Moving Academic Management Accounting Research Closer to Practice: A View from US and Australian Professional Accounting Bodies
45 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2015 Last revised: 19 Nov 2015
Date Written: August 13, 2015
Abstract
Concerns about the extent to which academic research informs practice have been repeatedly voiced in the management accounting literature. How widespread this apparent concern is has not been extensively investigated, and the views of non-academics have, however, rarely been canvassed in this conversation. This paper provides empirically based insights how the research-practice gap is seen from a practice frame of reference, and the ways in which such perceptions vary across two different geographical contexts. Based on a questionnaire survey and follow-up interviews with a sample of senior representatives of principal US and Australian professional accounting bodies, our findings largely support the observations of academic commentators on this subject who conclude that the extent to which academic research informs practice is limited, despite the potential for academic research findings to make a significant contribution to management accounting practice. We find similarities as well as differences in the major obstacles to closer engagement in the US and Australia. This comparison, however, leads us to offer an explanation of the divide between academic research and practice framed in terms of Rational Choice Theory, in which engagement is dependent upon the costs and benefits academics perceive in adopting a greater practice orientation in their research efforts. Our study suggests that academic and practical relevance is not necessarily mutually exclusive, and that ‘bridging the research-practice gap’ necessitates demonstrating the value of practice-useful academic research. Consistent with Rational Choice Theory, we call for management accounting researchers to extend the bounds of their rationality by broadening their awareness of and interest in engagement with practice.
Keywords: academic research, research-practice gap, rigor-relevance, engagement
JEL Classification: M41
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation