In Defence of Triangulation: A Critical Realist Approach to Mixed Methods Research in Management Accounting


Speaker


Abstract

The notion of triangulation constitutes a key justification for mixed methods research but has been contested on ontological and epistemological grounds, especially where this entails integration of theories and/or methods rooted in different philosophical assumptions (or paradigms). Resonating with recent debates in the management accounting literature questioning the persistence of such irreconcilable differences in empirical research, this paper responds to these criticisms by advancing a modified notion of triangulation grounded in critical realism. This approach is largely consistent with, but more clearly articulated than the pragmatic position that mixed methods research often subscribes to. Critical realism signifies a clear departure from the ‘naïve’ empirical realism, constituting the main target of critics of triangulation, and affirms the inherently relativistic nature of knowledge claims grounded in empirical research. However, it insists on the possibilities of such claims to achieve some wider validity within the theory- and context-bound premises specified through triangulation. The plausibility of such an approach in management accounting research is illustrated through a review of two empirical studies straddling between the functionalist and interpretive paradigms.
 
Contact information:
Paolo Perego
Email