Abstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to respond to Modell’s paper entitled “Theoretical triangulation
and pluralism in accounting research: a critical realist critique” (AAAJ this issue), which offers a two-part
exposition of topics and issues pertaining to the recent paper “Theoretical triangulation and pluralism in
research methods in organizational and accounting research” (Hoque et al., 2013).
Design/methodology/approach – Critical analysis of Modell’s observations pertaining to the paper
drawing on the classical work of Burrell and Morgan (1979).
Findings – The authors reemphasize the need for an interaction between adopting an ontological
stance and then conducting empirical research where the authors stated that the intention was not to
argue any idea that theoretical triangulation approach should become the dominant approach and
“take over” single theory approach. Instead, the authors demonstrate the ways theoretical
triangulation can advance the understanding of multifaceted organizational realities.
Originality/value – The authors make a contribution to the generation of knowledge in research by
addressing the tradeoffs involved such as possible theoretical incoherence and lack of focus when
integrating theories with different ontological and epistemological assumptions.
