Comparing the research-practice gap in management accounting

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast perceptions about the research-practice “gap” as it may apply within management accounting, from the perspective of professional accounting bodies in Australia and Germany. Design/methodology/approach – The findings reported in this paper is based on the collection and analysis of data from interviews with 19 senior representatives from four Australian Professional bodies and 14 representatives of German Professional accounting bodies. Findings – In Australia and Germany, there exist common as well as unique barriers preventing a more effective engagement of academic research with practice. Common to both countries is the perception that the communication of research represents a major barrier. In Australia, practitioner access to academic research is seen to be a principal obstacle; in Germany, the relevance of topics researched by academics is perceived to represent a significant barrier to academic research informing practice. Research limitations/implications – This paper directly engages with, and extends recent empirically based research into the extent to which academic research may “speak” to management accounting practice. It extricates both common and specific barriers contributing to the oft-quoted “research-practice gap” in management accounting, and points to the pivotal nature of an intermediary to act as a conduit between academics and practice. Originality/value – By investigating this issue in two quite different cultural, educational, academic and practice contexts, this paper provides much-needed empirical evidence about the nature, extent and pervasiveness of the perceived research-practice gap in management accounting, and provides a basis for further investigation of this important topic.

Abundant Publications but Minuscule Impact: The Irrelevance of Academic Accounting Research on Practice and the Profession

“…While the criticism within academic ranks has been growing, external pressure is also mounting [47]. David Willetts, the UK's minister for higher education until 2014, is highly critical of business schools for chasing status and rankings via journal publications at the detriment of applied research [48].…”

The Impact of Management Accounting Research: An Analysis of the Past and a Look at the Future

“…Therefore, it does not consider the practitioners' view which would be fundamental to prove that a real gap between theory and practice exists. The practitioners' perspective has been adopted by Tucker and Schaltegger (2016) who, in their study, contrast the perceptions of representatives of Australian and German professional accounting bodies concerning the gap between theory and practice. The authors show that relevance of topics and communicational problems represent two of the most significant barriers diminishing the impact of management accounting research.…”

“…In some cases, this is due to practitioners' unfamiliarity with quantitative and statistical methods, for example, which are often used to analyse and interpret phenomena in the field of accounting and management accounting (Chalmers & Wright, 2011). Moreover, the fact that management accounting research has become ever more interpretative, rather than normative, has made it less understandable by practitioners who often have a technical, or practical, education (ter Bogt & van Helden, 2012;Tucker & Schaltegger 2016). According to Mitchell (2002, p. 282), these changes which occurred with regard to management accounting research has created "semantic and syntactical barriers" between researchers and practitioners, given that the latter often do not have an adequate background to fully understand and appreciate the contribution, especially the theoretical one, given by a research study.…”

The Link between Corporate Environmental and Corporate Financial Performance—Viewpoints from Practice and Research

“…For the purpose of filling the second gap identified in research, this investigation refers to qualitative expert interviews with corporate representatives. The study therefore considers the voice of practice [50] and intends to appeal to practitioners in particular. The cause-and-effect analysis is considered by asking interviewees directly for the existence of a relationship between corporate resource efficiency and CFP.…”