The Experts below are selected from a list of 25571964 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ahmed Othman Rashwan Kholeif - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Strong Structuration theory in accounting research
Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and consider the impact of this for accounting research. The paper also provides an overview of the contributions advanced by the other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and AccountabilityJournal (AAAJ). Design/methodology/approach This paper draws together and identifies key issues and themes related to the rapidly evolving interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and considers the relevance of these issues to accounting research. Findings The paper highlights that there is a growing use of strong Structuration theory in a number of disciplines, such as in healthcare, learning studies, management, migration studies and childcare as well as in accounting. Within the accounting discipline, whilst the interest began in management accounting and control, there are ongoing studies of the not-for-profit sector, social and environmental accounting, financial reporting standards and audit. Using strong Structuration theory, researchers are more interested in the people (individually or collectively) and their analysis of their conduct and context. They are moving forwards from an overly static use of the quadripartite framework to a more dynamic approach that also includes the other important central elements of strong Structuration that focus on the issue of agency in situ rather than on structure cut off from agency. Research limitations/implications The paper provides important insights into emerging issues and developments in strong Structuration theory that have clear relevance to accounting research and practice as well as other disciplines. Originality/value This paper, and other contributions to this special issue of AAAJ, provide a basis and a research agenda for accounting scholars seeking to undertake empirical research using Stones’ strong Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory: reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose - – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach - – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings - – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications - – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens. Originality/value - – This paper provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about ...
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose: To examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research.Design/methodology/approach: The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory.Findings: Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life, and improves research design.Research limitations/implications: Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens.Originality/value: Provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design, and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
-
introducing strong Structuration theory for informing qualitative case studies in organization management and accounting research
Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 2007Co-Authors: Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose – The aim of this paper is to present a reinforced version of Structuration theory, known as strong Structuration theory, set out in Stones as a disciplined approach to qualitative case study research in the organization, management and accounting fields. This framework challenges the belief held by certain critics that Structuration theory cannot be used in substantive empirical research but is only a sensitising device or analytical tool.Design/methodology/approach – A conceptual discussion is the approach of the paper.Findings – The key concepts of strong Structuration theory are outlined and then put in the context first of two attempts to apply the framework to empirical research and second of two recent papers which address theoretically informed qualitative research and the use of Structuration theory in IT studies.Research limitations/implications – There are some limitations of this paper. The framework offered was not used to set the original research questions in the two case studies em...
Alan Coad - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Strong Structuration theory in accounting research
Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and consider the impact of this for accounting research. The paper also provides an overview of the contributions advanced by the other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and AccountabilityJournal (AAAJ). Design/methodology/approach This paper draws together and identifies key issues and themes related to the rapidly evolving interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and considers the relevance of these issues to accounting research. Findings The paper highlights that there is a growing use of strong Structuration theory in a number of disciplines, such as in healthcare, learning studies, management, migration studies and childcare as well as in accounting. Within the accounting discipline, whilst the interest began in management accounting and control, there are ongoing studies of the not-for-profit sector, social and environmental accounting, financial reporting standards and audit. Using strong Structuration theory, researchers are more interested in the people (individually or collectively) and their analysis of their conduct and context. They are moving forwards from an overly static use of the quadripartite framework to a more dynamic approach that also includes the other important central elements of strong Structuration that focus on the issue of agency in situ rather than on structure cut off from agency. Research limitations/implications The paper provides important insights into emerging issues and developments in strong Structuration theory that have clear relevance to accounting research and practice as well as other disciplines. Originality/value This paper, and other contributions to this special issue of AAAJ, provide a basis and a research agenda for accounting scholars seeking to undertake empirical research using Stones’ strong Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory: reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose - – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach - – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings - – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications - – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens. Originality/value - – This paper provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about ...
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose: To examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research.Design/methodology/approach: The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory.Findings: Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life, and improves research design.Research limitations/implications: Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens.Originality/value: Provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design, and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
-
back to the future new potential for Structuration theory in management accounting research
Management Accounting Research, 2009Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Ian HerbertAbstract:Abstract For three decades, the use of Structuration theory has made a distinctive contribution to management accounting research. A recent development of the theory by Stones [Stones, 2005. Structuration Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke] advocates a move away from the relatively abstract concepts evident in the work of Giddens, towards providing more concrete constructs that give epistemological and methodological guidance to researchers in the field. In order to achieve this, he recommends deployment of the concept of position–practices, combined with use of a quadripartite model of Structuration. The main purpose of this paper is to examine the potential of this development for management accounting research. We do so by setting it within our own skeletal model of the Structuration process, and then using it to analyse a case study of management accounting practices in a privatised utility company. We conclude that investigation of position–practices focuses attention on the strategic conduct of agents, the importance of power in social interaction, and a plurality of structures and theories of action. But, whilst the quadripartite model highlights the phenomenology, hermeneutics and practices of agents, we note that it provides few direct insights into the processes of reproduction, learning and change in management accounting. We suggest this limitation can be overcome by using Structuration theory in a flexible manner, drawing inspiration from other theoretical perspectives which ascribe central roles to path dependency, contradiction and praxis.
Lisa Jack - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
STRONG Structuration THEORY AND MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING RESEARCH
Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting, 2017Co-Authors: Lisa JackAbstract:Strong Structuration theory is a recent development in social theory that, among other attributes, makes the gap between ontological concepts and empirical research easier to negotiate. Giddens’ Structuration theory is a developed ontology-in-general explaining at an abstract level how structure and agency are interrelated, being a duality in which neither can exist without the other. Strong Structuration is a development of Structuration theory that retains duality of structure but has a greater sense of ontology-in-situ (that is, a concern with social processes and events at particular times and places) to counteract the overly abstract and philosophical nature of Giddens’ work. In this essay, I set out three reasons why I believe that strong Structuration theory is particularly suited to qualitative empirical research in management accounting. These are that it encourages and reminds researchers to use up to date scholarship from other disciplines in their research; that it refocuses research on agency and the intended and unintended effects that individual people have on structures; and that it encourages research design that have the intention of building new theoretical insights. A review of the small body of accounting research that has so far used strong Structuration theory shows that researchers are using innovative approaches, based on Stones’ (2005) and later work, to investigate the relationships between different actors and their knowledge of the contexts which they inhabit to understand why accounting is done in the way it is, and the extent to which change is possible. The next step in this area of research is to consider the concept of active agency within the theory more closely, and in particular, to examine communication in management accounting as active agency.
-
Strong Structuration theory in accounting research
Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and consider the impact of this for accounting research. The paper also provides an overview of the contributions advanced by the other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and AccountabilityJournal (AAAJ). Design/methodology/approach This paper draws together and identifies key issues and themes related to the rapidly evolving interdisciplinary use of strong Structuration theory and considers the relevance of these issues to accounting research. Findings The paper highlights that there is a growing use of strong Structuration theory in a number of disciplines, such as in healthcare, learning studies, management, migration studies and childcare as well as in accounting. Within the accounting discipline, whilst the interest began in management accounting and control, there are ongoing studies of the not-for-profit sector, social and environmental accounting, financial reporting standards and audit. Using strong Structuration theory, researchers are more interested in the people (individually or collectively) and their analysis of their conduct and context. They are moving forwards from an overly static use of the quadripartite framework to a more dynamic approach that also includes the other important central elements of strong Structuration that focus on the issue of agency in situ rather than on structure cut off from agency. Research limitations/implications The paper provides important insights into emerging issues and developments in strong Structuration theory that have clear relevance to accounting research and practice as well as other disciplines. Originality/value This paper, and other contributions to this special issue of AAAJ, provide a basis and a research agenda for accounting scholars seeking to undertake empirical research using Stones’ strong Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory: reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose - – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach - – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings - – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications - – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens. Originality/value - – This paper provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose – This paper aims to examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research. Design/methodology/approach – The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory. Findings – Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life and improves research design. Research limitations/implications – Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about ...
-
Structuration theory reflections on its further potential for management accounting research
2015Co-Authors: Alan Coad, Lisa Jack, Ahmed Othman Rashwan KholeifAbstract:Purpose: To examine the potential of strong Structuration theory in management accounting research.Design/methodology/approach: The paper explains how the ontological perspective of strong Structuration theory extends the work of Giddens and explores how the perspective overcomes a number of the limitations of existing management accounting research based on Structuration theory.Findings: Strong Structuration theory develops and extends the work of Giddens, providing greater insights into the role of agents, improves our understanding of the diffusion of accounting practices through organisational fields, adds to our knowledge of how artefacts are used in the production and reproduction of organisational life, and improves research design.Research limitations/implications: Strong Structuration theory provides clear guidance about management accounting case study research design, and suggests the potential for the accounting research community to engage more actively in debates about the development of Structuration theory beyond the work of Giddens.Originality/value: Provides a clear explanation of the ontology of strong Structuration theory, its implications for research design, and how it holds the potential to overcome many of the limitations of earlier management accounting studies deploying Structuration theory.
Jesse Dillard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
An Application Of Structuration Theory In Professional Service Firms
2013Co-Authors: Jesse Dillard, Kristi YuthasAbstract:A theoretical base for studying ethics in action is developed. In previous work, we propose a responsibility ethic, normative stakeholder theory, and discourse ethics as components of ethical decision making within organizational contexts. Here, we argue that Structuration theory provides theoretical depth and conceptual integration to the ideas presented in our earlier work. The previous work is briefly discussed and Structuration theory is reviewed. Ethically informed action is formulated within the context of Structuration theory as a consideration and instantiation of structural features. Ethical action is predicated on the agent’s accountability within the context of an ongoing community. Accountability requires the explication of reasons for one’s actions and the justification, or legitimation (normative grounds) for the reasons given. The question of expert systems applications within a professional service organization is used as the vehicle for illustrating how the theoretical ideas might be implemented in identifying and addressing ethical dilemmas.
-
entrepreneurship as the nexus of individual and opportunity a Structuration view
Journal of Business Venturing, 2006Co-Authors: Yolanda Sarason, Thomas J Dean, Jesse DillardAbstract:Abstract We propose Structuration theory as a useful lens through which to view the entrepreneurial process. Extending Shane and Venkataraman's work ( Shane, S., Venkataraman, S., 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review 25, 217–226 ), entrepreneurship is presented as the nexus of opportunity and agency, whereby opportunities are not singular phenomena, but are idiosyncratic to the individual. Entrepreneurial ventures are the medium and outcome of the entrepreneurs' actions. The traditional view of entrepreneurship is that entrepreneurs fill market gaps. A Structuration view proposes that the entrepreneur and social systems co-evolve. The presentation of Structuration theory offers a robust, and hereto underrepresented, perspective of the entrepreneurial process.
-
entrepreneurship as the nexus of individual and opportunity a Structuration view
Social Science Research Network, 2006Co-Authors: Yolanda Sarason, Thomas J Dean, Jesse DillardAbstract:A Structuration theory-based perspective ofentrepreneurship offers a unique framework for better understanding therelationship between opportunity and the entrepreneur. Unlike the traditionalview of the entrepreneurial process, Structuration theory specificallyarticulates the relationship between agent (entrepreneur) and structure(opportunity) as a duality. Following a discussion of the basic tenets of Structuration theory, sevenpropositions are presented in order to demonstrate how the nexus ofentrepreneur and opportunity can be understood from a Structurationperspective. The first proposition emphasizes the idiosyncratic nature of opportunities,the next three address the co-creation and evolution of entrepreneurialventures, and the last three deal with the role of various structural types inthe discovery, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities. Finally, thecontributions of studying entrepreneurship from a Structuration perspective arediscussed. (SAA)
John Roberts - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Testing the limits of Structuration theory in accounting research
Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2014Co-Authors: John RobertsAbstract:In 1985 I published a paper in Accounting Organizations and Society with Bob Scapens titled Accounting Systems and Systems of Accountability; understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. The paper suggested the potential usefulness of Anthony Giddens’ Structuration theory for efforts to understand accounting in its organisational contexts. Rather than engage in a further review of the use of Structuration theory in accounting, this paper sets out to test our original proposition as to the usefulness of Giddens ideas for accounting research. I explore three points of possible criticism in the paper. That Structuration theory does not take the ‘agency’ of accounting sufficiently seriously; that Foucault and Lacan allow us to get much closer to the ways in which accounting information works back upon human subjects; and that Giddens and accounting share a lack of ethics.
