Academic accounting and interdisciplinary research – Australian evidence

Katherine Leanne Christ, Roger Leonard Burritt, Ann Martin-Sardesai, James Guthrie
{"title":"Academic accounting and interdisciplinary research – Australian evidence","authors":"Katherine Leanne Christ, Roger Leonard Burritt, Ann Martin-Sardesai, James Guthrie","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-02-2023-6297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Given the importance of interdisciplinary research in addressing wicked problems, this paper aims to explore the development of and prospects for interdisciplinary research through evidence gained from academic accountants in Australia.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Extant literature is complemented with interviews of accounting academics in Australia to reveal the challenges and opportunities facing interdisciplinary researchers and reimagine prospects for the future.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Evidence indicates that accounting academics hold diverse views toward interdisciplinarity. There is also confusion between multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity in the journals in which academic accountants publish. Further, there is mixed messaging among Deans, disciplinary leaders and emerging scholars about the importance of interdisciplinary research to, on the one hand, publish track records and, on the other, secure grants from government and industry. Finally, there are differing perceptions about the disciplines to be encouraged or accepted in the cross-fertilisation of ideas.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This paper is novel in gathering first-hand data about the opportunities, challenges and tensions accounting academics face in collaborating with others in interdisciplinary research. It confirms a discouraging pressure for emerging scholars between the academic research outputs required to publish in journals, prepare reports for industry and secure research funding, with little guidance for how these tensions might be managed.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":501027,"journal":{"name":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-02-2023-6297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Given the importance of interdisciplinary research in addressing wicked problems, this paper aims to explore the development of and prospects for interdisciplinary research through evidence gained from academic accountants in Australia.

Design/methodology/approach

Extant literature is complemented with interviews of accounting academics in Australia to reveal the challenges and opportunities facing interdisciplinary researchers and reimagine prospects for the future.

Findings

Evidence indicates that accounting academics hold diverse views toward interdisciplinarity. There is also confusion between multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity in the journals in which academic accountants publish. Further, there is mixed messaging among Deans, disciplinary leaders and emerging scholars about the importance of interdisciplinary research to, on the one hand, publish track records and, on the other, secure grants from government and industry. Finally, there are differing perceptions about the disciplines to be encouraged or accepted in the cross-fertilisation of ideas.

Originality/value

This paper is novel in gathering first-hand data about the opportunities, challenges and tensions accounting academics face in collaborating with others in interdisciplinary research. It confirms a discouraging pressure for emerging scholars between the academic research outputs required to publish in journals, prepare reports for industry and secure research funding, with little guidance for how these tensions might be managed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术会计和跨学科研究--澳大利亚的证据
目的鉴于跨学科研究在解决棘手问题方面的重要性,本文旨在通过从澳大利亚学术会计师那里获得的证据,探讨跨学科研究的发展和前景。 研究结果有证据表明,会计学术界对跨学科性持有不同的观点。在会计学者发表论文的期刊中,多学科性和跨学科性之间也存在混淆。此外,院长、学科带头人和新兴学者对跨学科研究的重要性认识不一,一方面,他们认为跨学科研究有助于发表论文,另一方面,他们认为跨学科研究有助于获得政府和企业的资助。最后,对于在思想交叉融合中应鼓励或接受哪些学科,大家的看法也不尽相同。它证实了新兴学者在期刊发表学术研究成果、为行业准备报告和确保研究资金等方面所面临的令人沮丧的压力,而对于如何处理这些紧张关系却几乎没有任何指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ways of not seeing: visibility, blindness, and the transparency game Accounting for racial inequality in South Africa with the black economic empowerment policy Boundary objects: sustainability reporting and the production of organizational stability Responding to employee-based race inequalities in National Health Service (England): accountability and the Workforce Race Equality Standard The failure of the United Kingdom’s accounting and fiscal governance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1