DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
Abstract: This chapter provides practical guidance to management accounting
researchers on the design and execution of field studies that use quantitative data
analysis to test or build theory. We discuss common purposes for conducting field
research and provide a brief overview of the accomplishments and failings of recent field
research in management accounting. We then turn to the doing of quantitative field
research, discussing practical considerations related to the role of theory; site selection;
and data identification, collection and preparation. Finally, we reflect on how field
research practices may be amended to address some of the criticisms of prior field
research.
INTRODUCTION
Management accounting is the process of identifying, measuring, accumulating,
analyzing, preparing, interpreting, and communicating information that helps managers
fulfill organizational objectives (Horngren et al., 2002: G6). There are few rules for how
management accounting must be done. Rather, management accounting takes place in a
specific organization at a specific point in time to meet unique needs for management
control and decision support. The design of management accounting work is guided by
economic principles; however, the social context of the firm and the mutability of
management accounting suggest that other social sciences (e.g., sociology, psychology,
political science) offer equally compelling explanations for observed practice.
A variety of research methods have facilitated this objective in management
accounting and it is not our intent in this chapter to advocate the use of field research
methods. Nor is our intent to provide a review of field research in the management
accounting literature or a compendium on field research methods. Rather, our objective is
to provide practical guidance to management accounting researchers about important
considerations in the design and execution of field studies that use quantitative data
analysis to test or build theory.
This chapter contributes to the literature on field research methods a discussion of
issues that confront the management accounting researcher who aims to use quantitative
analysis of data obtained in the field for rich description, for theory building, or for theory
testing. Although this chapter examines quantitative field research it is important to note
Page
1

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
that field research is the research method, while the qualifier quantitative simply
refers to the numeric nature of the data that are analyzed or the nature of the analysis to
which data are subjected. This qualifier is not meant to imply that qualitative data are not
analyzed. Even when quantitative data are central to the research, qualitative data are
ever-present because field research necessitates understanding the data and data
generating processes in situ.
As a result, the reader will find it useful to consider this chapter in conjunction with
chapters on qualitative field research (Ahrens & Chapman, 2006) and action research
(Jonsson & Lukka, 2006). Moreover, since quantitative data may be obtained in the field
from a variety of sources, the chapters on survey research (Van der Stede et al., 2006)
and archival research (Moers, 2006) are also recommended. Although this chapter
contains material that overlaps with these chapters and with other papers on field
research

methods,

we

have

attempted

to

distinguish

this

chapter

by

giving

disproportionate attention to issues that arise in using data for quantitative analysis.
QUANTITATIVE FIELD RESEARCH: MEANING AND PURPOSE
FIELD RESEARCH
Birnberg et al. (1990) define field research in relation to its y natural settings that
are not created for the sole or primary purpose of conducting research. Ferreira &
Merchants (1992) definition of field research requires that the field researcher experience
direct and in-depth contact with members of the organization and that the field research
project be informed by insights that emerge from ongoing contact between the
organization and the researcher. Ferreira & Merchant (1992: 24) find that for published
field research in management accounting the most common purpose of field research
has been theory development.
Field research is portrayed as improving upon case study research because of the
opportunity to consider firm-level variation and to generalize results (albeit in a limited
statistical sense) to more than one firm. Management accounting research covers a broad
array of questions for which different units of analysis are relevant (e.g., individuals, work
teams, organizational sub-units). Thus, we conclude that it is arbitrary for management

Page
2

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
accounting researchers to define the unit of analysis for field research in the abstract
without consideration of the research question.
Related to this point, we do not rule out theory testing in field research. If the unit
of analysis is the firm and field research costs escalate with the number of firms studied,
most field research will tend toward theory building rather than theory testing. This is
consistent with Yins (2003) observations and with Ferreira & Merchants (1992)
characterization of published field research. However, when a lower level of analysis
(e.g., individual or work team) is warranted, it is quite possible that theory testing may be
accomplished in the field using fewer firms and at reasonable cost.
In sum, field research is somewhat more inclusive than some prior studies. We
accept the importance of sustained interactions with organizational members in the
natural field setting and we admit the possibility that researchers may need to adapt in
response to these interactions, but we reject restrictions on the objective of the study
(e.g., theory testing versus theory building), the mode of data collection, and the number
of firms studied.
QUANTITATIVE FIELD RESEARCH
Quantitative field research in relation to the nature of the analysis to which the
data are subjected. Specifically, we focus on field research that uses data that may be
represented numerically and are of a quantity and quality to support empirical analysis
using parametric or non-parametric statistical methods. if we define quantitative field
studies in terms of statistical analysis tools, then we implicitly require multiple
observations on the relevant unit of analysis. While empirical analysis of numeric data is
commonly used in theory testing, we do not constrain our definition of quantitative field
research in this manner.
Our definition of quantitative field studies removes from consideration studies that
use numeric data primarily to corroborate or extend interview data. We consider three
sources of numeric data as follows: (1) measured data, which are authentic numeric data
in the native state in which it is captured by the organization or individual (e.g., company
records used in a field study by Banker et al., 2000); (2) latent data that are derived from
measured data (e.g., as in Ittner et al., 1997); and (3) latent data that are measured
Page
3

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
through researcher intervention (e.g., coded interview data as employed by Abernethy &
Lillis, 1995; survey data as employed by Epstein & Widener, 2005; and coded
observations as employed by Anderson et al., 2002). We distinguish different sources of
numeric data because they are associated with somewhat different field research
challenges.
THE USE OF QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS TO ACHIEVE DIFFERENT PURPOSES
The purpose of field research - whether quantitative or qualitative in data
orientation - is to describe a practice, to build theory, or to test hypotheses (Yin, 2003). A
common progression in building systematic knowledge involves first careful observation
and description, followed by theory development, and then testing the theory in different
settings to determine its relevant domain.
Studies that develop theory often follow a grounded theory approach (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967). Glaser & Strauss (1967) is the definitive how-to book on grounded
theory. They develop techniques for surfacing previously unseen patterns in interview and
observation data that bear a strong resemblance to methods of exploratory (numeric)
data analysis associated with the seminal work of Tufte (2001) and Tukey (1977).
Field research that tests theory often employs quantitative analysis to determine
whether central tendencies in numeric data are broadly consistent or inconsistent with
theoretical predictions. However, consistent with our definition of field research, data
collection should be accompanied by sustained, direct contact with key members of the
organization. Atkinson & Shaffir (1998: 63) propose that field studies that test theory
should meet four conditions:
1

The conditions of the test should be consistent with the underlying assumptions or

axioms of the theory.

The test should define clearly and with good reason the test results that support the

theory and the test results that would contradict the theory.
The test should be unbiased in the sense of providing a reasonable probability that it

could uncover evidence that could confirm or contradict the theory.

The test should define and measure accurately the artifacts for the theorys variables.

Page
4

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
KEY DECISION, CHOICHES, AND CONTRIBUTIONS OF QUANTITATIVE FIELD
RESEARCH
ROLE OF THEORY
Theory is emergent in field studies aimed at grounded theory development and is a
strong preconditioning factor for field research aimed at theory testing. However, even
theory testing requires dynamic adaptation of the researcher. Once the theory is
identified, quantitative field studies aimed at theory testing must grapple with pragmatic
issues of research design, data collection, and analysis in an effort to ensure that the
tests are aligned with the theory. Considering these issues early in the design of the
research program enhances the likelihood of meeting Atkinson & Shaffirs (1998) second
and fourth conditions for successful theory testing: that the theory be sufficiently defined
to allow ex ante specification of what results support and contradict the theory, and that
appropriately defined and measured variables are employed to ensure that the test is
aligned with the theory.
SITE SELECTION
The researcher pursuing a quantitative field research study must consider various factors
when selecting an appropriate site including the availability of data, the appropriateness
of the company for the study, the appropriate unit of analysis, and whether adequate
statistical power is likely to be obtained for testing the theory. For quantitative field
studies that have theory testing as a goal, careful site selection is critical to meeting the
first and third conditions that Atkinson & Shaffir (1998) require of successful theory
testing in the field: that the conditions of the test (i.e., the setting, the unit of analysis)
are consistent with the axioms of the theory, and that the test provides reasonable
probability (i.e., power) to confirm or contradict the theory.
DATA IDENTIFICATION, COLLECTION, AND PREPARATION
Jick (1979) presents an interesting and informative discussion of various forms of
triangulation and how to mix qualitative and quantitative data. There is a distinct
tradition in the literature on social science research methods that advocates the use of
multiple

methods.

Quantitative

researchers
Page
5

are

urged

to

draw

on

qualitative

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
observations to validate and interpret results, and clarify unexpected findings. Instead of
using multiple methods simply to round out the picture, researchers should attempt to
obtain measures for each construct from more than one source.
CONCLUSION
Field researchers have the potential to make a significant contribution to the field
of management accounting (Hopwood, 1983; Kaplan, 1983, 1984; Young, 1999). Field
research offers academics the chance to go inside an organization and gain firsthand
knowledge of organizational practices and processes. Important objectives for field
research include studying outliers, providing small-sample evidence, and investigating
anomalies and innovative practices (Shields, 1997).
By definition, field research provides the field researcher with a rich set of data in
its natural context. While quantitative field research is particularly well-suited to testing
theoretical predictions, we believe that more powerful use of numeric data in quantitative
analysis would benefit all forms of field research, whether aimed at description, theory
building, or theory testing.
This chapter responds in part to that call by discussing key decisions and choices
that researchers must consider in designing and executing a field study that has an aim
of testing theory using quantitative analysis. We provide illustrations of key decisions and
choices from the literature. We emphasize the importance of theory and the role it must
play early in the project. Although, we encourage researchers to be open-minded,
especially in pursuing and developing multiple methods and measures of variables, we
also argue that for field research that aims to test theory, the theory must be well-defined
before powerful empirical tests can be constructed. Another early and critical decision
that the researcher must make is the selection of the field site.
In order to undertake a successful quantitative field study it is imperative that the
researcher evaluate data availability and choose sites and informants that provide a
powerful test of the theory. Finally, we discuss the importance of proper measurement in
the field and the advantages a field site can offer in terms of combining data from
multiple methods in triangulating variable measures. However, for the researcher who is
committed to understanding management accounting in its natural setting, an obvious
Page
6

DOING QUANTITATIVES FIELD RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT

ACCOUNTING
response is that other paths are far more risky, if by risk we consider both the likelihood
and the magnitude of innovation associated with plowing the well-turned field of public
accounting data versus collecting private data from a promising site that is chosen to
enhance the power of the test or the likelihood of revealing new theoretical relationships.
When questioned about the wisdom of a doctoral student doing a single substantial
piece of field work as compared to several smaller empirical studies using public
accounting data, a senior faculty member who built his reputation on field research
confidedIts okay to put all your eggs in one basket, but you better take exceptional
care of that basket. Although many of the recommendations that we offer are obvious
(though regrettably, not so obvious that we avoided the problems that ensue from
neglecting them), our goal in this chapter has been to enhance the care that is taken in
field research, and thus to enhance the effectiveness of researchers applying field
research methods.

Page
7