The research practice gap on accounting in the public services

Purpose—This book considers how the practical and public policy rele-vance of research might be increased, and academics and practitioners can better engage to define research agendas a

An International Analysis

Series Editors Sandra Cohen Athens University of Economics and Business

Athens, Greece Eugenio Caperchione Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia

Modena, Italy Isabel Brusca University of Zaragoza Zaragoza, Spain Francesca Manes Rossi Department of Management and Innovation Systems

University of Salerno Fisciano, Italy

on the new budgeting and accounting methodologies and their impact across the public sector, from central and local government to public health care and education It considers the need for better quality account-ing information for decision-making, planning and control in the public sector; the development of the IPSAS (International Public Sector Accounting Standards) and the EPSAS (European Public Sector Accounting Standards), including their merits and role in accounting har-monisation; accounting information’s role in governments’ financial sus-tainability and crisis confrontation; the contribution of sophisticated ICT systems to public sector financial, cost and management accounting deployment; and the relationship between robust accounting information and performance measurement New trends in public sector reporting and auditing are covered as well The series fills a significant gap in the market

in which works on public sector accounting and financial management are sparse, while research in the area is experiencing unprecedented growth.More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15782

Laurence Ferry • Iris Saliterer

Ileana Steccolini • Basil Tucker

The Research-Practice Gap on Accounting in the Public Services

An International Analysis

Public Sector Financial Management

ISBN 978-3-319-99431-4 ISBN 978-3-319-99432-1 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99432-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018957073

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2019

This work is subject to copyright All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information

in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication Neither the lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu- tional affiliations.

pub-Cover illustration: Prisma by Dukas Presseagentur GmbH / Alamy Stock Photo

This Palgrave Pivot imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG

The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Durham University Business School

Purpose—This book considers how the practical and public policy

rele-vance of research might be increased, and academics and practitioners can better engage to define research agendas and deliver findings rele-vant to accounting and accountability in the public services

Design/Methodology/Approach—An international comparative

analy-sis of the research-practice gap on accounting in the public services has been undertaken This involved academic perspectives from 21 coun-tries and practitioner perspectives from the heads of the public services

at 3 leading international professional accounting bodies actively involved in the public services arena

Findings—Research can be useful to inform practice, but engaging at a

high level of policy engagement has been primarily by a small group of experienced researchers For other researchers, the impact accomplished may not always be valued highly in the academic community relative to other, more scholarly, activities

Research Limitations/Implications—The book covers a broad range of

countries in an attempt to get a detailed comparative analysis of the extent to which academic research is seen to resonate, engage, and impact public sector practice The main coverage is relatively advanced western liberal democratic countries from Europe, alongside Australia, and North America (Canada and the USA) However, importantly, as part of a broader comparative analysis, it also includes contributions

an InternatIonal analySIS of the

reSearch-PractIce GaP on accountInG In

the PublIc ServIceS

from Africa—Nigeria and Ghana, South America—Brazil, and Asia—Malaysia and Thailand Nevertheless, it does not cover other developing economies, where findings could be different and are worthy of investigation.

Originality/Value—The book is both ambitious and innovative in

build-ing on calls to address the research-practice gap through engagbuild-ing a broad cross-section of academics and practitioners at an international level

We would specifically like to thank Ron Hodges (Emeritus Professor of Accounting, Birmingham University, UK), Aileen Murphie (Director at National Audit Office (NAO), UK), Pete Murphy (Professor of Public Management, Nottingham Trent University, UK), Lee Parker (Professor

of Accounting, RMIT, Australia, and University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK), and all of the other colleagues who supported in the development

of this book

acknowledGementS

Laurence  Ferry is a Professor of Accounting at Durham University

Business School (UK) and a prestigious Parliamentary Academic Fellow in public accountability 2018–2019 He is a well-recognized international expert in public financial management

Iris Saliterer is a Professor of Public and Non-Profit Management at the

Albert-Ludwigs University in Freiburg (Germany) and was Schumpeter Fellow at Harvard University (USA) in 2015–2016 Her main research interests include performance management, public sector accounting and financial management (reforms), financial and administrative resilience, and innovative forms of public service delivery

Ileana Steccolini is a Professor of Accounting and Finance at Newcastle

University London (UK) and the chair and founder of IRSPM Accounting and accountability special interest group Her research develops at the interface between accounting and public administration

Basil Tucker is currently a senior lecturer in the School of Commerce,

UniSA Business School (Australia) He has published extensively on the relevance of academic research, and in particular, the research-practice

‘gap’ in management accounting

about the authorS

Fig 1.1 Mapping current engagement—bridging the academic-practice

Fig 4.1 Making sense of the research-practice gap 120

lISt of fIGureS

© The Author(s) 2019

L Ferry et al., The Research-Practice Gap on Accounting in the

Public Services, Public Sector Financial Management,

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99432-1_1

Concerns About the Research-Practice Gap

on Accounting in Public Services

Abstract What does the impact of research on practice look like? Why is

it important? How might it be achieved? What are the benefits to ers in ‘speaking’ to practice? These are all questions that have been debated not only in accounting research forums, journals, conferences, and semi-nars, but also in the wider academic landscape In this chapter, we outline the journey that we as researchers with a particular interest in bridging the research-practice gap have travelled in our consideration of these ques-tions For us, this book represents another important step in this journey

research-by bringing an international perspective to this vexing issue, and in this chapter, we outline our intent in unpacking some of these questions, and how this book contributes to this end

Keywords Research-practice gap • Accounting • Accountability •

Public sector • Academics • Practitioners

A significant challenge for academia is to be, and be seen to be, relevant to practice, and for practice to have, and be seen to have, the legitimation of

brick; theory is mortar Both are essential and both must be good if we are to erect a worthy structure’ However, all too often, the worlds exist sepa-

rately, undermining the potential contributions that can be made from a closer relationship between theory and practice The situation has become particularly evident in accounting research, where academics and their research are often seen as cut off from what is happening in the so-called

real world outside of the ivory towers of universities, and the practical as

Concerns about a (widening) research-practice gap have been raised in

rating and benchmarking are amplifying this situation, additionally risking the relevance and quality of accounting research (Parker and Guthrie

Aside from a sustained interest in public services accounting research, recent reviews of the literature have also raised similar concerns for this

practitioners, although central to the production of knowledge in public administration, has nevertheless been described as challenging (Buick

p. 685) Pointing to the challenges and ‘wicked’ problems both

practitio-ners and academics have to face, an increasing number of scholars call to action for (interdisciplinary) accounting researchers ‘to reflect on what these turbulent times means for society and to ensure that their academic endeavours make a contribution to practice, policy and a wider societal

accounts for, but also impacts on, issues of wider social relevance (Steccolini

accounting academic, highlight how engaging with the profession and society can give impact to academic’s teaching and research both in their own countries and internationally

It is within this motivation of interdisciplinary accounting research in the public services that embraces the public interest and engagement through bringing together academics and practitioners that this book is situated, as a comparative analysis to highlight the potential of construct-ing an enabling accounting for the wider societal good This book there-fore addresses potentials for and barriers to bridging a research-practice gap in (public service) accounting research that is a long debated issue with uncertain and no definitive solutions (ter Bogt and Van Helden

bridge the practice-academia gap, but represents a further effort to try to narrow it by presenting and contrasting the views from 21 different coun-tries and representatives of 3 international professional accounting bodies

While the different contributions provide evidence of engagement between academics and practitioners, they also reveal that the engagement remains at the margins and that more can be done in accounting research

in general and in a public service context in particular

The origins for this book that considers a comparative analysis of research and practice on accounting in the public services is found in the International Research Society of Public Management (IRSPM) Special Interest Group on Accounting and Accountability This was established in

2011 with the aim of contributing to and influencing the ‘international’ debate on accounting, accountability, and performance measurement sys-tems in the public sector Part of this role involved developing a distinc-tive, interdisciplinary research approach which embraced theoretical, methodological, and geographical diversity as well as engagement with public policy and practice communities

Over the past seven years, the group has organized an annual workshop with the objectives to build a network of researchers in the area of account-ing and accountability in the public services and to lay the foundations for developing future research strategies and projects that are useful for prac-titioners and researchers In the third workshop at the Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, in 2015, the overarching theme ‘Engaging Academia with Practice and Policy: A Step Forward’ was addressed within two parallel discussion sessions: (i) ‘What topics could

we focus on to increase the practical relevance of our research?’ and (ii)

‘How can we (academics) better engage with practitioners to define research agendas and deliver/communicate research findings?’

In a proactive effort to address how to narrow the research-practice gap, the group consequently spent a stimulating two days debating the aforementioned themes It identified current topics that could increase the practical relevance of our research as being related to financial sustain-ability, financial conformance and operational performance, accountabil-ity and transparency, role of the accounting profession (and other professions) in public finance and administration, effects of New Public Management, and International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS)/Accrual accounting adoption A host of ideas on how academics and practitioners could better engage were also discussed This included identifying bridging activities (e.g research, consultancy, teaching) and groups of boundary spanners (e.g professional associations, think thanks, informal communities) as well as highlighting criteria for interaction (e.g proactive personal contact, co-definition of emerging themes and proj-ects/co-production/co-authorship) and rethinking dissemination (e.g common language, straightforward pieces, use of non-academic outlets like blogs, tweets, professional journals, briefings, contributions to public

engagement for bridging the academic-practitioner gap

As part of making sense of the debate and emerging themes, it was gested in a discussion between Laurence Ferry and Ileana Steccolini that members of the network may want to consider these issues in a ‘polyphonic

sug-Practice Bridging

Practitioners (Senior Executives)

Society Media

Policy-makers

Professional associations Think tanks Informal communities (meetings)

debate’ as part of ‘a collective desire to leave a trace of the discussion’ regarding the research-practice gap between academics and practitioners

in public services accounting across comparative countries (Ahrens et al

involved in policy development and in the management of the public tor This extends across all tiers of government, to other public bodies, the accounting profession (insomuch as its activities relate to public services), and to the business sector that works with the public sector Academics were defined as those employed in universities who were engaged in research across accounting, public management, public administration, and other disciplines interested in accounting in the public services.Initiating the process, an email was sent out with an invitation to people who had been at those first meetings, including the scientific committee, workshop hosts, guest speakers, and practitioners A traditional academic journal paper would not work with an unusually large number of co- authors who are dispersed primarily (although not exclusively) across Western Europe So, a different form of collective writing was decided upon that reflected the original discussions, which would ultimately form this book It involved a simultaneous process in which academics worked collegiately in country-focused teams to contribute a target of around 600–800 words within a three-week deadline The contribution was to be based on their experiences and asked them to describe for their country:

sec-‘(i) the type and extent of impact of academia on practice, policy, and the professions and (ii) the types and extent of relationships of academics with practitioners, policy makers, and the professions? Are there (desirable or current) evolutions in this?’ The responses were then made available to all academic participants so that any additional points could be made and responses clarified After this group exercise, invited practitioners from international professional accounting bodies leading on the public sector provided their independent reflections

Later, responses from invited academic groups and practitioners went through a further round of revision whereby contributions from countries and professional bodies increased to around 1000 words and covered four areas for consistency being (i) Specific features of the country context which in their view affect the research-practice gap issue in the country; (ii) The role of institutions in widening/narrowing the gap; (iii) The roles

of academics in widening/narrowing the gap; and (iv) Examples of good practice

From this coherent overview, and based on a broader review of the erature examining the problems and issues identified in the ‘research- practice gap’, we offer an evaluative framework for analysing the national similarities and differences (and the contexts that produce them), with the intent of helping to make sense of the research-practice gap on a global scale This framework builds upon the categorization of factors identified

lit-by our contributors lit-by level of influence to theorize a broader alization of the obstacles as well as facilitators to achieving a closer rela-tionship between research and practice

conceptu-The book will now set out the literature review, the detailed responses from each country and professional accounting bodies that the compara-tive analysis is based upon, and the comparative analysis and findings, fol-lowed by some concluding thoughts In this book, we do not purport to

‘solve’ the question of how academic research might become a closer panion to practice Rather, the narratives contained and the analysis we offer provide ‘food for thought’ and an invitation to researchers, who, through their research, are seeking to make a contribution to the practice

com-of accounting for public services

Ahrens, T., Becker, A., Burns, J., Chapman, C. S., Granlund, M., Habersam, M., Hansen, A., Khalifa, R., Malmi, T., Mennicken, A., Mikes, A., Panozzo, F., Piber, M., Quattrone, P., & Scheytt, T (2008) The future of interpretive

accounting research-a polyphonic debate Critical Perspectives on Accounting,

19(6), 840–866 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2006.07.005

Broadbent, J., & Guthrie, J. (2008) Public sector to public services: 20 years of

“contextual” accounting research Accounting, Auditing & Accountability

Journal, 21(2), 129–169.

Buick, F., Blackman, D., O’Flynn, J., O’Donnell, M., & West, D (2016) Effective practitioner–scholar relationships: Lessons from a coproduction partnership

Public Administration Review, 76(1), 35–47.

Chapman, C. S., & Kern, A (2012) What do academics do? Understanding the

practical relevance of research Qualitative Research in Accounting and

Management, 9(3), 279–281.

Dudau, A., Korac, S., & Saliterer, I (2015) Mapping current engagement  –

Bridging the academic-practice gap, IRSPM SIG Accounting and Accountability

Nottingham Trent University.

Evans, E., Burritt, R., & Guthrie, J. (Eds.) (2011) Bridging the gap between

aca-demic accounting research and professional practice, Acaaca-demic leadership series

(Vol 2) Sydney: The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and the Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability.

Goddard, A (2010) Contemporary public sector accounting research – An

inter-national comparison of journal papers The British Accounting Review, 42(2),

75–87.

Guthrie, J., & Parker, L.  D (2014) The global accounting academic: What

counts! Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 27(1), 2–14.

Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D (2016) Whither the accounting profession,

accoun-tants and accounting researchers? Commentary and projections Accounting,

Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(1), 2–10.

Humphrey, C., & Miller, P (2012) Rethinking impact and redefining ity: The parameters and coordinates of accounting and public management

responsibil-reforms Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(2), 295–327.

Jacobs, K (2016) Theorising interdisciplinary public sector accounting research

Financial Accountability & Management, 32(4), 469–488.

Jacobs, K., & Cuganesan, S (2014) Interdisciplinary accounting research in the

public sector: Dissolving boundaries to tackle wicked problems Accounting,

Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(8), 1250–1256.

Laughlin, R. C (2011) Accounting research, policy and practice: Worlds together

or worlds apart? In E. Evans, R. Burritt, & J. Guthrie (Eds.), Bridging the gap

between academic accounting research and professional practice (pp.  23–30)

Sydney: Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability, University of South Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Australia Modell, S (2014) The societal relevance of management accounting: An intro-

duction to the special issue Accounting and Business Research, 44(2), 83–103 Paarlberg, D (1968) Great Myths of Economics New York: The New American

Library Inc.

Parker, L.  D (2011) University corporatisation: Driving redefinition Critical

Perspectives on Accounting, 22(4), 434–450.

Parker, L. D., & Guthrie, J. (2010) Editorial: Business schools in an age of

glo-balization Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23(1), 5–13.

Parker, L D., Guthrie, J., and Linacre, S., 2011 Editorial: the relationship between academic accounting research and professional practice Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 24 (1), 5–14.

Reed, M. I (2009) The theory/practice gap: A problem for research in business

schools? Journal of Management Development, 28(8), 685–693.

Steccolini, I (2016) Public sector accounting: From “old” new public management

to a paradigmatic gap: Where to from here? APIRA conference, Melbourne.

ter Bogt, H., & van Helden, J. (2012) The practical relevance of management accounting research and the role of qualitative methods therein: The debate

continues Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 265–273.

Tucker, B. P., & Lowe, A. D (2014) Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus? An empirical investigation of the research-practice gap in manage-

ment accounting Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(3),

394–425.

Tucker, B. P., & Parker, L. D (2014) In our ivory towers? The research-practice

gap in management accounting: An academic perspective Accounting &

© The Author(s) 2019

L Ferry et al., The Research-Practice Gap on Accounting in the

Public Services, Public Sector Financial Management,

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99432-1_2

Where There’s a Will… The Research-

Practice Gap in Accounting

Abstract In this chapter, I engage with recent empirical research I have

been involved with in investigating the important question of how research may become a closer companion to practice and address three questions central to the research-practice debate:

1 How prevalent is the research-practice gap?

2 How has the research-practice gap been investigated?

3 How, if at all, might research become a closer companion to practice?These questions are by no means restricted to the public sector, and their consideration in a more general context may be valuable for both researchers and practitioners interested in the nexus between research and practice

Keywords Research-practice gap • Accounting • Research relevance •

Public sector • Research policy

Basil Tucker

UniSA Business School, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia

2.1 Overview

As reported on the website of Founded in November 1984, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) Institute, the SETI programme was

to begin operations on February 1, 1985 The SETI programR was ranked

as the most thorough effort ever made to search the skies for radio signals from nonhuman civilizations NASA had planned to fund the SETI pro-gramme through to at least the year 2002 In 1993, Nevada Senator Richard Bryan successfully introduced an amendment that eliminated all funding for the NASA SETI programme, citing budget pressures as his reason for ending NASA’s involvement with SETI. At an annual cost of only $12 million, the programme was less than 0.1% of NASA’s annual budget, amounting to about a nickel per taxpayer per year (SETI Institute

2017)

In terms of a need to demonstrate the practical relevance of its ours at least, the science of cosmology is not alone! The opening passage offers two crucial and related lessons illustrating the importance of the necessity of academic research to in some way inform, engage with, or contribute to practice First, public scrutiny of the value of research and its perceived value to society can have critical ramifications—even for the direction and indeed, sustainability of what might arguably be regarded as

profound importance, significance, and potential consequence to

con-cerned, the (perceived) return on investment on research is inevitably evaluated in the context of competing priorities within an environment of finite resources

Such lessons are not profound However, their implications are As

of the gap between academic research and practice ‘raises fundamental questions not only about the relationship between academics and practi-tioners; but more generally, about the role of academic research in soci-ety’ Indeed, resonating with the opening passage of this chapter, it has been argued that the very legitimacy of academic research depends largely upon its ability to demonstrate its policy and practice relevance

This chapter proceeds by addressing some fundamental issues that serve

to problematize the research-practice gap in accounting in terms of five fundamental questions:

1 How prevalent is the research-practice gap?

2 How has the research-practice gap been investigated?

3 What challenges does the research-practice gap pose for a public tor audience?

4 What are the problems with engagement?

5 Is the problem of relevance soluble?

2.2 HOw Prevalent is tHe researcH-Practice GaP?

In view of the public scrutiny of research investment, competing priorities for research funding, and disciplinary legitimacy, it is hardly surprising that apprehensions about how effectively academic research speaks to practice have been raised by scholars within a diverse range of ‘practiced-based’ or

Indeed, calls to more effectively link research to practice have been made

Most of these commentaries are predicated on an underlying concern that the need for academic research is crucial to the future health, vitality, and construction of a distinctive identity of the discipline In terms of the

porten-tous warning, ‘…this must be addressed if we are to avoid becoming an incestuous, self-referential species whose existence becomes a matter of ever declining importance’

However, apart from the concerns expressed by accounting researchers, the imperative for academic research to engage more effectively with prac-tice has been accentuated by recent research rating exercises across the

globe For instance, the Australian government’s Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA), the UK government’s Research Excellence Framework (REF), and the New Zealand government’s Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) are becoming an increasingly common fixture in the envi-ronment within which public universities operate This trend has been mirrored in countries such as Denmark, Germany, Austria, Sweden, the

The rating of academic research outputs forms part of an overall national government research management system designed to allocate public funding to universities’ research efforts by measuring, monitoring, and evaluating academic research ‘impact’, ‘relevance’, or ‘usefulness’ Such systems signal to university management and researchers the type of

directly influence not only the quality and concentration of research

reputa-tions and financial inflows

Although less reliant on public funding than their Australian and

Universities are not exempt from the need to legitimize their research investment decisions, and with this reliance comes a need to legitimize their spending on research by demonstrating the return it generates

Europe, North American higher education institutions are increasingly reliant on private monies for their continued survival (Bartunek and Rynes

‘relevant’ carries with it a financial imperative for universities on both sides

issue for university leaders, academic researchers of all disciplinary sions, and other parties with a stake in the construction, propagation, and application of academic research

persua-2.2.1 A Public Sector Perspective

Although commentaries on the divide between academic research and its application in practice have proliferated in the general academic literature,

voiced specifically in relation to the research-practice nexus within a lic sector context have been surprisingly limited (van Helden and

pub-Northcott 2010) This is at odds with the expectation that the practical relevance of academic research would be of interest to public sector man-

underpin this expectation First, long-standing criticism of the public

has led to quite significant transformations in this sector over the past three decades Perhaps the most significant transformation has been the

accountability and control practices, and extensive and measurable tors of performance to ensure more efficient resource use but at the same time seeking to maintain or improve the quality of service delivery

founda-tion and implementafounda-tion of the New Public Management have been

created scholarly interest and potential opportunities for academic research

A second factor suggesting that academic research and its contribution may be germane to the public sector is the inherent complexity of public services, agencies, and instrumentalities Complexities associated with the sector are well documented They result from sectorial responsibilities for quite abstract and contestable outcomes related to justice, responsibility,

uncertain and complex environment, it is not inconceivable that public sector managers might turn to findings from academic research to reduce uncertainty and complement experience-based practices (Hemsley-Brown

2004)

Finally, some evidence shows that although a majority of public sector managers do not engage extensively with academic research, a sizeable minority of them do use academic research in their policy-related work

that public sector and academic communities possess links that can further encourage the use of research in policy making

Although arguably of lower profile than in disciplinary conversations, when considering the nexus between academic research and practice, it is important to remember that under the umbrella of the generic term ‘the public sector’ are entities charged with the responsibility of delivering a con-siderable diversity of services, programmes, and agendas typically encom-passing emergency services, infrastructure, utilities, telecommunications,

transport, education, and health care The size of the divide between demic research and practice varies from discipline to discipline (Brennan

with some academic domains experiencing strong knowledge uptake, while other disciplines are only beginning to promote knowledge sharing actively

believe such variations would not also apply across the portfolio of public sector agencies To draw definitive inferences about the ways in which aca-demic research informs or is informed by practice would therefore reduce the discussion to a naive and unsophisticated level, and distort the veracity of any conclusions reached That said, particular public sector domains have varied in the attention they have directed and the importance they have afforded to the research-practice gap The health sector in general, and the nursing profession in particular, has developed an ‘Evidence-Based Practice’ (EBP) tradition that has as its aim the utilization of the ‘best available’ research evidence from management, medical, biological, and behavioural sciences to inform and underpin nursing practice, policy, and education

As a profession, the advances that nursing has made in bridging the

his-tory dating back to the 1970s in seeking to integrate academic research

achievements and progression that nursing has achieved point to one realm of the public sector that may be considered to be at the forefront

of such discussions Interestingly, and as will be discussed later in this chapter, the reasons attributable to, and implications of, the divide between research and practice in nursing are remarkably consistent with those articulated in general commentaries (see Tucker and Leach

2017)

1 For example, through the move to tertiary-trained nurses, incorporation of research as a component of training, engagement with research as a prerequisite for continued registration

or accreditation, and the establishment of academic journals such as Evidence-Based Nursing,

Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, Research and Theory for Nursing Practice, dedicated

to publishing expositions on this aspect of nursing.

2.3 HOw Has tHe researcH-Practice GaP Been

As we have seen, the nature, extent, and implications of the practice nexus have attracted the attention of numerous academics over the past few decades Indeed, the relationship between academic research and practice as it pertains to accounting generally has been the subject of

con-siderable extent to which the use and usefulness of academic research to practice have been debated, the relevance of academic research as a topic

of research enquiry in its own right remains in its infancy We make this claim based on two key characteristics of the articles and book chapters that directly address the relevance of academic research—collectively, the

majority of these writings are based on the reflections of senior, learned, and respected academics, and offer a point of departure for further thought

on this topic, they are nevertheless essentially speculative (Tucker and

academics—quite the opposite, it is these very insights that motivate and provide the point of departure for further enquiry of the disengagement between academic research and practice Nevertheless, the absence of empirical evidence has direct implications for the cross-validation of find-ings and ideas across studies, and the prescriptions offered, leading to calls for empirical questioning and substantiation rather than normative opin-

2 For example: Accounting & Business Research, 2014, Vol 44, No 2; Qualitative Research

in Accounting & Management, 2012, Vol 9 No 3; Management Accounting Research,

2010, Vol 21 No 2; Australian Accounting Review, 2010, Vol 20 No 1.

( 2010 ).

Florida, 2014; Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting, Kobe, 2013; Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, Melbourne, 2012; Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability, Adelaide, 2011; Management Accounting Research Group, London School of Economics, London, 2009; and, the Global Management Accounting Research Symposium, Sydney, 2005.

A second characteristic of much of the relevance literature is the jointed diagnoses, and divergent remedies proposed in studies that have examined the nature, significance, and underlying explanations of ‘the

of a theoretical frame of reference to organize and explicate the underlying arguments and concerns about barriers preventing or impeding this out-

adop-tion of a theoretical framework is likely to better enable a systematic view

of the ‘research-practice gap’ by providing a means by which factors that may be contributing to the gap may be recognized and evaluated However, attempts to theorize tensions underlying the adoption of aca-demic research in practice, and the use of theory as a means of problema-tizing, framing, or interpreting the ways in which academic research may, does, or even should speak to practice, are the exception rather than the norm in academic musings on this topic

2.3.1 A Deeper Reflection on the Research-Practice Gap

there must be (proposed) solutions, and over the years, academics have not shied away from offering their remedies’ Nevertheless, the schism between research and practice endures, and according to some commenta-

with practice, such contentions are somewhat disheartening However, these observations do offer the opportunity to reflect on at least three questions pivotal to understanding the nature, extent of the divide, and challenges involved in bringing the worlds of research and practice closer

First, what evidence exists for claims about a disconnect between accounting research and practice? How academic research should engage with practice is a discussion comprising at least two parties: academics on the one hand, practitioners on the other As has been noted, although empirical evidence has been largely neglected from the academic conversa-tions on this subject, recent investigations from both frames of reference support a definite disengagement between academic research and the uti-lization of research findings by practitioners In a study of 64 senior man-agement accounting academics from 55 universities in 14 countries

exploring the extent to which academic management accounting research

while 30% of the academics interviewed believed that research is not too isolated from practice, 40% perceived it is Moreover, while around 30% of the sample believed that research should be based on practice, 40% did not

Further, almost 30% of academics perceived research is based upon tice, yet around 37% held a contrary view These results reflect disparate views on the perceived extent of the gap between academic research and practice, and its importance, at least from the perspective of the senior management accounting academics comprising their sample

prac-From the practitioner-based perspective, in a questionnaire survey and follow-up interviews with 19 representatives of the four principal profes-sional accounting bodies in Australia, the findings of Tucker and Lowe

remote from practice Extending this study to an investigation of 14 resentatives of German professional accounting bodies (Tucker and

conclu-sions were reached in that the extent to which academic research informs practice is perceived to be limited Clearly, these findings cannot be regarded as globally generalizable; however, they are indicative of a per-ceived gap between the worlds of research and practice in the UK, Australia, Germany, as well as the USA from the vantage point of practice

The second question that warrants the attention of those interested in the relationship between research and practice is whether this disconnect

is a problem for academics, practitioners, and other scholars As we have already seen, much discussion in the accounting literature has centred on the need to direct greater attention to the practical relevance of academic

corroborated these concerns However, an important finding of Tucker and Parker was that although a majority of the academics canvassed in their study held that the ‘gap’ between academic research and the practice

is significant, widening, and of considerable concern, a minority yet nificant number of academics indicated that a divide between academic research and practice is appropriate, and that efforts to bridge this divide are unnecessary, untenable, or irrelevant The arguments mounted for the

sig-maintenance of a separation between research and practice by this ity group’ of academics were based on issues relating to ‘… independence

‘minor-in research choices, autonomy and objectivity ‘minor-in how research was ducted, and the identification of further stakeholders in addition to prac-titioners as ‘consumers’ or potential beneficiaries of academic research’

conclu-sions that the disconnect between academic research and practice is seen

to be of limited concern to practitioners However, despite this disinterest, professional accounting bodies in all three countries did indicate practitio-ners were likely to be open to greater engagement with the findings of academic research Unsurprisingly perhaps, these professional bodies expressed a belief that they were well positioned to act as a conduit between researchers and practitioners

clarify the reasons underlying the disconnect between research and tice In the relevance literature as it applies to accounting generally, numer-ous causes have been attributed for the apparent detachment between the worlds of academia and practice For example, the tendency of academic research to neglect questions of relevance to practitioners (Baldvinsdottir

incubation period of academic publications as compared with the short-

the inaccessibility of academic accounting research journals for

research-ers to contextualize research to enable its utilization by practitionresearch-ers

In the four studies outlined above, empirical support was found for three major barriers to effective utilization of academic research: (i) the failure to develop questions of practical relevance to practitioners (Germany and the USA); (ii) presenting the findings of academic research in a form that is intelligible and lucid for practitioners (Australia and Germany;

Australia and the UK); and (iii) ensuring practitioners can access research findings through appropriate media, distribution, or communication channels (Australia and the USA; Australia and the UK) In all countries, however, a pivotal and arguably more fundamental barrier was that of incentives for academics to undertake practice-relevant research Merchant

this barrier:

Most academics are focused on getting ‘hits’ in top journals and building their academic citation counts We receive little or no rewards for presenta- tions to, or publications for, practitioners, so we do not reach out to them.

‘if only there were simple solutions, but there aren’t…’ Our deeper tion on bringing academic research closer to practice has suggested there

reflec-is empirical evidence to suggest a dreflec-isconnect between the world of the researcher and that of practitioners This is seen to be of concern to most (but by no means all) researchers, but largely inconsequential to practitio-ners Reasons for the disconnect are many and varied, but appear to con-verge to issues of researchers asking the right questions, presenting their findings in a ‘user-friendly’ way, and ensuring accessibility to the research they are doing, the findings they have generated, and the implications they see for practitioners Underlying these barriers, however, is the question of motivating academics to meaningfully engage with practice in the first place This discussion leads to a consideration of how, if at all, research may become a closer companion to practice It is towards this question that our attention now turns

2.4 accOuntinG researcH and Practice: clOser

The question of whether it is possible for academic research to become a closer companion to practice is, of course, rhetorical At least two observa-tions support this stance First, there is a precedent for academic research

to engage with practitioners For instance, the origin of the works of many

academic or consultancy-based research but popularized through

successfully tailoring their messages to a non-academic community Such examples demonstrate that it is indeed possible for academic research to directly engage with and arguably significantly influence practice.

A second observation that dispels the notion that research and practice communities and interests are diametrically opposed is that the separation

of academic research from its practical application is a false dichotomy, and

a function of the way in which the relationship between research and the use or usefulness of research has been framed—as a ‘gap’, ‘schism’, ‘divide’,

or ‘rigor/relevance tension’ There exists no intrinsic reason why rigorous research and its relevance to practice cannot be complementary Gulati

influential theories in the social sciences were also actively involved in shaping the societies in which they lived’ Citing Weber, Durkheim and Marx (sociology), Lewin and Freud (psychology), and Smith and Keynes (economics), Gulati points to the considerable influence these scholars have had on mainstream public policy, suggesting that researchers who adopt an either–or approach to the relationship between research and

emphasis on practice relevance reinforces conventional conceptualizations

of the practice gap that in essence positions the work of ers against that of practitioners, treating them as polar opposites, and mak-ing integration of them problematic Under such conditions, to gain more

research-of one implies a loss research-of some proportion research-of the other In such a zero-sum view, researchers perceive they are faced with mutually exclusive choices: either–or decisions as to whether or not their research is designed to

Thus, on the basis of these arguments, if (i) academic research is (or has the potential to be) of interest to practitioners and (ii) academic research has

a demonstrable tradition in informing practice, what does this suggest for

those interested in increasing the extent to which academic research engages with practice? Perhaps a point of departure is to acknowledge a point under-

neces-sarily have as its aim an intent to inform practice Conversations about the relevance of academic research have generally framed the issue of relevance

in terms of the extent to which academic research does or should inform practice While practitioners, policy makers, and regulators clearly consti-tute important stakeholders in the relevance debate, by no means are these constituencies the only ‘consumers’ or potential consumers of academic

research Other academics, students, professional associations, and industry bodies are all examples of groups that have a legitimate interest in the appli-cation of academic research findings That said, for those researchers who have identified a preference to contribute to practice, policy, or regulation, the barriers preventing such engagement cannot be ignored The question facing such researchers becomes one of how can these barriers be sur-mounted? The four specific barriers perceived to underlie the disconnect between academic research and practice as identified in this chapter do not purport to represent an exhaustive list of hurdles impeding a closer nexus between research and practice They do, however, provide a starting point for answering this question and, as they are based on empirical findings, warrant reflection Each of the four barriers is considered in turn in the ensuing discussion.

2.4.1 The Failure to Develop Questions of Practical Relevance

to Practitioners

The question investigated by researchers may very well be relevant to an academic audience, but can also be appropriate to practitioners Obviously, a means to generate research questions of relevance to both academics and practitioners is through collaboration Joint research projects involving industry, government, or commercial partners pro-vide not only a compelling motivation for a particular study, but is also likely to directly meet practitioner needs Common to most national research assessment exercises is the need to demonstrate engagement,

is often a condition of satisfactorily demonstrating such relevance (Otley

probabil-ity of receiving funding enhanced, but the findings resulting from the research are likely to be directly relevant to the needs of practice, policy,

or regulators

In addition to such external collaborations, other means by which ideas for ‘practical’ research projects can be developed include discussions with

reviewing professional/practitioner journals (Bromwich and Scapens

2.4.2 Presenting the Findings of Academic Research in a Form

That Is Intelligible and Lucid for Practitioners

undeniably relevant, not much effort would be needed to sell it to bers of the business community’ It is difficult to dispute such an assertion; however, unless the subject of the sale is impenetrable in the language it uses, and the expression in which it is presented, it is unlikely that it will

mem-be recognized, let alone utilized Academic research is generally written in

a style characterized by abstract, esoteric, or obscure language (Chapman

invali-dates the content of the message, it may obfuscate it The barrier of the presentation of research confuses substance with form As researchers are aware in the design of their studies, the data that can be collected, the analytical methods employed, and the theoretical perspective adopted,

‘there are many ways to skin a cat.’ There is no reason why this flexibility cannot (or should not) be adapted in the communication of their research

Of course, journal articles require stringent adherence to academic writing conventions; however, journal articles are by no means the only vehicle by which research can be communicated

Tailoring the message to a target audience (in this instance, ners) is not a call to ‘dumb down’ research Just as a consultation with a medical practitioner does not typically involve that practitioner recounting Anatomy 101 to the patient, conveying the essence of research findings can and should be well within the literacy capabilities of academics Like patients, it may be that practitioners and others without research training

practitio-or background may simply seek a diagnosis, prognosis, and prescribed treatment to the problem they have encountered

The question of academics ‘dumbing down’ research is a point that has been recurrently raised in various guises in the relevance literature (e.g see

Although useful as a means to describe the adaptation of academic research writing to facilitate greater comprehension by practitioners who have not had the opportunity to receive training in how to decipher academic prose,

it may be that the metaphor of ‘dumbing down’ academic research has

limited traction for researchers who seek to engage with and impact practice The idea of ‘dumbing down’ research arguably evokes an almost patronizing or condescending image in which the academic occupies a privileged intellectual position, with practitioners relegated to one of less intellectually gifted In fact, rather than representing a differential in the intelligence stakes, academics and practitioners may be thought to speak

‘different languages’ in a sense The key word here is ‘different’—not

bet-ter, or superior or more adept Researchers seeking to engage with and impact practice would be well advised to reflect on the observation attrib-uted to Einstein, ‘If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough’

2.4.3 Ensuring Practitioner Access to Research Findings Through Appropriate Media, Distribution, or Communication

Channels

management accounting research journals’ As alluded to in the ately preceding sub-section, in addition to the comprehensibility of research papers published in academic journals, there are numerous potential outlets through which research may be disseminated For exam-ple, chapters in texts, book reviews, conference papers and proceedings, discussion papers, edited texts, consultants’ reports, the Internet, mono-graphs, newspaper/television/radio/videos, professional journals, popu-lar journals, submissions to government/regulators, poetry, and teaching

This is not an exhaustive list On the basis of the empirical findings

indus-try forums, professional accounting bodies, specific targeted tions, and webinars are further avenues researchers might use to circulate and publicize their research The key message is clear: providing practi-tioners with access to research findings need not be an impediment for those seeking to propagate their findings In fact, it could very well be said that ‘necessity is the Mother of invention’—which brings us to the fourth predominate barrier, that of incentives to academics to engage with practice

organiza-2.4.4 Incentives for Academics to Undertake Practice-Relevant

Research

The question of incentives for academics to undertake practice-relevant research is a necessary antecedent for undertaking research that informs with, and impacts upon, practice As we have seen, however, the absence

net-works of practitioners and colleagues from other disciplines (Mohrman

primarily rely on academic standards, rather than the practical relevance of

this type of research

Nevertheless, the increasing emphasis on research assessment in its ous forms in universities across the globe may have changed this tradi-tional state of affairs Such research assessment exercises are designed to measure, monitor, and evaluate academic research ‘impact’, ‘relevance’, or

vari-‘usefulness’ and have placed considerable pressure on academics and versities to generate research outcomes that directly impact practice

research published in professional journals, and oriented towards ing practical problems, can be of comparable quality to research published

address-in peer-reviewed academic journals is a very real assumption upon which

Related to the advent and emphases of research assessment exercises are university strategies designed to generate external revenue Such strategies include, for example, establishing joint venture research programmes with corporations, obtaining research grant funding from industry sources, and undertaking contract research Securing such sources of external funds is likely to be more attractive if proposed studies can demonstrate their prac-

In addition to these institutionally based incentives, there are ample opportunities to undertake research on this fundamentally important topic Other than designing and undertaking studies of both theoretical significance and practical importance, researchers might consider that investigations of the relationship between academic research and its use or usefulness to practice can in itself be an area of scholarly enquiry in its own

although speculative, discussions, observations, and reflections on the relationship between academic research and practice abound in the

academic literature, empirical studies investigating this relationship are extremely rare This provides researchers with a fertile field of exploration using different ontologies, epistemologies, theoretical vantage points, and methods Contextualized studies that examine the connection between academic research outcomes and practice in different countries, industries, and organizations over time would add much-needed empirical evidence for bridging the gap between academic research and practice An example

of research that is particularly germane to this book is an investigation of the extent to which research may inform (and be informed by) public sec-tor organizations This chapter has not explicitly addressed this issue but,

in the absence of evidence to the contrary, has assumed negligible ences in the relevance of academic research as applied to public, not-for- profit, and private sectors However, absence of evidence is not evidence

differ-of absence, and whether or not this assumption is valid has yet to be mined Such investigations by those researchers particularly interested in public sector management would certainly be worthwhile by offering much-needed sectorial-based evidence relating to the nexus between aca-demic research and practice, and what might be done to narrow what appears to be a prevalent gap

Abbott, M., Walton, C., Tapia, Y., & Greenwood, C. R (1999) Research to

prac-tice: A ‘blueprint’ for closing the gap in local schools Exceptional Children,

65(3), 339–352.

Abdellah, F. G (1970) Overview of nursing research 1955–1968 (v 3) Nursing

Research, 19, 239–252.

Arnaboldi, M (2013) Consultant-research in public sector transformation: An

evolving role Financial Accountability & Management, 29(2), 140–160.

Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I (2015) Performance management in

the public sector: The ultimate challenge Financial Accountability &

Management, 31(1), 1–22.

Balakrishnan, R (2012) Commentary: Journal of management accounting

research Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 274–275.

Baldvinsdottir, G., Mitchell, F., & Nørreklit, H (2010) Issues in the relationship

between theory and practice in management accounting Management

Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L (2014) Academics and practitioners are alike and

unlike: The paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships Journal of

Management, 40(5), 1181–1201.

Baskerville, R (2009) Preparing for evidence based management (editorial)

European Journal of Information Systems, 18(6), 523–525.

Baxter, W. T (1988) Accounting research–academic trends versus practical needs

Edinburgh: The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.

Bennis, W.  G., & O’Toole, J.  (2005) How business schools lost their way

Harvard Business Review, 83(5), 98–104.

Billingham, J.  (1998) Cultural aspects of the search for extraterrestrial

intelli-gence Acta Astronautica, 42, 711–719.

Bolton, M. J., & Stolcis, G. B (2003) Ties that do not bind: Musings on the

spe-cious relevance of academician research Public Administration Review, 63(5),

626–630.

Brennan, R (2008) Theory and practice across disciplines: Implications for the

field of management European Business Review, 20(6), 515–528.

Broadbent, J. (2010) The UK research assessment exercise: Performance

mea-surement and resource allocation Australian Accounting Review, 20(1),

14–23.

Bromwich, M., & Scapens, R. W (2016) Management accounting research: 25

years on Management Accounting Research, 31, 1–9.

Burke, L.  A., & Rau, B (2010) The research-teaching gap in management

Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(1), 132–143.

Chapman, C. S., & Kern, A (2012) What do academics do? Understanding the

practical relevance of research Qualitative Research in Accounting and

Management, 9(3), 279–281.

Chevaillier, T., & Eicher, J.-C (2002) Higher education funding: A decade of

changes Higher Education in Europe, XXVII(1–2), 89–99.

Cooper, C., & Annisette, M (2012) Critical perspectives on accounting

Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 282–283.

Covey, S (1989) The seven habits of highly effective people New York: Free Press Denis, J.  L., & Langley, A (2002) Introduction to the forum Health Care

Management Review, 27(3), 32–34.

Dostaler, I., & Tomberlin, T (2013) The great divide between business school

research and business practice Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(1),

115–128.

Fey, M. E., & Johnson, B. W (1998) Research to practice (and back again) in

speech-language intervention Topics in Language Disorders, 18(2), 23–34.

Fink, R., & Thompson, C. J (2005) Overcoming barriers and promoting the use

of research in practice Journal of Nursing Administration, 35(3), 121–129.

Gray, R., Guthrie, J., & Parker, L.  D (2002) Rites of passage and the self- immolation of academic accounting labour: An essay exploring exclusivity ver-

sus mutuality in accounting scholarship Accounting Forum, 26(1), 1–30.

Gulati, R (2007) Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-

relevance debate in management research Academy of Management Journal,

50(4), 775–782.

Handy, C (1976) Understanding organizations London: Penguin Books.

Hemsley-Brown, J. (2004) Facilitating research utilisation: A cross-sector review

of research evidence International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(6),

534–552.

Hemsley-Brown, J. V., & Sharp, C (2003) The use of research to improve

profes-sional practice: A systematic review of the literature Oxford Review of Education,

29(4), 449–470.

Hodgkinson, G. P., Herriot, P., & Anderson, N (2001) Re-aligning the holders in management research: Lessons from industrial, work and organiza-

stake-tional psychology British Journal of Management, 12, 41–48.

Hood, C (1995) The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a

theme Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93–109.

Hopper, T (2013) Making accounting degrees fit for a university Critical

Perspectives on Accounting, 24(2), 127–135.

Hopwood, A. G (2002) If only there were simple solutions, but there aren’t: Some reflections on Zimmerman’s critique of empirical management account-

ing research European Accounting Review, 11(4), 777–785.

Hopwood, A. G (2007) Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review,

82(5), 1365–1374.

Inanga, E. L., & Schneider, W. B (2005) The failure of accounting research to improve accounting practice: A problem of theory and lack of communication

Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(3), 227–248.

Jacobs, K., & Cuganesan, S (2014) Interdisciplinary accounting research in the

public sector: Dissolving boundaries to tackle wicked problems Accounting,

Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(8), 1250–1256.

Kanter, R (1983) The change masters New York: Simon & Schuster.

Kaplan, R. S (2011) Accounting scholarship that advances professional

knowl-edge and practice The Accounting Review, 86(2), 367–383.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D (1996) The balanced scorecard: Putting strategy into

action Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Keefer, J. M., & Stone, S. J (2009) Practitioner perspectives on the gap between

research and practice: What gap? Advances in Developing Human Resources,

Kondrat, M. E (1992) Reclaiming the practical: Formal and substantive

rational-ity in social work practice Social Service Review, 67(2), 237–255.

Lapsley, I (2012) Commentary: Financial accountability & management

Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 9(3), 291–292.

Lapsley, I., & Skærbæk, P (2012) Why the public sector matters Financial

Accountability & Management, 28(4), 355–358.

Laughlin, R. C (2011) Accounting research, policy and practice: Worlds together

or worlds apart? In E. Evans, R. Burritt, & J. Guthrie (Eds.), Bridging the gap

between academic accounting research and professional practice (pp.  23–30)

Sydney: Centre for Accounting, governance and sustainability, University of South Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Australia Lee, T.  A (1989) Education, practice and research in accounting: Gaps, close

loops, bridges and magic accounting Accounting and Business Research,

19(75), 237–253.

Leisenring, J. J., & Johnson, L. T (1994) Accounting research: On the relevance

of research to practice Accounting Horizons, 8(4), 74–79.

Lindeman, C. A (1975) Priorities in clinical nursing research Nursing Outlook,

Malmi, T., & Granlund, M (2009) In search of management accounting theory

European Accounting Review, 18(3), 597–620.

Markides, C (2010) Crossing the chasm: How to convert relevant research into

managerially useful research Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(1),

121–134.

Mautz, R. K (1978) Discussion In A. R Abdel-Khalik & P. F Keller (Eds.), The

impact of accounting research on practice and disclosure Durham: Duke

University Press.

McKelvey, B (2006) Response Van de Ven and Johnson’s ‘engaged scholarship’:

Nice try, but… Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 830–832.

Merchant, K. A (2012) Making management accounting research more useful

Pacific Accounting Review, 24(3), 1–34.

Middlehurst, R (2014) Higher education research agendas for the coming

decade: A UK perspective on the policy–research nexus Studies in Higher

Education, 39(8), 1475–1487.

Mitchell, F (2002) Research and practice in management accounting: Improving

integration and communication European Accounting Review, 11(2), 277–289.

Mohrman, S. A., & Lawler, E. E., III (2012) Generating knowledge that drives

change The Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(1), 41–51.

Moser, D.  V (2012) Is accounting research stagnant? Accounting Horizons,

26(4), 845–850.

Newman, J. (2014) Revisiting the “two communities” metaphor of research

utili-sation International Journal of Public Sector Management, 27(7), 614–627.

Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D (2010) That’s relevant! Different forms of practical

rele-vance in management science Organization Studies, 31(9–10), 1257–1285.

Nicolai, A. T., Schulz, A.-C., & Göbel, M (2011) Between sweet harmony and a clash of cultures: Does a joint academic-practitioner review reconcile rigor and

relevance? Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(1), 53–75.

Ormerod, P (1994) The death of economics London: Faber and Faber.

Otley, D. T (2010) Research assessment in the UK: An overview of 1992–2008

Australian Accounting Review, 20(3), 3–13.

Parker, L.  D (2011) University corporatisation: Driving redefinition Critical

Perspectives on Accounting, 22(4), 434–450.

Parker, L. D (2012) Beyond the ticket and the brand: Imagining an accounting

research future Accounting and Finance, 52(4), 1153–1182.

Parker, L. D., & Guthrie, J. (2010) Editorial: Business schools in an age of

glo-balization Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 23(1), 5–13.

Parker, L.  D., Guthrie, J., & Gray, R (1998) Accounting and management

research: Passwords from the gatekeepers Accounting, Auditing and

Accountability Journal, 11(4), 371–402.

Parker, L.  D., Guthrie, J., & Linacre, S (2011) Editorial: The relationship

between academic accounting research and professional practice Accounting,

Auditing and Accountability Journal, 24(1), 5–14.

Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H (1982) In search of excellence New York: Harper

& Row.

Pettigrew, A. M (2005) The character and significance of management research

on the public services Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 973–977.

Philip, K. L., Backett-Milburn, K., Cunningham-Burley, S., & Davis, J. B (2003) Practising what we preach? A practical approach to bringing research, policy

and practice together in relation to children and health inequalities Health

Education Research, 18(5), 568–579.

Porter, M. E (1980) Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and

competitors New York: Free Press.

Pronovost, P., & Wachter, R (2006) Proposed standards for quality improvement

research and publication: One step forward and two steps back Quality Safety

Health Care, 15(3), 152–153.

Ratnatunga, J. (2012) Ivory towers and legal powers: Attitudes and behaviour of

town and gown to the accounting research-practice gap Journal of Applied

Management Accounting Research, 10(2), 1–19.

Ravald, A., & Grönroos, C (1996) The value concept and relationship

market-ing European Journal of Marketing, 30(2), 19–30.