The practical relevance of public sector research: the potential contributions of the interventionist approach

Abstract

E. Bracci / Rev. Cont Org 30 (2017) [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] 4The practical relevance of accounting research is one of the main issue currently present in the debate. Scholars engagement and impact of accounting research are all the more required nowadays. Interventionist research (IVR) is considered a potential methodology that allows researchers to contribute to the advancement of both practice and theory. The aim of this paper is to present an analysis of the characteristics of IVR, providing guidance on how it can provide a fruitful methodology to bridge academics and practitioners in the context of public sector research. INTRODUCTIONThere is a growing call made in the literature to increase the practical relevance of accounting research (i.e. Jönsson, 1996;Malmi & Granlund, 2009;Tucker & Parker, 2014;Van Helden & Northcott, 2010) for both managers and policy makers (Coleman, 2007;Swieringa, 1998). The academic/practitioner gap represents an unsolved issue still debated in many facets (Baldvinsdottir, Mitchell & Nørreklit, 2010;Nørreklit, Nørreklit & Mitchell, 2016;Tucker & Lowe, 2014), showing the risk of developing a loop where academic research outputs produced only for academic researchers. In the context of public sector, in particular, we are observing many cases of difficulties and/or failures in bringing about accounting innovations (Arnaboldi & Palermo, 2010) and producing practical relevant accounting research (Tucker & Lowe, 2014), calling for developing research capable of delivering the advancement of both theory and practice. Professional bodies, as well as governments, are pushing universities towards the production of impact-related activities liaising more with the industry and/or the public sector institutions. This is particularly true in the UK and in Italy where universities are required to account for the impact the research activities have generated with an impact on the amount of governmental financing.Method-wise, field research is considered a way through which answering the questions of practitioners and researchers alike (Hopwood, 2002;Lukka & Mouritsen, 2002), trying to bridge academia and practice. Malmi and Granlund (2009) suggest three ways in which to produce practically relevant accounting theories, such as altering some current practices when conducting traditional research, using normative theories as a starting point, and adopting an interventionist research (IVR henceforth) methodology. On a similar manner, Van Helden and Northcott (2010: p. 231) suggest applying interventionist research approaches, engaging scholarship in order to both create new practice and find practical relevant theory or model. IVR can activate a learning process through the continuous collaboration and interaction between the concrete experiences and theoretical observation and development (Dumay & Baard, 2017;Jönsson, 1996).

Governmentality and performance for the smart city

“…Interventions can be various theoretically informed deeds or acts carried out by the field researcher, who seeks to contribute to resolving practical managerial or technological challenges faced within the empirical context (Jönsson and Lukka, 2007; Suomala and Lyly-Yrjänäinen, 2012). Interventionist research is particularly relevant in public sector organisations, where the complexity of problems and the indeterminacy of solutions always require case-sensitive interventions (Bracci, 2017).…”

Corporate Social Responsibility due diligence among European companies: The results of an interventionist research project with accountability and political implications

“…There is indeed a call for creating new opportunities via a closer engagement with the field, learning both from case studies and by co‐creating solutions with practitioners (Alawattage et al, 2021). An explanatory design for pragmatic and concrete research design is represented by interventionist research (Bracci, 2017). While in the field of sustainability accounting is still rare (Jönsson & Lukka, 2006; Labro & Tuomela, 2003; Westin & Roberts, 2010), interventionist research is a legitimate methodology, useful to analyse unique contexts (Jönsson, 2010), and develop theoretical contributions by reverse engineering the process aimed at reaching the solution and the solution itself.…”

“…In this study, we present the results deriving from an interventionist research project, where researchers were involved in the elaboration of scenarios regarding the state‐of‐the‐art and potential levels of CSR due diligence achieved and achievable by European companies. According to Bracci (2017), researchers could estimate opportunities introduced by a normative change, observing and anticipating the shifts in the corporate behaviour, and offering the results as a base for policymakers to plan the legislative intervention. This study introduces the intervention made by researchers working closely with the Directorate‐General for Parliamentary Research Services, that was aimed at forecasting the potential benefit due to the introduction of a normative change on CSR due diligence.…”

“…In this study, we present the results deriving from an interventionist research project, where researchers were involved in the elaboration of scenarios regarding the state-of-the-art and potential levels of CSR due diligence achieved and achievable by European companies. According to Bracci (2017) with those commissioning the study. This is quite distinct from a consultancy activity (Baard & Dumay, 2020b), and the paper reflects the reasoning and logic adopted by the researchers involved, aimed at unearthing possible problems and proposing solutions.…”

Management control practices in interorganizational initiatives: The case of a public program

“…The reason why the authors focused on this specific case study is because the characteristics of the interorganizational initiative—a network of public organizations and a multiyear program—and the accessibility of information relating to the case allowed them to undertake an in‐depth analysis. As previously mentioned, the research was conducted using the combination of an interventionist approach (see, among others, Baard, 2010; Bracci, 2017; Jönsson & Lukka, 2006; Lukka & Vinnari, 2017) and multiple semistructured interviews with key informants who were identified among the representatives of the organizations involved in the program.…”