英语论文网

new dimensions to the theoretical and methodological debate. Through its ordering processes it is hoped to highlight the inevitable truth that all empirical research is partial and incomplete and that theoretical and methodological choices are inevitably made whether appreciated or not. Dimensions for theoretical and methodological choices Perhaps Burrell and Morgan (1979) have done most to help design an abstracted classification schema for understanding broad streams of social science approaches to empirical research. Their framework inspired a range of accounting-related classifications in the literature (most notably Chua, 1986; Hopper and Powell, 1985; Laughlin and Lowe, 1990). While there has been much criticism of their framework (see for instance Willmott (1990, forthcoming) and the many citations in these articles) it is a useful starting point for this section in its search to create an abstracted set of key characteristics under which various social science approaches can be located. What Burrell and Morgan (1979) create is a two-by-two matrix based on two bipolar continuums. One continuum posits alternative approaches to socialscience (ranging from “subjectivist” to “objectivist”) the other contains different assumptions about the nature of society (ranging from the “sociology of regulation” to the “sociology of radical change”). The multiple nature of the social science continuum is actually a five part schema related to ontology, human nature, nature of society, epistemology and methodology. While the simple bipolar dualism that Burrell and Morgan (1979) have introduced for these important areas is too simplistic as Willmott (1990, forthcoming) so ably demonstrates, it is quite probable that they have indeed isolated many, if not most, of the key domains for choice. Indeed a position on being (ontology), on the role of the investigator (human nature), on perceptions of society (society), on perceptions on understanding (epistemology) and ways to investigate the world (methodology) are implicit in the various approaches to empirical research. Expressing these in the context of choices that have to be made before undertaking any empirical investigation it is possible to cluster these concerns under three broad bands which can be conveniently labelled “theory”, “methodology” and “change” choices. In broad terms choice with regard to “theory” involves deciding on a view about the nature of the world (Burrell and Morgan’s “ontology”) and what constitutes knowledge either past or present and how it relates to the current focus of investigation (Burrell and Morgan’s “epistemology” assumption). The choice in relation to “methodology” involves taking a position on an amalgam of the nature and role of the observer in the discovery process (Burrell and Morgan’s “human nature” assumption) and the level of theoretical formality in defining the nature of the discovery methods (Burrell and Morgan’s “methodology”). Finally, the choice in relation to “change” involves taking a position on whether the investigation is intentionally geared to achieve change in the phenomena being investigated (Burrell and Morgan’s “society” assumption). On the “theory” dimension we can express the amalgam of concern in relation to the level of prior theorizing and prior theories that can legitimately be brought to the empirical investigation. This links to ontological assumptions about the nature of the world we are investigating and our views about its materiali