Hegemony and Feuds or Paradigmatic Dialogue? Rethinking a Plural Scientific Model from a Kuhnian Reinterpretation in the Accounting Academy.

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Objective. This investigation aimed to analyze the existing paradigmatic discussion in the accounting academy and its implications for developing knowledge from a rereading of Tomas Kuhn.

Methodology and/or approach. The article is a theoretical essay. In this theoretical essay, the idea is defended that the paradigmatic discussion in management accounting provides subsidies to rethink the hegemonic scientific model currently developed in accounting and the consequences for developing knowledge.

Key findings. The work presented provides subsidies to understand that the multiparadigm view, the proposal of straddling paradigm and the related treatment of the terms epistemology, methodology and paradigms are contradictory conceptions with the Kuhnian concepts advocated in the work "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". Therefore, the analysis of the existing paradigmatic discussion advanced regarding implications for the scientific accounting field.

Contributions. By reaffirming the results found in the research, its main contribution is presented: accounting is situated in a pre-paradigm period, with the absence of a research paradigm. From the point of view of this research, it is argued that Tomas Kuhn's work should be used with caution by the management accounting community since it should not be fully applied to accounting.

Originality and/or Relevance. In this context, it is suggested that research in management accounting evidence social aspects such as beliefs, values and power relations existing in academia and their relationship with scientific results, giving birth to a subjective view of knowledge.