. (2006), “The accounting of ‘the meeting’: examining calculability within a ‘fluid’ local space”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31, pp. 735-62.
* Vaivio, J. (2008). “Qualitive Management Accounting Research: Rationale, Pitfalls and Potential”, Qualitive Research in Accounting and Management, vol.5 pp. 64-86.
* Young, S. and Selto, F. (1993), “Explaining cross-sectional workgroup performance differences in a JIT facility: a critical appraisal of a field-based study”, Journal of Management Accounting Research, Fall, pp. 300-26
_||_