• français
    • English
  • English 
    • français
    • English
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
BIRD Home

Browse

This CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals BIRDResearch centres & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Reactions to reading “Remaining consistent with method? An analysis of grounded theory research in accounting”: A comment on Gurd

Thumbnail
View/Open
Reactions reading JOANNIDES_BERLAND_GT.pdf (147.3Kb)
Date
2008
Dewey
Contrôle de gestion Comptabilité
Sujet
interpretive research; grounded theory
JEL code
M.M4.M41
Journal issue
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management
Volume
5
Number
3
Publication date
2008
Article pages
253-261
Publisher
Emerald Group Publishing Ltd
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/11766090810910254
URI
https://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/1468
Collections
  • DRM : Publications
Metadata
Show full item record
Author
Joannides, Vassili
status unknown
Berland, Nicolas
1032 Dauphine Recherches en Management [DRM]
Type
Article accepté pour publication ou publié
Abstract (EN)
Purpose: The present paper is a comment on Gurd’s paper published in QRAM on the use of grounded theory in interpretive accounting research. Methodology: Like Gurd, we conducted a bibliographic study on prior pieces of research claiming the use of grounded theory. Findings: We found a large diversity of ways of doing grounded theory. There are as many ways as articles. Consistent with the spirit of grounded theory, the field suggested the research questions, methods and verifiability criteria. From the same sample as Gurd, we arrived at different conclusions. Research limitations: In our research, we did not verify the consistency of claims with grounded theory. We took for granted that they had understood and made operational the suggestions of the founders of the method. Practical implications: The four canons of grounded theory can be considered as reference marks rather than as the rules of the method. Accordingly, the researcher is free to develop his own techniques and procedures. Originality/Value of the paper: This paper stimulates debates on grounded theory based research. On the other hand, it conveys the richness and the variety of interpretive research. Two similar studies, using similar samples and methods arrive at different (divergent) conclusions.

  • Accueil Bibliothèque
  • Site de l'Université Paris-Dauphine
  • Contact
SCD Paris Dauphine - Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny 75775 Paris Cedex 16

 Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 France (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) license.