Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Approaches to validation and evaluation in qualitative studies of management accounting

Approaches to validation and evaluation in qualitative studies of management accounting Purpose – This paper aims to address the reporting of validation and evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies, which is a topic of critical debate in qualitative social science research. The objective of this study is to investigate the ways researchers have reported the use of evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies and whether they are associated with certain paradigmatic affiliations. Design/methodology/approach – Building on the work of Eriksson and Kovalainen (Eriksson and Kovalainen (2008) Qualitative Methods in Business Research. London, Sage), the following three approaches are examined: the adoption of classic concepts of validity and reliability, the use of alternative concepts and the abandonment of general evaluation criteria. Content analysis of 212 case and field studies published during 2006 to February 2015 was conducted to be able to offer an analysis of the most recent frontiers of knowledge. Findings – The key empirical results of this study provide partial support for the theoretical expectations. They specify and refine Eriksson and Kovalainen’s (2008) classification system, first, by identifying a new approach to evaluation and validation and, second, by showing mixed results on the paradigmatic consistency in the use of evaluation criteria. Research limitations/implications – This paper is not necessarily exhaustive or representative of all the evaluation criteria developed; the authors focused on the explicit reporting of criteria only and the findings cannot be generalized. Somewhat different results might have been obtained if other journals, other fields of research or a longer period were considered. Practical implications – The findings of this study enhance the knowledge of alternative approaches and criteria to validation and evaluation. The findings can aid both in the evaluation of management accounting research and in the selection of appropriate evaluation approaches and criteria. Originality/value – This paper presents a synthesis of the literature (Table I) and new empirical findings that are potentially useful for both academic scholars and practitioners. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management Emerald Publishing

Approaches to validation and evaluation in qualitative studies of management accounting

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/approaches-to-validation-and-evaluation-in-qualitative-studies-of-roxaJVsTP4

References (45)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1176-6093
DOI
10.1108/QRAM-03-2013-0012
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to address the reporting of validation and evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies, which is a topic of critical debate in qualitative social science research. The objective of this study is to investigate the ways researchers have reported the use of evaluation criteria in qualitative management accounting studies and whether they are associated with certain paradigmatic affiliations. Design/methodology/approach – Building on the work of Eriksson and Kovalainen (Eriksson and Kovalainen (2008) Qualitative Methods in Business Research. London, Sage), the following three approaches are examined: the adoption of classic concepts of validity and reliability, the use of alternative concepts and the abandonment of general evaluation criteria. Content analysis of 212 case and field studies published during 2006 to February 2015 was conducted to be able to offer an analysis of the most recent frontiers of knowledge. Findings – The key empirical results of this study provide partial support for the theoretical expectations. They specify and refine Eriksson and Kovalainen’s (2008) classification system, first, by identifying a new approach to evaluation and validation and, second, by showing mixed results on the paradigmatic consistency in the use of evaluation criteria. Research limitations/implications – This paper is not necessarily exhaustive or representative of all the evaluation criteria developed; the authors focused on the explicit reporting of criteria only and the findings cannot be generalized. Somewhat different results might have been obtained if other journals, other fields of research or a longer period were considered. Practical implications – The findings of this study enhance the knowledge of alternative approaches and criteria to validation and evaluation. The findings can aid both in the evaluation of management accounting research and in the selection of appropriate evaluation approaches and criteria. Originality/value – This paper presents a synthesis of the literature (Table I) and new empirical findings that are potentially useful for both academic scholars and practitioners.

Journal

Qualitative Research in Accounting & ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: Aug 3, 2015

There are no references for this article.