Knowledge creation for practice in public sector management accounting by consultants and academics: Preliminary findings and directions for future research

This study is about knowledge creation for practice in public sector management accounting by consultants and academics. It shows that researchers emphasize the importance of practice, but worry about the prospects of a successful cross-fertilization between practice and research, because of the pressure they feel to publish in international research journals. Their contacts with consultants are limited. Consultants have limited access to academic research, because of pressures from their daily work. Knowledge created by consultants is initiated by problems coming from practice; it has to be ready-made for application in practice, and is often a combination of explicit and tacit knowledge. However, our interviews with researchers show a more diffuse picture; the knowledge created by some of them is disciplinary-driven and fundamental, whereas the research of others is more problem-driven and applied. Our study hints at two intermediary groups, i.e. consultant-researchers and consultants working in the expertise centres of their firms, both of which can potentially overcome hindrances in the communication between consultancy and research.

[1]  J. Guthrie,et al.  Debating Developments in New Public Financial Management: The Limits of Global Theorising and Some New Ways Forward , 1999 .

[2]  C. Hood.  The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme , 1995 .

[3]  H. Tohidi,et al.  Organizational culture and leadership , 2012 .

[4]  R. Oldfield,et al.  Transforming the public sector: management consultants as agents of change , 2001 .

[5]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  Research and practice in management accounting: improving integration and communication , 2002 .

[6]  Jürgen Enders,et al.  PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM IN DUTCH HIGHER EDUCATION: THE ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE UNIVERSITY , 2007 .

[7]  Yves Gendron,et al.  Constituting the Academic Performer: The Spectre of Superficiality and Stagnation in Academia , 2008 .

[8]  R. Scapens,et al.  Performance Measurement in Universities: A Comparative Study of Two A&F Groups in the Netherlands and the UK , 2009 .

[9]  Symonds Em.  Research assessment exercise , 1998 .

[10]  Irvine Lapsley,et al.  The NPM Agenda: Back to the Future , 2008 .

[11]  G. Paulsson,et al.  Reforming governmental accounting and budgeting in Europe. Chapter 8: Sweden , 2003 .

[12]  R. Scapens,et al.  Institutionalization and practice variation in the management control of a global/local setting , 2009 .

[13]  K. Lukka,et al.  There and Back Again: Doing Interventionist Research in Management Accounting , 2006 .

[14]  ter Henk Bogt,et al.  A reflection on accounting reforms in dutch government , 2005 .

[15]  Stephen Gourlay.  Conceptualizing Knowledge Creation: A Critique of Nonaka's Theory , 2006 .

[16]  G. Vinten.  Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis , 2000 .

[17]  J. Guthrie,et al.  Debating Public Sector Management and Financial Management Reforms: An International Study , 2005 .

[18]  Carmelo Mazza,et al.  Consulting as a Liminal Space , 2003 .

[19]  Denis D. Smith,et al.  Practising What We Preach? Academic Consultancy in a Multi-Disciplinary Environment , 2007 .

[20]  H. T. Bogt.  RECENT AND FUTURE MANAGEMENT CHANGES IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT: CONTINUING FOCUS ON RATIONALITY AND EFFICIENCY? , 2008 .

[21]  E. Jansen,et al.  New public management in Dutch local government , 2003 .

[22]  Nora Jacobson,et al.  Organizational Factors that Influence University-Based Researchers’ Engagement in Knowledge Transfer Activities , 2004 .

[23]  A. Hopwood,et al.  Changing Pressures on the Research Process: On Trying to Research in an Age when Curiosity is not Enough , 2008 .

[24]  T. Groot,et al.  The Influence of New Public Management Practices on Product Costing and Service Pricing Decisions in Dutch Municipalities , 2004 .

[25]  M. Christensen.  On public sector accounting change: Epistemic communities, consultants, naive officials and a reply to humphrey , 2006 .

[26]  S. Berger.  Globalization and Politics , 2000 .

[27]  D. Larcker,et al.  Innovations in Performance Measurement: Trends and Research Implications , 1998 .

[28]  Markus Granlund,et al.  The fragmented communication structure within the accounting academia: the case of activity-based costing research genres , 2002 .

[29]  R. Daft,et al.  Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer Between Practitioners and Academics , 2001 .

[30]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[31]  Teemu Malmi,et al.  In Search of Management Accounting Theory , 2009 .

[32]  Steven W. Floyd,et al.  Are managers from Mars and academicians from venus? Toward an understanding of the relationship between academic quality and practical relevance , 2004 .

[33]  Nora Jacobson,et al.  Consulting as a strategy for knowledge transfer. , 2005, The Milbank quarterly.

[34]  M. Christensen.  The ‘third hand’: Private sector consultants in public sector accounting change , 2005 .

[35]  Kieron Walsh,et al.  Public Services and Market Mechanisms , 1995 .

[36]  D. Northcott,et al.  Examining the Practical Relevance of Public Sector Management Accounting Research , 2010 .

[37]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  Perceived Causes and Solutions of the Translation Problem in Management Research , 2007 .

[38]  Tom Groot,et al.  Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues in Dutch economics and business research programs , 2006 .