Accepted Manuscript

Factors impacting accounting research output in developing countries: An exploratory

study

Minga Negash, Tesfaye T. Lemma, Grant Samkin

PII: S0890-8389(18)30065-9
DOI: 10.1016/j.bar.2018.09.003
Reference: YBARE 805

To appear in: The British Accounting Review

Received Date: 13 February 2017

Revised Date: 20 September 2018
Accepted Date: 20 September 2018

Please cite this article as: Negash, M., Lemma, T.T., Samkin, G., Factors impacting accounting research
output in developing countries: An exploratory study, The British Accounting Review (2018), doi: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2018.09.003.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Factors impacting accounting research output in developing countries: An
exploratory study

RI
Minga Negash

SC
University of the Witwatersrand
and Metropolitan State University of Denver, USA

U
Tesfaye T. Lemma1
AN
Towson University, USA
M

Grant Samkin
Department of Accounting, University of Waikato, New Zealand
D

and College of Accounting Sciences, University of South Africa, South Africa

TE
C EP
AC

1
Corresponding Author: email: [email protected]; Mailing Address: 8000 York Road, Towson, MD 21252-0001
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
1

Factors impacting accounting research output in developing countries: An

exploratory study

Abstract

PT
The objective of this paper is to identify the factors that impact accounting research
output in one of the developing regions of the world, Anglophone Sub-Sahara Africa
(Anglophone SSA). Adopting an institutional theory framework, the paper uses a sequential

RI
research process comprising an original questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. Four
research questions were developed to achieve the research objectives. The region’s low research

SC
output is explained by a host of individual, departmental and/or university, country and
international factors; of these, departmental and/or university factors appear to have the strongest

U
impact. The study also found that factors that constitute the regulative (coercive) pillar that
AN
promote research tend to be weaker in this region’s universities, while factors that constitute the
normative and cultural-cognitive pillars which tend to promote teaching appear to be stronger.
Thus, the institutional pressure stemming from factors that constitute normative and cultural-
M

cognitive elements dictate the conduct of an accounting academic positioned in Anglophone

SSA’s universities. That is, research activities of accounting academics in the region are
D

disempowered by the more potent, normative and cultural-cognitive pressures and are
TE

inadequately sanctioned by the regulative pressure.

Key words: accounting research; Sub-Sahara Africa; developing countries; institutional theory
EP

1. Introduction
C

Academic publishing is inherently inequitable. Much of the academic work published in

AC

reputable peer-reviewed international journals is either authored or co-authored by researchers

associated with institutions in the developed world (Salager-Meyer, 2008). Within the developed
world, academics in reputable universities publish in journals that attract high citation and impact
visibility. Academic publishing is, in part, driven by the publication industry, coupled with the
desire of governments and the management of universities to determine ‘what counts’ for
employment and tenure purposes. Publications are also influential in determining how funds are
distributed across and among universities and research entities (Milana, Holford, Jarvis, Waller,
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2

& Webb, 2015; Nygaard, 2015). As a discipline, accounting is no exception (Guthrie & Parker,
2014; Wills, Ridley, & Mitev, 2013; Chan, Chang, Tong, & Zhang, 2012).
An examination of the institutional affiliations of authors in the top-tier accounting
journals over the period 2012 to 2015 shows that only 1.65% of the publications originated from
developing countries.1 Of these, only 0.89% came from Anglophone Sub-Sahara African (SSA)2

PT
authors; moreover, a majority of these authors were from South Africa.3 This absence of
meaningful engagement in scholarship by SSA accounting academics is important for three

RI
reasons. First, it deprives the scientific community of “important alternative cultural
perspectives” and contributions originating from SSA countries (Flowerdew, 2001, p. 122; Gray,

SC
2010). Second, in the absence of meaningful participation from SSA academics, the relevance
and generalisability of findings by scholars based in the developed world to settings in

U
developing countries is diminished (Van Dijk, 1994). Third, the absence of research in SSA
countries suggests a missed opportunity for accounting academics to contribute to growth and
AN
development of the region (Romer, 1994; Johnson & Lundvall, 2003; Gray, 2010; Ngai &
Sameniego, 2011; World Economic Forum, 2017).
M

An important starting point to reverse this trend is to understand the forces that contribute
to low research performance of academics in the region. Thus, the objective of this paper is to
D

identify the factors that impact accounting research output in Anglophone SSA’s universities. A
sequential research process comprising an original questionnaire and semi-structured interviews
TE

was developed to answer the following four research questions: What are the individual
academic-related factors that impact accounting research at Anglophone SSA’s universities?
EP

What are the departmental or university-related factors that impact accounting research output in
C

1
The journals were taken from seven top-tier journals identified by Tucker, Parker, and Merchant. (2016).
AC

Two high profile auditing journals (International Journal of Auditing, and Auditing: A Journal of Practice
and Theory) were added to the list to take into account that particular sub-discipline. In addition, the British
Accounting Review was added as it was thought that authors from former British Colonies in Anglophone
SSA may submit to this outlet, and this would be reflected in research. For the five-year period 2012 to 2015,
a total of 2,120 articles were published on these journals.
2
Within the context of this paper, SSA refers to a region in Africa comprised of 48 developing countries of
which about half use English either as their official or de facto official language (Anglophone SSA) and the
other half use French either as their official or de facto official language (Francophone SSA).
3
What these numbers do not represent is the number of academics from Anglophone SSA who left the
continent to join educational institutions in the developed world but still publish about Africa. It would be
expected that these academics would mentor or co-author with their colleagues in Anglophone SSA. Except
in a few South African cases, no evidence of this hypothesis was found.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
3

the region? Do country-related factors impact accounting research output? What other factors,
including international influences, impact accounting research output?
Extensive research has examined the factors that potentially impact the level of discipline-
specific research output in developed countries including Australia (Evans, Burritt, & Guthrie,
2013; Guthrie & Parker, 2014; Milton & O'Connell, 2009; Parker & Guthrie, 2005); Canada

PT
(Everett, Neu, & Green, 2003; Mathieu & McConomy, 2003); New Zealand (Chan et al., 2012);
Norway (Smeby, 2003; Nygaard, 2015); Spain (Albert, Davia, & Legazpe 2016); the United

RI
Kingdom (Beattie & Goodacre, 2012; Humphrey, Moizer, & Owen, 1995; Tucker, Parker, &
Merchant, 2016); and the United States (Chow & Harrison, 1998; Fogarty & Ravenscroft, 1999;

SC
Fogarty & Ruhl, 1997; Levitan & Ray, 1992; Prather-Kinsey & Rueschhoff, 1999).
Likewise, studies outside of the accounting discipline have examined research output in

U
Anglophone SSA’s universities. These studies identified factors such as the vagaries of state
politics and policies; continually changing missions and mandates of international donor
AN
agencies; unpredictable demands and dislocations of civil society; political autonomy;
inadequate research infrastructure including, information and communication technologies;
M

absence of academic leadership, research culture and support; absence of a congenial political
and academic environment particularly in some countries; employment of staff who are
D

unqualified to pursue academic research; crippling teaching loads impacting research capacity;
inadequate financial support; low remuneration; recruitment and reward structures marred by
TE

corruption, patronage and politics; local relevance; and international recognition as impacting on
research output of Anglophone SSA’s universities (see, Zeleza, 2002; Atuahene, 2011).
EP

Nonetheless, the factors impacting the level of accounting research output in developing
countries in general, and in the SSA region in particular, have not been examined. Where studies
C

have occurred, they have tended to focus on South Africa (see, for example, Nieuwoudt &
Wilcocks, 2005; Van der Schyf, 2008a; Nieuwoudt, Wilcocks, & Kilpert, 2006; Van der Schyf,
AC

2008b; Coetsee & Stegmann, 2012; Samkin & Schneider, 2014; Samkin & Stainbank, 2016).
The present study, therefore, contributes to the academic literature in that it identifies the
factors that impact accounting academics’ research productivity in the Anglophone SSA region,
one of the developing areas of the world and an area largely neglected in prior research. The
Anglophone SSA region was selected as the geographical area of study for the following
reasons. First, Africa is the world’s second largest continent both in terms of area and population
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
4

size and richness in culture and natural resources. However, many of the poorest nations of the
world are found in this region.4 Many global indexes rate the region at the bottom of
international country rankings.5 Its universities are underrepresented in international university
rankings and researchers in this region are often not visible to their international colleagues in
developed countries (Gyimah-Brempong, Paddison, & Mitiku, 2006; Habib, Morrow, & Bentley,

PT
2008; Teferra & Altbach, 2004). Second, when issues relevant to Anglophone SSA are covered,
the participants in the discourse are seldom located in the region’s universities. Third, what

RI
constitutes accounting knowledge has been narrowly defined, is epitomised largely by a
quantitative approach that focuses on the ‘impact’ and ‘structure’ of accounting knowledge and

SC
is published in a narrow range of journals (Milana et al., 2015; Hopwood, 2007; Tuttle & Dillard,
2007; Gray, 2010). Understanding the factors that impact the research productivity and

U
challenges that academics in developing countries have to overcome to publish at levels
comparable to those of their colleagues in developed countries is, therefore, essential if these
AN
individuals are to join the international community of scholars (Flowerdew, 2001).
A number of studies have used institutional theory to gain insights into factors that
M

influence individuals and groups within organisations (see, for example, Dillard, Rigsby, &
Goodman, 2004; Tuttle & Dillard, 2007; Zhang, Boyce, & Ahmed, 2014). The benefit of using
D

institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan 1977; DiMaggio & Powell,
1991; Scott, 2014) as a frame of reference, according to Tuttle and Dillard (2007, p. 388), is that
TE

it enables researchers to move “beyond economic forces to understand more completely the
evolution of systems and their enabling and constraining influences on actors within these
EP

systems.” Integrating the study’s findings into its theoretical framework provides insight into the
interplay between the factors and the different institutional forces that impact accounting
C

research output in the Anglophone SSA region.

The findings of the study are as follows. First, individual academic’s attributes (including
AC

commitment, motivation and research competency); departmental and/or university-related

factors (for example, recruitment, tenure and promotion policies; research assessment policies;
departmental leadership; and availability of research supervisors, co-authors and infrastructure);
national and international factors (including: lack of research funding); perceived editorial and/or

4
For more on this see for example https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/why-natural-
resources-are-a-curse-on-developing-countries-and-how-to-fix-it/256508/
5
https://weforum.ent.box.com/s/dari4dktg4jt2g9xo2o5pksjpatvawdb
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
5

review bias; professionalisation and vocationalisation of accounting education; and professional

associations explain the low research output of the region. Of these, departmental and/or
university level factors appear to play the most important role in shaping the research
productivity of accounting academics in Anglophone SSA’s universities. The study also found
that factors that constitute the regulative (coercive) pillar that promote research tend to be weaker

PT
in Anglophone SSA’s universities than elsewhere. On the other hand, those that constitute the
normative and cultural-cognitive pillars that tend to promote teaching appear to be stronger than

RI
those found in other regions. Thus, the institutional pressure stemming from factors that
constitute normative and cultural-cognitive elements dictate the conduct of an accounting

SC
academic positioned in a university in Anglophone SSA. That is, research activities of
accounting academics in the region are constrained by the more potent, normative and cultural-

U
cognitive pressures and inadequately empowered by the regulative pressure. The findings
suggest that efforts directed at strengthening the regulative (coercive) ‘structures and processes’
AN
and availing of the requisite ‘resources’ could be used to “strategically manipulate” (Scott, 2014,
p. 79) and shape the cultural-cognitive templates that the region’s accounting academics use in
M

understanding and discharging their professorial roles.

The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. The next section provides the
D

theoretical underpinning of the paper. Thereafter, the factors impacting research productivity in
developed and developing countries are reviewed. Section 4 details the research design and data
TE

and includes discussion of the research design. That discussion is then followed by an overview
of the development of the questionnaire, the semi-structured interview questions and a summary
EP

of the institutional features of accounting departments in the region. The findings are then
presented. A discussion and conclusion round out the paper.
C

2 Theoretical framework
AC

This section considers the theoretical framework used in the study. It introduces
institutional theory and its use in prior research in educational settings. It then considers
institutional pillars, isomorphism and decoupling as dimensions of institutional theory that have
direct bearing on the study.

2.1 Institutional theory and its use in education research

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
6

Institutional theory examines the processes by which structures including schemas, rules,
norms and routines become established as authoritative guidelines for social behaviour and
interaction (Scott, 2004). This theory provides tools that can be used to understand why
organisations operating in a particular sector reproduce or adopt particular forms and ultimately
resemble each other (DiMaggio, 1988; Scott, 1987; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Scott & Meyer,

PT
1991). It also provides a useful frame of reference through which stability and change within
organisations and systems and their relationship to broader social systems can be examined

RI
(Zhang et al., 2014). These social systems are imposed on and upheld by individuals within an
organisational structure and can, therefore, be used to explain both individual and organisational

SC
action (Dacin, Goodstein, & Scott, 2002). Institutions are referred to by Burton et al. (2010, p.
422) as “the formal rule sets (North, 1990), ex ante agreements (Bonchek & Shepsle, 1996), less

U
formal shared interaction sequences (Jepperson, 1991) and taken-for-granted assumptions
(Meyer & Rowan, 1977) that organisations and individuals are expected to follow.” Institutional
AN
theory is useful in identifying the structures including schemas, regulatory, social and cultural
factors that ensure the survival and legitimacy of an organisation (Bruton, Ahlstrom, & Li,
M

2010).
Institutional theory is particularly relevant for this study. As Stensaker et al. (2014, p. 194)
D

explain:
higher education institutions are often referred to as professional organizations driven
TE

by values and norms associated with academia. Hence, the accomplishment of

strategic objectives by higher educational institutions depends on contextual factors
such as the regulatory framework of the country, decision-making power, financial
EP

support, culture, communication, and assessment.

Likewise, both Slaughter (2014) and Bégin-Caouette (2016) contend that higher education
C

systems are comprised of institutions and that familiarity with institutional theories is vital for an
AC

accurate understanding of policy networks, forms of governance and connections between

different organizational fields. In a similar vein, Zhang et al. (2014) argue that an institutional
perspective is particularly relevant when examining educational settings since they do not
necessarily operate under market conditions. Rather, as Carolan (2008, p. 429) explains, they
compete for “political relevance and institutional legitimacy.” This outcome is achieved through
conforming to institutional rules to ensure social legitimacy while at the same time gaining
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
7

access to resources and avoiding risk (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Scott,
2008).
Tuttle and Dillard (2007) use institutional theory to frame an understanding of the
fundamental structural problems surrounding the lack of diversity of research topics within the
academic accounting literature. Rusch and Wilbur (2007) draw on institutional theory to

PT
understand how mimetic, coercive and normative isomorphism influenced academics,
administrators and the institution when working towards achieving organisational legitimacy

RI
through the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation.
Adler and Harzing (2009) use institutional theory to explain the dynamic network of institutions

SC
supporting academic rankings. Finally, in their study of the historical development of business
schools and business/management education in the United Kingdom Wilkins and Huisman

U
(2012) use institutional theory to explain trends in rankings and the positions of different types of
schools.
AN
2.2 Three institutional pillars, isomorphism and decoupling
M

Scott (2014) conceptualises institutions as comprising three pillars—that is, regulative,

normative and cultural-cognitive pillars—which are conveyed by various types of vehicles or
D

‘carriers,’ consisting of symbolic systems, relational systems, routines and artefacts. These
pillars together with “the associated activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to
TE

social life.” Further insight is provided by Zhang et al. (2014, p. 822) who explain that each of
these institutional pillars “provide[s] an identifiable basis of legitimacy with broad but different
EP

rationales, logics, bases of compliance and order.” Within an institutional setting the regulative
pillar provides a stabilising role (Zhang et al., 2014). It provides the organisational structures,
C

including formal and informal laws or rules, which regulate, monitor and constrain or sanction
behaviour (Scott, 2014). The regulative pillar is coercive and forces compliance through fear of
AC

sanctions for disobedience (Zhang et al., 2014; Casto & Sipple, 2011).
The normative pillar focuses on the norms and social obligations associated with
institutional order. As such, it constrains behaviour. However, it is not coercive. Rather,
behaviour is established, modified and reinforced through individuals’ participating in
organisational systems of values, expectations, norms and roles. This is particularly the case
where there are social and professional obligations that require compliance with a set of values,
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
8

expectations, norms and roles. The normative pillar, therefore, provides a frame through which
the actions of individual members of a social group can be evaluated (Zhang et al., 2014; Casto
& Sipple, 2011). Although the normative pillar constrains behaviour it is enabling and
empowering through balancing “rights as well as responsibilities, privileges as well as duties,
licenses as well as mandates” (Scott, 2014, p. 64).

PT
Finally, the cultural-cognitive pillar is embedded within an institution. According to Casto
and Sipple (2011) the embedded nature of this third pillar means that it is difficult to see,

RI
recognise and identify. This cultural-cognitive pillar involves aspects of institutions which are
related to a shared understanding of reality. Scott (2001, p. 58) describes it as the “socially

SC
mediated construction of a common framework of meaning.” That is, it relates to the things that
are taken for granted and the interaction between the cultural influence and the individual’s

U
process of interpretation. These are the shared or common conceptions, schemas, frames, beliefs
and other symbolic representations that provide the filter through which actors view their
AN
organisation and its environment and which guide behaviour (Zhang et al., 2014; Scott, 2014;
Casto & Sipple, 2011).
M

Scott’s (2014) three institutional pillars provide what Caronna (2004) describes as the
‘common meaning system’ embedded within a community of organisations—the organisational
D

field—which constitutes a recognised area of institutional life. The participants within this
community “interact more frequently and fatefully with one another than with actors outside” the
TE

community (Scott, 2012; Caronna, 2004). The three pillars, therefore, comprise the institution
and provide the culture, structure and meaning that shape the practices of the actors. Although
EP

the three pillars may provide a ‘common meaning system’ (Caronna, 2004), as Zhang et al.
(2014, p. 822) explain, “[T]he strength of each of the three pillars may vary in both space and
C

time, yet each pillar provides an explanation for the power of institutions.” When these “pillars
are aligned, the strength of their combined forces can be formidable” (Scott, 2014, p. 71). In such
AC

situations, the pressures act in concert to produce homogeneity of practice in changing

institutional orders (Lounsbury, 2008; Thornton, Ocasio, & Lounsbury, 2015).
Institutional stability or order is central to institutional theory. Kury (2007) suggests that
this stability or order is important in that it provides institutional actors with a framework
through which they can understand how organisations operate and what their expected
behaviours are. Drawing on this idea, Scott’s (2014) institutional pillars can be further mapped
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
9

using DiMaggio and Powell’s (1983) coercive, normative and mimetic institutional mechanisms.
Pressure to achieve legitimation initiates isomorphism (Zhang et al., 2014). Isomorphism is the
process that forces an organisation or individual to mimic others who face similar environmental
conditions (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Dacin et al., 2002; de Lange, O’Connell, Mathews, &
Sangester, 2010). Structures and processes that exist or are prevalent in other organisations that

PT
are relevant to their own environment are adopted to enhance legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell,
1983). That is, they become isomorphic with their environment and other similar organisations

RI
(DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Dacin et al., 2002; de Lange et al., 2010).
Scott’s (2014) institutional pillars act to ensure conformity with institutional order or

SC
ensure similarities between organisations, namely isomorphism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983;
Kury, 2007). As the regulative pillar comprises laws, standards, codes, rules, directives,

U
regulations, policies and formal structures of control that govern behaviour, coercive
isomorphism results from the implementation of practices commonly adopted or imposed by
AN
powerful actors in the field (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Kury, 2007; Zhang et al., 2014).
Coercive isomorphism, therefore, refers to organisations’ being forced into a particular course of
M

action. It arises from asymmetric power relationships, that is, formal or informal pressures
exerted by one organisation on another to change (Tuttle & Dillard, 2007). As de Lange et al.
D

(2010) explain, coercive isomorphism occurs “when an organisation depends on another for key
resources or for long-term survival that implies the adoption of specific attributes to be
TE

legitimated.” Empirical indicators of regulative elements that support institutions include

constitutions, laws, standards, codes, rules, directives, regulations, policies and formal structures
EP

of control (see, for instance, Colyvas & Jonsson 2011; Dowling & Pfeffer 1975; Ruef & Scott
1998; Scott, 2014). In the realm of higher education, indicators of the regulative element
C

comprise higher education proclamations/university acts, licensing/evaluative agencies, salary

scales and funding mechanisms (Bégin-Caouette, 2016). Bégin-Caouette (2016, p. 38) further
AC

claims that “public research funding is used as both a symbol of the relationship between the
states and universities and a policy instrument to influence the direction and nature of research.”
Normative isomorphism results from professionalism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), or as
Scott (2008, p. 55) explains, the “prescriptive, evaluative, and obligatory dimensions [of] social
life”, that is, compliance with values, norms, social and professional expectations or obligations.
These norms can arise from within the organisation through professional training regimes, trade
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
10

associations which provide certification or accreditation and other socialising mechanisms which
represent sources of institutional values (Kury, 2007; Tuttle & Dillard, 2007; de Lange et al.,
2010). Since normative pressures become particularly strong where a professional group
accredits certain practices as norms (Andrews, 2009), some authors tend to classify compliance
to standards set by accreditation agencies as a form of coercive isomorphism (Tuttle & Dillard,

PT
2007). Nonetheless, consistent with the dominant view (see, for example, Ruef & Scott, 1998;
Casile & Davis-Blake, 2002; Wilson & McKiernan, 2011; Scott, 2014), it is argued that these

RI
agencies impose standards, rules and values on schools and reinforce normative expectations
and, thus, are sources of normative isomorphism. Further examples of sources of normative

SC
isomorphism include the process of obtaining a PhD or equivalent degree in accounting which
define acceptable behaviour and the socialisation mechanism or process of a university career

U
path from lecturer to full professor (Tuttle & Dillard, 2007). Additionally, editorial boards and
other ‘gatekeepers’ in the academic publishing process are also characterised as sources of
AN
normative isomorphism as they enforce standards and norms that comport with the target
journal’s intents and mission (Baily, 2013).
M

Mimetic isomorphism refers to organisations’/actors’ benchmarking (or copying) each

other to replicate successful organisations/actors (Tuttle & Dillard, 2007). Scott (2014, pp. 68-
D

69) argues that the cultural-cognitive element of institutions provides “cognitive frames,”
“templates,” or a “set of collective meanings” for “particular types of actors and scripts for
TE

action.” Thus, mimetic isomorphism occurs since behaviours outside the cognitive frames or
templates are inconceivable. Scott (2014, p. 70) further adds that “actors who align themselves
EP

with the prevailing cultural beliefs are likely to feel competent and connected; those who are at
odds are regarded as, at best ‘clueless’ or, at worst, ‘crazy’.” For instance, decisions based on
C

published journal rankings and the establishment or revision of university promotion criteria are
examples of mimetic isomorphism (Tuttle & Dillard, 2007) resulting from cultural-cognitive
AC

pillars. As Tuttle and Dillard (2007, p. 393) explain, “If no normative criteria exist within the
organizational field or no powerful constituent(s) force the adoption of specific criteria, a school
will likely identify a ‘successful’ model school and adopt or adapt its promotion and tenure
criteria.” In the higher education setting, cognitive-cultural pillars relate to beliefs and values
regarding access, quality, efficiency, collegiality, academic freedom and others (Bégin-Caouette,
2016, p. 35).
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
11

Each of Scott’s (2014) pillars “may operate virtually alone in supporting the social order;
and in many situations, a given pillar assumes supremacy.” In addition, each of the pillars “may
support differing choices and behaviours” which could lead to “confusion and conflict” (Scott,
2014, p. 71; see also, Strang & Sine, 2002; Dacin, Goodstein, & Scott, 2002; Kraatz & Block,
2008). Underscoring the same point, Scott (2014, p. 73) argues that an individual or organisation

PT
that is facing conflicting requirements and standards may “find it difficult to take action since
conforming” to one powerful “sovereign authority” undermines its legitimacy with “the other,

RI
less powerful constituency.” Generally, rules, norms or schemas that are not supported by the
necessary “resources would eventually be abandoned and forgotten” (Sewell, 1992, p. 13). Thus,

SC
Giddens (1984) contends that individual actors tend to observe rules or practices supported by
stronger relations and more resources. Furthermore, Scott (2014, p. 79) argues that the regulative

U
and normative elements of an institution shape an actor’s interpretations of social reality and,
hence, could “strategically manipulate” the cultural-cognitive template that s/he uses to
AN
understand a role in an organisation.
Meyer and Rowan (1977) propose that organisations often ‘decouple’ their actual practices
M

from the official structures, prescriptions or accounts. Such decoupling, the authors explain,
occurs to address two problems. First, it occurs when the organisational demand for efficiency
D

(i.e., the task environment) conflicts with the demand for ceremonial conformity (that is, the
institutional environment). Second, it occurs when the demand for ceremonial conformity arises
TE

from different sources and when such sources send conflicting demands. Thus, Boxenbaum and
Jonsson (2017, p. 81) define decoupling as a circumstance where actors abide only superficially
EP

by institutional pressures, while adopting new structures without necessarily implementing the
related practices. According to Scott (2014), decoupling is more likely to occur when
C

“organizations are confronted with external regulatory requirements than with normative or
cognitive-cultural demands.” For instance, Coburn (2004, p. 233) documents evidence that
AC

teachers tend to respond more favourably to “normative messages than to regulative messages”
to effect changes to their teaching practice. Likewise, decoupling is more likely to occur “when
there is high symbolic gain from adoption but equally high cost is associated with their
implementation” (Scott, 2014, p. 187). Finally, Scott (2014, p. 186) contends that isomorphism
and decoupling could be used jointly to explain the disconnect between “structures or processes”
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
12

adopted by organisations to signal conformity and actual behaviour of actors within the
organisation.

3 Review of the Literature

3.1 Research in developed countries

PT
Research productivity has been covered in the wider academic literature since the 1970s
(Nygaard, 2015). An early study suggests that the research productivity of academics in

RI
developed countries is influenced largely by two factors: individual researcher-related factors
and department or university-related variables (Dundar & Lewis, 1998). Within the accounting

SC
discipline, studies identifying factors impacting research productivity commenced in earnest in
the 1990s (see, for example, Chow & Harrison, 1998; Fogarty & Ravenscroft, 1999; Fogarty &

U
Ruhl, 1997; Levitan & Ray, 1992; Prather-Kinsey & Rueschhoff, 1999). Individual researcher-
related factors include: persistence; creativity; learning capability; drive for advancement;
AN
external orientation; professional commitment; academic affiliation; and academic origin.
Departmental or institutional factors include: resources; infrastructure; leadership; employment
M

conditions; institutional and workforce characteristics; and the existence of doctoral programmes
(Babu & Singh, 1998; Kotrlik, Bartlett, Higgins, & Williams, 2002; Guthrie & Parker, 2014;
D

Long, Crawford, White, & Davis, 2009; Wills, Ridley, & Mitev, 2013; Moya, Prior, &
Rodriguez-Pérez, 2014). In a related vein, Kelly and Warmbrod (1986, p. 31) contend that
TE

“perceived institutional and departmental suport for research are the most important enablers for
research productivity.”
EP

In a meta-analysis of studies published between 1988 and 2008 Wills et al. (2013)
identified nine factors that explain accounting and business research output. University
C

attributes, intrinsic motivation and knowledge and skills of the individual were identified as the
most important factors that explain variations in research productivity of accounting academics.
AC

Other influences including: research assessment practice (national performance evaluation of

academics and universities); extrinsic motivation (tenure and promotion); and the mechanics and
politics of getting published were identified as less attenuating (or accentuating) factors (Wills et
al., 2013).
A similar study by White, James, and Burke (2012) demonstrates that personal and
situational-level factors distinguish between high- and low-productivity researchers in business
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
13

schools. High-performance individuals generally held a higher academic rank, possessed greater
time management skills, placed a higher value on research, had time available to undertake
research, had greater institutional support in the form of graduate assistants and sound research
support, taught fewer courses and worked for departments that prioritised research. In a similar
vein, Beattie and Goodacre (2012) identify non-cognitive factors (including social, cultural,

PT
institutional and external factors) as drivers of knowledge creation. In their study of successful
co-operations in co-authoring Tucker et al. (2016) also conclude that collaborative writing is

RI
“intrinsically a social process, where advances depend crucially on interaction with other
researchers.” Finally, Nygaard (2015, p. 528) concludes that individual research productivity is

SC
not simply a function of observable individual or institutional characteristics but is, to an extent,
an outcome of “the researchers’ subjective understanding of their own identity (including

U
abilities, desires and fears); their subjective interpretation of their institutional environments.”
AN
3.2 Factors impacting research in developing countries
The studies considered above were carried out within the context of the developed world.
M

As such they ignored the peculiarities of developing countries. Several papers have examined the
factors that negatively impact research in developing countries (Chan & Costa, 2005; Gyimah-
D

Brempong et al., 2006; Habib, Morrow, & Bentley, 2008; Meneghini, 2012; Ruiz, 2012; Salager-
Meyer, 2008). In an Anglophone Sub-Sahara African context this low output may be explained
TE

by the overemphasis placed on the teaching function by both universities and governments, high
student-staff ratios, shortage of resources including: funding inadequacy; research culture;
EP

quality of the workforce; low salaries that, at times, compel accounting academics to engage in
‘opportunity-driven consulting;’ and the professionalisation of accounting higher education
C

(Coetsee & Stegmann, 2012; Negash, 2011; Nieuwoudt & Wilcocks, 2005; Perkmann & Walsh,
2008; Venter & de Villiers, 2013; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017). Tauringana and Mangena (2012)
AC

note that the number of academics at African universities capable of undertaking quality research
is limited. Furthermore, only a small number of “African diaspora academics” (Tauringana &
Mangena, 2012, p. ix) are undertaking research on African issues (see also, Rahaman, 2010;
Nyamori, Abdul-Rahaman, & Samkin, 2017).
Many papers have explored the difficulties that academics from developing countries face
in getting published (see, for example, Chan & Costa, 2005; Gyimah-Brempong et al., 2006,
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
14

Habib et al., 2008; Meneghini, 2012; Ruiz, 2012; Salager-Meyer, 2008). Although the context of
the Argilés and Garcia-Blandon (2011) study was not a developing country, its findings are
pertinent to developing countries. They argue that publishing accounting research is more
difficult than publishing in the natural and social sciences. The reason is that accounting journals
are “scarce, publish fewer articles than other journals, apply high rejection rates, and the review

PT
process is lengthy, expensive and flawed” (Argilés & Garcia-Blandon, 2011, p. 12; see also
Bisman, 2010; Hopwood, 2007).

RI
Salager-Meyer (2008) highlights the widening disparities and inequities that exist in
academic publishing and the gulf between rich (developed or centre) and poor (developing or

SC
periphery) countries. She demonstrates that the broad geopolitical context of academic
publishing—that is, the science, publishers, nation-states and world power structures—

U
contributes to the divide, while the researchers themselves also play a role. Salager-Meyer
(2008) underscores the importance of publishers as these institutions have profit motives that
AN
compel them to monitor the quality of the papers published. Publishers achieve the highest
quality required through rigorous scientific peer-review processes. Achieving the standard
M

required appears to be difficult for academics from developing countries if they are not
connected to a network.
D

Editorial boards of journals, in cooperation with the publication industry, are responsible
for guiding the direction and setting the standards of published research. They act as the
TE

gatekeepers of knowledge in that they decide the research agenda and the quality of research that
gets published and, hence, influence research that gets recognised, funded, patented or
EP

copyrighted (Parker, Guthrie, & Gray, 1998; Guthrie, Parker, & Gray, 2004). Editorial boards are
also responsible for promoting new research areas and setting the standard by which new
C

knowledge is assessed (Meneghini, 2012; Milana et al., 2015; Parker et al., 1998). Another
challenge facing academics from developing countries is the dominance of the English language
AC

in the publication industry or, as Salager-Meyer (2008) describes it, the “proficiency in certain
genres of academic discourse” required to publish in top-tier journals (Meneghini, 2012; Ruiz,
2012; Coates, Sturgeon, Bohannan, & Pasini, 2002; Papaioannou, Machaira, & Theano, 2013).
While academics from developed countries make use of paid English language editors to check
and edit manuscripts to ensure that they are concise and unambiguous, these resources are often
not available in developing countries or are prohibitively costly (Ruiz, 2012).
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
15

What this means is that researchers in developing countries often resort to publishing their
work in ‘peripheral’ journals that report research that would normally be rejected by top-tier
journals either because the topic is of marginal interest to the gatekeepers and the clientele
(readers) of the journals or because the work lacks the necessary rigour for publication (Salager-
Meyer, 2008; Meneghini, 2012; Sunder, 2008). The resultant effect is that the work of scholars

PT
from developing countries seldom gets published in highly ranked journals or ever cited. There is
also a growing concern that due to the way research is measured by some Anglophone Sub-

RI
Sahara-African universities already scarce resources are being used unproductively as
researchers from the region do not distinguish between genuine ‘open source’ journals and

SC
journals that are regarded as ‘predatory’ when publishing their work (de Jager, van der Spuy, &
de Kock, 2016; Mouton & Valentine, 2017).

U
Nation-states also play a role in the level of publishing by academics in developing
countries. Habib et al. (2008) state that African universities have been government creations
AN
closely linked with nationalist agendas and so have primarily relied on government funding.
However, the economic crises faced by African countries have led to cuts in funding for higher
M

education, libraries, journal subscriptions, academics’ salaries and infrastructure. These cuts have
resulted in “strong tendencies to intellectual isolation and academic stagnation” (Habib et al.,
D

2008, p. 8; see also Bloom, Elliot, Canning, & Chan, 2006; Gyimah-Brempong et al., 2006). The
resource gap appears starker when one notes that most developed countries spend between 2 and
TE

4% of their GDP on research and development while Anglophone SSA countries where outdated
information is available spend less than 1% of their GDP for the same purpose (World Bank
EP

Group, 2018).
C

4. Research design and data collection

This section describes the research design, the development of the questionnaire and semi-
AC

structured interview instrument and the conduct of the interviews.

4.1 Research design

The data collected for this study were obtained from responses to a questionnaire and
interviews. An original questionnaire based on prior literature and experiences at several
universities in the Anglophone SSA region was developed. The survey sought information about
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
16

individual, departmental, country and international factors that impact the research output of
accounting academics employed by Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African universities (Tables 3 to 6).
The questionnaire also sought information on the individual respondent’s research and
publication record as well as her/his association with Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African
universities. The last section of the questionnaire aimed at capturing the respondent’s profile

PT
(gender, qualifications, experience). The final questionnaire comprised seven sections and 72
statements. The questionnaire was pilot tested and revised prior to distribution. The questionnaire

RI
and the protocol were approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) for meeting United
States government standards for research that involves human subjects. Eight semi-structured

SC
interview questions were developed from the responses to the questionnaires; these provided
further insight and depth to the study.

4.2
U
Collection of data - Administration of the questionnaire
AN
The 2014 webometrics ranking of universities was used to identify the top Anglophone
Sub-Sahara-African universities6 This approach was used because individuals who would not
M

experience language difficulty in completing the questionnaire or engaging in follow-up

interviews were targeted. In addition, accounting departments in these universities share similar
D

colonial legacies and, hence, may have similar institutional features. Email addresses of 550
accounting academics were hand collected from the websites of the selected universities; the
TE

mailing list of the African Accounting Forum at the American Accounting Association was also
used.7 The Qualtrics Research Suite was used to distribute the questionnaire. Two follow-up
EP

reminders were sent at two-weekly intervals after the initial email. The anonymous survey was
administered in the second half of 2015.
C

4.2.1 Survey responses

AC

6
This system was used despite the poor web presence of Anglophone SSA’s universities. Other ranking
systems do not cover Africa to the same extent as Webometrics. Webometrics ranks universities by region
and uses a weighted average score of presence, impact, openness and excellence. Openness and excellence
relate to a university’s research output as captured by Google Scholar and citation frequency.
(http://www.webometrics.info/ en/Methodology).
7
Fifty-two of the 550 accounting academics whose details were collected were commercial email addresses
(e.g., yahoo mail, google mail, etc.), while the remainder were institutional email addresses.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
17

The Qualtrics summary shows that of the 344 academics who opened the research
instrument, 65 commenced the questionnaire and between 45 and 48 individuals completed the
first section; however, only 32 completed the whole instrument. Although online surveys have
become common and are functionally useful, response rates are often disappointing (Lowe &
Locke, 2005). In this study the low response rate could in part be explained by the length and

PT
breadth of the questionnaire (Fan & Yan, 2010) as well as the research environment (i.e., factors
such as computer and internet facilities, frequent power outages, cost and speed of data

RI
downloads) in Anglophone SSA’s universities. Additionally, while individual academics are
inundated with survey requests, the risks of computer viruses, internet scams and identity theft

SC
impact response rates (Fan & Yan, 2010; Kaplowitz, Hadlock, & Levine, 2004; Manfreda et al.,
2008).

U
To assess the impact of non-response bias respondents were classified using the date of the
first and second reminders and the closing date. The respondents were grouped into an early
AN
respondents’ cohort (22 responses), a middle respondents’ cohort (15 responses) and a late
respondents’ cohort (11 responses). For each cohort, sample mean, mode and standard deviation
M

were calculated for Section I of the questionnaire (26 statements: between 45 and 48 responses).
Mean and median figures were tested for difference and the sub-samples appeared to be
D

statistically indistinguishable from one another.

TE

4.3 Collection of data - Semi-structured interviews

To obtain further insight into the individual, departmental, country and international factors
EP

that impact research output in Anglophone SSA university accounting departments eight semi-
structured interview questions were developed. The responses to a number of the individual
C

statements dealing with the individual, departmental, country and international factors were used
to contextualise the semi-structured interview questions. The first question asked the
AC

interviewees to rank the four factors (i.e., individual, departmental, country and international) in
terms of their impact on accounting research output in the context of the interviewee’s own
country and the broader Anglophone SSA region. The second question sought to obtain insights
into the apparent dissonance between what survey respondents said about their commitment to
research and the actual research output from the region. The third and fourth questions related to
the institutional structures of accounting departments and the global entrenchment of
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
18

professional organisations and audit/accounting firms and their impact on accounting academics’
research output. Questions five and six dealt with research funding (including that from private,
public and foreign sources) while question seven focused on the perceived bias against papers
that originate from the Anglophone SSA region. The last two questions were open-ended; there,
interviewees were asked what could be done to improve accounting research output in the

PT
region.
The interviews were conducted during November and December, 2015 (Round 1) and

RI
April and May, 2017 (Round 2). Prior to the interviews, the participants were briefed about the
findings of the survey and the reason(s) for the follow-up. The initial cohort of seven

SC
interviewees comprised individuals who had indicated on the survey that they were willing to
participate in follow-up interviews. For the second round of interviews, critical case sampling, a

U
form of purposive sampling (Patton, 1990), was used to identify participants with specific
experiences (Marshall, 1996; Coyne, 1997) or first-hand knowledge of working in accounting
AN
departments of Anglophone SSA’s universities. Academics in several countries in the region
were targeted and sent emails requesting their participation in the study. This process led to 15
M

additional interviews, resulting in a total of 22 interviews. Table 1 summarises the interviewees

by country of origin. Profiles of the interviewee participants are detailed in Appendix 1.
D

Table 1 Country of origin of interviewees

TE

Number of
Country Interviewees
Ethiopia 3
Ghana 3
EP

Kenya 2
Mauritius 1
Nigeria 6
C

South Africa 2
Tanzania 3
AC

Zimbabwe 1
Other* 1
Total 22
* Other refers to the UK-based interviewee.

Five of the interviewees were heads or former heads of accounting departments at

universities located in Anglophone SSA countries (i.e., Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and
Zimbabwe). Seventeen of the interviewees had earned doctoral degrees, six were professors or
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
19

associate professors while the remainder were lecturers or senior lectures. Five of the
interviewees were currently enrolled for doctoral studies. Sixteen of the interviewees were
employed at an Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African university at the time of the interview, while
five had formerly been a member of such a university department. Although these five
interviewees had moved to universities in developed countries it was presumed that they not only

PT
had institutional memory about their former Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African university but also
that they had the advantage of having experiences in developed countries with more supportive

RI
research environments. The final interviewee was a United Kingdom-based scholar with
extensive Anglophone SSA research experience including in editorial roles with international

SC
journals.
Interviews were terminated once 22 had been completed as saturation has been reached by

U
then (DiCicco‐Bloom & Crabtree, 2006; Mason, 2010; Walker & Brown, 2004; Baker &
Edwards, 2012;). No discernible differences in responses between the first and second round
AN
interviews or between individuals currently and formerly employed in departments of accounting
at Anglophone SSA’s universities were found.
M

As the interviewees were situated at various locations internationally conducting face-to-

face interviews was logistically impractical. Skype's Voice over Internet Protocol (VOiP) was
D

considered to be the most cost-effective means of conducting the interviews (Hay-Gibson, 2010;
Tucker et al., 2016). However, the reliability of internet services and uninterrupted Skype
TE

connections meant that 11 of the 22 interviews were administered by telephone. Each interview
(excluding time for reconnecting when calls dropped) lasted between 50 and 80 minutes.
EP

With the consent of the interviewees, all interviews were tape-recorded. The interviews
were transcribed shortly after the interview occurred to ensure that any uncertainties that may
C

have arisen during the interviews could be quickly identified and to ensure that the interviewees’
meaning was accurately captured. The de-identified interview transcripts were then analysed
AC

thematically (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Patton, 1990). Although the semi-structured interview
questions were initially based on the individual, departmental, country and international factors
that impact research output in accounting departments of Anglophone SSA’s universities, the
interview transcripts were read/reread, manually coded/highlighted and interpreted (Tucker et al.,
2016) to find recurring patterns and/or additional themes.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
20

The importance of reliability and validity in qualitative research has been highlighted
previously (Golafshani, 2003; Creswell & Miller, 2000; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tucker et al.,
2016; Schwandt, 2007). Drawing on Tucker et al. (2016), processes were put in place to provide
assurances of ‘credibility’ and ‘dependability.’ As Tucker et al. (2016, p. 192) explain,
credibility can be assured through the researchers’ discussing “the coding process in an effort to

PT
understand the significance of the themes and patterns emerging from the interviews.”
Dependability is assured through the accurate transcription of the interview and careful

RI
maintenance of records of contacts, interview dates, times and venues (Gelman & Basbøll, 2014;
Tucker et al., 2016).

SC
Finally, the interview transcripts were not analysed statistically. Rather, as Tucker et al.
(2016) explain, they were used to obtain both a broad and specific understanding, in the

U
participants’ own words, of their views regarding the factors that impact accounting research
output in Anglophone SSA.
AN
5. Findings
M

This section details the study’s findings. Consistent with the sequential design the results
of the questionnaire are described, followed by the interview findings.
D

5.1 Institutional and accounting academic profiles

TE

With a view to providing further context for the study, Table 2 presents a summary of the
institutional features of the accounting departments in 29 Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African
EP

universities compiled from the websites of Webometrics and the respective universities.
C

Insert Table 2 about here

AC

The table shows that the average number of full-time academics in Anglophone SSA’s
accounting departments is 32. Southern African (particularly South African) universities appear
to have larger academic staff complements (average size = 46) compared to their Eastern and
Western counterparts (the average number of academics in a department in these regions is 23
and 24, respectively). However, untabulated one-way ANOVA tests indicate that the differences
are not statistically significant (p value of 0.1446).
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
21

A significant difference in the employment of females (at 1% significance level) in

Anglophone SSA’s accounting departments was found. Departments of Accounting at Southern
African, in particular South African, universities tend to have a higher proportion of female
accounting academics (49%) compared to their Eastern (17%) and Western (26%) counterparts.
The proportion of accounting academics with a doctoral degree is approximately 24%.8

PT
However, in untabulated results the participation rate of accounting academics with a doctoral
degree is higher (at 1% significance level) in accounting departments of both Western (38%) and

RI
Eastern (27%) African universities compared to the 12% participation rate observed in Southern
African universities. This finding is in line with prior South African studies (Venter & de

SC
Villiers, 2013; Samkin & Schneider, 2014; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017). It is worthwhile noting
that the academic profile of the accounting academics at Anglophone SSA universities is

U
markedly different from the requirements of international accrediting agencies such as the
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). These agencies encourage the
AN
hiring of academic staff who already hold a doctoral degree, or those who are near completion, to
tenure track positions.9 However, in the Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African context, and South
M

Africa in particular, the influence exerted by the preeminent accounting professional body
ensures that professionally rather than academically qualified staff are recruited to universities
D

(see Venter & de Villiers, 2013; Samkin & Schneider, 2014; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017).
TE

5.2 Survey findings

This section details the research findings based on the survey and, in particular, addresses
EP

the research questions focusing on the various factors that may impact accounting research
output of individuals working at Anglophone SSA’s universities.
C

5.2.1 Individual factors

AC

Tables 3 to 6 provide the survey results for each set of factors. Table 3 contains 26
statements that relate to the individual academic’s attributes.
8
In some cases, the number of doctoral degree holders reported on departmental websites includes those in
finance and other cognate disciplines. This means that there are fewer accounting doctoral degree holders
than reflected on the websites.
9
For more on this see http://www.aacsb.edu/-/media/aacsb/docs/accreditation/standards/accountingstds_2013
_update-3oct_final.ashx?la=en
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
22

Insert Table 3 about here

Consistent with the literature (Babu & Singh, 1998; Dundar & Lewis, 1998; Wills et al.,
2013), a majority of the respondents either “strongly agree” or “agree” that they are committed

PT
and motivated to undertake research. Additionally, 79% of the respondents either “strongly
agree” or “agree” that they are: working to complete research; ambitious; and striving to publish

RI
their research. Survey results also show that participants consider that their motivation and
commitment to engage in research stem primarily from the following factors: their understanding

SC
of the current literature and methodologies; ability to communicate findings; availability of
research outlets; recognition by colleagues/department/university; opportunity for sabbatical

U
leave; promotion criteria being aligned with research; and the existence of a clearly articulated
promotion policy.
AN
5.2.2 Departmental or university-related factors
M

A summary of participants’ responses to 21 departmental or university-related attributes

that may impact the level of accounting research is presented in Table 4.
D

Insert Table 4 about here

TE

A plurality of respondents either “strongly disagree” or “disagree” that there is (are):

EP

suitably qualified research supervisors; potential co-authors; adequate research infrastructure;

departmental pressure for excellence in research; funding; clearly defined promotion and tenure
C

policies; and consistent enforcement of tenure/continuing appointment policy. Only a minority of

respondents agreed that resources, circumstances or policies that foster research productivity
AC

exist in Anglophone SSA’s accounting departments. For example, a majority of the respondents
disagreed with the statement that funds for supporting research could be easily accessed.
While respondents indicated that academic staff with doctoral degrees publish, on average,
more than those without a doctorate, 65% of the respondents indicated that Anglophone SSA’s
accounting departments are staffed largely with individuals who do not hold a doctoral degree;
rather, they hold professional qualifications (73%). However, contrary to the evidence in Samkin
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
23

and Schneider (2014), a majority of the respondents did not agree that female academics, on
average, publish more than their male colleagues.
A plurality of respondents also disagreed with the statement that continued employment of
full-time academics in Anglophone SSA’s accounting departments hinges on publishing in peer-
reviewed journals. Only 38% of respondents agreed that the head or chair of the

PT
department/school is an accomplished researcher. Finally, 70% of respondents either disagreed
or were ambivalent about the statement that a research active academic is paid relatively more

RI
than a non-research active colleague. Reading these responses in conjunction with the proportion
of academic staff with a doctoral degree reported in Table 2 highlights the weak research

SC
capacity of accounting departments in the Anglophone SSA region.

U
5.2.3 National or country factors
Table 5 provides a summary of participants’ responses to 14 statements that describe
AN
national or country factors that either encourage or discourage accounting academics’
engagement in research.
M

Insert Table 5 about here

D

A majority of participants agreed that poor salaries offered by universities in the

Anglophone SSA region discourage potential researchers from joining academia. The low
TE

salaries encourage academics to engage in outside non-research activities to supplement their

income. Although a sizeable majority of respondents confirmed the existence of a national
EP

association of accounting academics and that such associations promoted academic research, a
comparable number disagreed that accounting professional organisations provide financial
C

support for research endeavours by accounting academics in the region. Only a minority of
respondents believed that accounting research funding was adequate, or that the accounting
AC

profession (associations and/or audit firms) provided financial support for research.
Contrary to the findings by Smeby (2003) and Evans et al. (2013), a majority of
respondents agreed that the recent increases in student enrolment and massification have led to
decreases in accounting research output.10 However, contradictorily, a number of respondents did

10
The extent of massification in the Anglophone SSA context can be seen from Atuahene (2011) where he
makes the following observation:
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
24

agree that the research environment in Anglophone SSA’s accounting departments had improved
and that the academic freedom enjoyed by accounting academics in some countries has led to
increased publications. Finally, only a minority of respondents agreed that accounting
programmes offered by foreign-based transnational virtual universities that export degrees to the
region had contributed to an increase in research output in Anglophone SSA.

PT
5.2.4 International factors

RI
Table 6 provides a detailed summary of participants’ responses to 12 statements aimed at
capturing the impact of international factors on the research productivity of accounting

SC
academics in the region.
Insert Table 6 about here

U
A majority of respondents agreed that commoditisation of accounting higher education
AN
(including, for example, large classes, profit centres, grade and rank inflation, casualisation of
labour) has changed traditional labour processes in academia and, through its direct and indirect
M

effects, has undermined research. The data also show the perception that Anglophone SSA’s
accounting researchers have towards the international accounting research establishment. For
D

instance, a plurality of respondents did not view the established tools for assessing research
quality (such as rating of academics, journals, universities and the resulting alignment of
TE

funding) as effective instruments for advancing accounting research in the Anglophone SSA
region (see also Adler & Harzing, 2009; Sunder, 2008). A majority of respondents also perceived
EP

the existence of editorial and reviewer bias against certain genres of research and methods,
which made it difficult for accounting academics in Anglophone SSA to publish research
C

relevant to developing countries in top-ranked journals. Finally, consistent with the growing
concern about the effectiveness of foreign aid, the responses given by respondents to the six
AC

enrollment in African universities has more than tripled since the 1980s, from 660,360 to
3,406,063 in 2005. Between 1985 and 2005 most countries have seen dramatic enrollment
increases. For example, Cameroon has seen a rising enrolment from 21,438 to 99,864 (366%),
Ethiopia, from 27,338 to 191,165 (599%), Ghana, from 8,324 to 110184 (1224%), Senegal,
from 13,354 to 59,127 (343%), and Tanzania, from 4863 to 51,080 (950%) (Yizengaw, 2008).
Without a concomitant increase in teaching faculty, this condition has added to the teaching
load of faculty members, thereby preventing them from participating in any active research. (p.
331)
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
25

statements (7 to 12, Table 6) that dealt with the link, if any, between foreign aid and research
capacity building in the region were ambivalent.

5.3 Interview findings

This section details the findings from the two rounds of semi-structured interviews. The

PT
findings are discussed within five sub-headings and recurring themes.

RI
5.3.1 Factors which play a dominant role
The interviewees were asked to rank the individual, department/university, country and

SC
international factors that impact accounting research in the context of the interviewee’s own
country and the broader Anglophone SSA region.

U
A number of the interviewees found this question difficult. Two of the three Ghanaian
participants (8 and 9) believed that individual factors are more important than departmental
AN
factors. They pointed out that although their school allocates research funds, individual staff
members do not spend the allocation or bid for new funds. Additionally, other interviewees who
M

rated individual factors as more important reasoned that the department cannot do much if
individuals do not possess research competencies. Participant 6 from Ethiopia concurred with
D

participants from Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria and Tanzania (that is, Participants 7, 11, 12, 15 and
16, respectively) and underscored the idea that the individual academic’s behaviour (ambition,
TE

effort, striving to publish, discipline) is, to a large extent, determined by her/his surroundings
(Nygaard, 2015; Scott, 2014; Tucker et al., 2016; Su & Baird, 2015).
EP

When discussing country factors, a majority of the interviewees agreed that research is
intricately connected to national policy (Habib et al., 2008; Bloom et al., 2006; Johnson &
C

Lundvall, 2003). In countries where government funds are allocated to universities based on
research output (for example, South Africa, the United Kingdom and New Zealand) or where
AC

universities are considered to be part of the public service (for example, Tanzania, where
academics are ‘deployable’ or ‘seconded’ to the civil services), government is the key driver of
research (Participants 3, 10, 15 and 19). For example, Participant 1 explained how in Ethiopia
the national environment shapes the accounting academy and its members as follows.
Institutional is number one and in the Ethiopian context, then country is next .... In
the Ethiopian context, no matter how we are educated (trained), I do not believe that
there is a right environment to engage in active research .... Take, for example,
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
26

faculty at the Addis Ababa University, they have to take up three to four jobs to
make ends meet. [It is] your consultancy and external teaching that brings you
money. Your research does not lead to anything.

Drawing on his experience in Nigeria, Participant 7 highlighted the link between the
accounting department and government policy on the one hand, and the individual and the

PT
department on the other as follows:
The school is the most important factor and what national government is asking is

RI
important; the individual acts within the framework of the school.

Participants 8, 10, 13, 15 and 21 who had experience in heading accounting departments in

SC
Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, respectively describe the environment under
which the accounting academy in each of those countries operates. They detailed a range of

U
research constraints that may be unfamiliar to their colleagues in developed countries. For
example, in Kenya and Zimbabwe, these were poor salaries or non-payment of salaries
AN
altogether; in Nigeria, they were the notorious power outages that obstruct research.
Additionally, although several PhD programmes were introduced as a response to massification,
M

a critical shortage of qualified supervisors exists. Participants from Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius,
Nigeria, Tanzania and Zimbabwe (that is, Participants 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 22, respectively)
D

indicated that PhD thesis supervisors themselves do not have a PhD degree in accounting and
are, therefore, unfamiliar with the contemporary accounting literature. While two of the five
TE

heads of department (Ghana and Zimbabwe) rated individual factors higher than institutional
factors, they also acknowledged the relationship between individual, institutional and country-
EP

level variables stemming from public funding. The recurring theme is that, while institutional
factors are rated highly, they are followed by individual factors and also that the dominance of
C

the two factors appears to be context dependent.

AC

5.3.2 Commitment to research

In the survey, Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African academics indicated their commitment to
(and motivation for) research (Table 3). The reasons for the gap between what the respondents
said about their research effort (that is, high level of commitment, ambition, motivation, striving
to publish) and their actual research published in top-tier journals needed to be understood.
Interviewees speculated that the survey respondents may not adequately understand the research
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
27

competency required to publish in these journals. They also speculated the survey responses may
have much to do with the type of research training the respondents have, and their inexperience
in ‘crafting’ material that is acceptable for publication (Golden-Biddle & Locke, 2007).
Participant 8 observed that for a research to come to fruition (that is, be published in reputable
journals), both the desire and the capacity to undertake rigorous research are necessary. S/he

PT
noted “to have a PhD is one thing; to do a rigorous research is another.”

RI
5.3.3 Structure and policies of accounting departments and role of accounting/audit firms
Consistent with the survey findings and prior research (Samkin & Schneider, 2014; Venter

SC
& de Villiers, 2013; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017), interviewees agreed that Anglophone SSA’s
accounting departments are large undergraduate teaching units. This situation is unlikely to

U
change in the foreseeable future primarily because of the current university funding structure,
graduate labour market and the influence of professional organisations and audit firms on the
AN
accounting academy. Participants, including those with experience in heading accounting
departments, pointed out that increased teaching and administrative workloads,
M

professionalisation of the curricula and the emerging institutional norms and cultures of the
academic unit all negatively impact research output. While Participant 7 questioned why the rest
D

of Anglophone SSA did not take lessons from the Nigerian massification experience of the
1970s, other participants (that is, Participants 18, 19 and 21) argued that massification cannot be
TE

used as an ipso facto excuse for low research output. These participants suggested that some of
the teaching funds could be directed to research and that workloads can be mitigated through the
EP

hiring of teaching assistants (Evans et al., 2013; Negash 2011; Smeby, 2003).
Another factor that may further explain the conspicuous absence of publication in top-tier
journals appears to be the emphasis on quantity over quality of publications.11 For example,
C

Participant 19 indicated that no incentive exists for an accounting academic to publish in top-tier
AC

international journals as such publications carry equivalent weighting as the local journals. Three
interviewees who also served as an editor, associate editor or guest editor of reputable journals
outlined the limitations of papers that originate from the region. They advised retraining
accounting academics, co-authoring with international scholars, engaging in joint research

11
First-hand experience of working in Anglophone SSA, knowledge of colleagues’ research outputs as well as
an examination of the publication records of a number of Anglophone SSA academics also support this
position.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
28

projects that target specific journals (Tucker et al., 2016) and the creation of joint PhD
programmes by twining universities (as practised in developed countries such as Sweden) as
useful ways to improve research capacity in Anglophone SSA’s universities (Participant 2). In a
nutshell, research competency and institutional policy about hiring and performance evaluation
were frequently raised as important factors.

PT
Given the reluctance of audit/accounting firms (including the local affiliates of the Big 4),
the preeminent professional accounting bodies as well as the local professional bodies to support

RI
accounting research in the region, it was necessary to understand how interviewees believe
universities should respond to the challenge.12 Participants 1, 3 and 19 argued that departments’

SC
approach to the firms must change. One of their proposals is for the accounting departments to
ask the firms where their interests lie. For example, do they lie in: funding teaching; improving

U
research programmes; specialisation in certain genre of research that the local affiliates of global
audit firms cannot easily import; academics spending their sabbaticals at audit firms and/or
AN
auditor regulating bodies; and carrying out research that has a positive impact on business.
Participant 3 noted the intensity of competition between audit/accounting firms and universities
M

for consulting contracts. S/he notes that auditing/accounting firms have opened multi-purpose
training centres, labelled as ‘universities’ and ‘academies’ (for example, PwC’s Business School;
D

KPMG Academy in South Africa) that generate cash and conduct occasional surveys. The
product is then sold as ‘research.’ S/he suggested the following:
TE

I think … a multi-phased approach is necessary. Our research must be seen as having

some impact on how business is done. Summary of research papers indicating how it
is relevant to business can be provided. The audit firms must realise that it is going to
EP

affect the type of clerks that they get. We have noticed that firms have started to pay
for bursaries to our masters’ students though as retention incentive.
C

5.3.4 Public funding of accounting research

AC

As with the findings from the survey, almost all participants noted that public investment
in accounting research has been practically non-existent (see also Zeleza, 2002; Atuahene, 2011).
Given the historic lack of investment and support for the hard sciences including agriculture,
science and technology by SSA universities (Yizengaw, 2008; Wilson-Strydom & Fongwa,

12
While it is acknowledged that a number of professional associations do offer competitive research funding,
the ones that are based in Anglophone SSA do not. However, the funding provided by those professional
associations based outside the region requires submission of sophisticated, and often project-oriented,
funding proposals.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
29

2012; Mouton et al., 2015), it is not surprising that the interviewees suggested that the lack of
investment in accounting research could be explained in part by governments’ prioritisation of
other disciplines including agriculture, science, technology and medicine over social sciences
and the prioritisation of economics over business or accounting. Reflecting on their experiences
about the research environments in Botswana, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria,

PT
South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, participants propose that developing countries have to
make trade-offs, for example, between spending on primary education and higher education on

RI
the one hand, and between teaching and research on the other. In other words, government has a
role to play in setting national policy on research (Romer 1994; Zeleza, 2002; Yizengaw, 2008;

SC
Atuahene, 2011; Ngai & Sameniego, 2011; Wilson-Strydom & Fongwa, 2012; Mouton, Gaillard,
& van Lill, 2015; World Economic Forum, 2017).

U
The gap in investment is also reflected in the neutrality of the survey respondents about the
role of foreign aid in building research capacity in the accounting departments. Interviewees
AN
from Ghana (Participants 8, 9 and 18), Kenya (Participants 11 and 13), Mauritius (Participant
12), Nigeria (Participants 7, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 22), South Africa (Participants 3 and 4) and
M

Zimbabwe (10) indicated that accounting departments have not been beneficiaries of foreign aid.
Only interviewees from Tanzania (Participants 15, 20 and 21) dissented. Again, with the
D

exception of Tanzanian interviewees, the other interviewees, by and large, confirmed what is
documented in the literature and in the survey findings and agreed that foreign aid did not have
TE

an impact in building research capacity in the region. Most interviewees argued that the aid is
necessary but that it needs to be channelled “directly to the department,” as so doing would
EP

enhance accountability in resource use. They added that foreign aid should come in a form that is
mutually beneficial and that Anglophone SSA’s universities should not merely be data collection
C

points (Participants 10, 11, 21 and 22). The recurring patterns here are: (i) absence of public
investment and (ii) absence foreign aid aimed at building accounting research capacity.
AC

5.3.5 Journal editors, gatekeepers and publishing bias

It was considered necessary to understand the source of Anglophone SSA’s accounting
researchers’ perception of editor and reviewer bias against submissions made to top-tier journals
from authors situated in the continent. As in Salager-Meyer (2008) and Milana et al. (2015),
several interviewees concurred with the survey respondents that bias exists in the publishing
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
30

process. For instance, Participant 7 suggested that there are flaws and inequities in the quality
control process and pointed out that “when you are the big guy you get published in [name of
journal withheld], it comes in one way or another, often as a note, review or a keynote speech.”
Interviewee participants believed that papers also get sent to soft/hard reviewers as editors have
the power to select who the reviewers are going to be and ultimately what gets published

PT
(Guthrie & Parker, 2014; Tucker et al., 2016).
Participant 8 stated that, although every journal has its own objective, a journal situated in

RI
a developed country may view Anglophone SSA from a particular perspective, or view the
research findings as being universal. This notion extends the Afro-centric/Euro-centric debate to

SC
accounting discourse. Participants 1, 3 and 19 identified what they considered an “implicit bias”
against research originating from authors based in developing countries, particularly in

U
empirically oriented journals. However, experienced interview participants highlighted concerns
with the reliability and sufficiency of the data that some research is based on. These interview
AN
participants acknowledged that rejecting the paper is often the safest option for the journal editor.
However, a number of interviewees (that is, Participants 3, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12) contended that the
M

high rejection rate faced by researchers from developing countries has to do with the quality or
currency of the papers rather than their origin. In short, bias, quality and journal paradigm were
D

recurring themes.
TE

6. Discussions
This section integrates the findings of the questionnaire and the themes that emerged from
EP

the analysis of the interview data and discusses the factors that impact accounting research
output in Anglophone SSA. Integrating the findings of the research questions into the theoretical
C

framework of the paper provides insight into the factors that impact accounting research output
in the region.
AC

6.1 Individual academic’s attributes that impact accounting research output

Drawing on the conceptualisation that an organisational field is a group that constitutes a
recognised area of institutional life, accounting and the academics making up the discipline
represent a separate field of activity within universities (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Tuttle &
Dillard, 2007). What could be established from the survey findings is that accounting academics
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
31

in the Anglophone SSA region acknowledge the importance of research output to legitimise their
position and ensure a successful career (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Tuttle & Dillard, 2007;
Rusch & Wilber 2007; Scott, 2014). This acknowledgement suggests that accounting academics
in the region have assessed the field and, thus, are aware of the research expectations of salient
stakeholders. That is, they experience the research expectations in the form of normative and

PT
cultural-cognitive pressures and internalise them in defining their professorial roles (Scott, 2014,
p. 64). Thus, these academics appear to be disposed toward copying the habits of successful

RI
colleagues in the discipline (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Tuttle & Dillard, 2007).
Furthermore, for a small number of individuals, personal recognition in the form of

SC
acknowledgement by colleagues, department, school, or univeristiy appear to motivate them to
engage in research activities (see, Rusch & Wilbur, 2007). However, this favorable disposition

U
towards research, and hence a potential for insititutional isomorphism, has not translated into
output, particularly in top-tier journals. Some interviewees point to the possibility of survey
AN
respondents not understanding the research competencies necessary to publish in these outlets.
Their suggestion underscores the necessity of understanding ‘subjective interpretations’ of what
M

constitutes quality research in the eyes of accounting academics in the region—that is, the
cognitive-cultural templates that academic actors positioned in Anglophone SSA’s accounting
D

departments use to make evaluations, judgements and inferences about the quality of their own
research (Nygaard, 2015; Scott, 2014).
TE

Normative isomorphism is associated with a mature field such as academic accounting.

Anglophone SSA’s accounting academics are also susceptible to normative isomorphism due to
EP

what Tuttle and Dillard (2007, p. 393) refer to as “conforming to a privileged worldview within
an organisational field.” In Western universities, normative isomorphism occurs through
C

background experiences which include the receipt of doctoral qualifications for employment in
academia, maintaining certain staff ratios and membership of (or accreditation by)
AC

accounting/business schools’ associations. Although a majority of the accounting academics in

the Anglophone SSA region do not hold a terminal degree in the discipline, the findings indicate
that those who do tend to publish more than those who do not; similarly, those who have
received research training claim that it ‘encouraged’ them ‘to engage in research.’ This finding,
to an extent, suggests that there is an element of normative isomorphism taking place in the
disposition of accounting academics toward research in the region. However, this factor should
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
32

be viewed with some degree of circumspection as most accounting academic staff in the region
hold professional rather than research qualifications. Respondents, therefore, subjectively
interpret their own individual position in the context of their own cultural-cognitive space
(Nygaard, 2015) which may not necessarily comport with the requirements for conducting
research that is publishable in top-tier journals.

PT
6.2 Departmental or university-related factors that impact accounting research output

RI
The survey and interview findings suggest that the research environments in the accounting
departments in the region are generally epitomised by: less than convincing ‘urge for excellence

SC
in research;’ less stringent publication requirements for academic tenuure and promotion;
publication policies that encourage quantity over quality; poorly defined and enforced tenure

U
criteria; inadequate salaries and lack of differentiated compensation for ‘research-active
academics:’13 lack of qualified research mentors, supervisors and/or co-authors; inadequate
AN
research funding, leave and infrastracture; and prevalence of department chairs who are not
necessarily ‘accomplished researchers.’ The findings in this paper can be compared to Zeleza’s
M

(2002, p. 14) reflections on teaching in Kenya in the 1980s.

African academics cannot, of course, be entirely blamed for moonlighting in the
worlds of consultancies and the informal sector, faced as they are by low pay and
D

recruitment and reward structures marred by corruption, patronage and politicisation.

I remember vividly, when I taught in Kenya in the 1980s, the juggling I had to do to
TE

cling to a rapidly evaporating middle-class lifestyle. In addition to my formal job at

Kenyatta University, I also taught courses at the Catholic University of Eastern
Africa 30 miles away, and learned to hustle my talents to foundations on projects that
EP

meant little to me as a historian. Needless to say, my research suffered. In the six

years I was there I witnessed the research and teaching environment deteriorate at the
same time as the university system, both public and private, was undergoing
unbridled, unplanned, and often chaotic expansion. Classrooms became
C

overcrowded, teaching loads expanded, research funds virtually dried up, and
political intervention intensified as the Moi regime was faced with an increasingly
AC

restive civil society and political opposition.

Kelly and Warmbrod (1986) argue that “perceived institutional and departmental support
for research are the most important enablers for research productivity” (p. 31). The cognitive-

13 Venter and de Villiers (2013) and Verhoef and Samkin (2017), however, describe the existence of two-tier
promotion and remuneration system in South African universities that favor accounting academics who are
professionally qualified than academically qualified. A practice of salary loading to recruit and retain
professionally qualified staff to teach accounting also exists.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
33

cultural pressure arising from the less than adequate ‘urge for excellence in reseach;’ the
normative pressure stemming from weak publication, promotion and tenure policies; and the
regulative pressure stemming from inadequate research funding and poor salaries augumented
with inadequate ‘resources’ constrain engagement in research activities in Anglophone Sub-
Sahara African universities. While some academics see engagement in research and publication

PT
as a way to legitimise their survival, they also engage in ‘opportunity-driven academic
consulting’ to supplement their earnings (Habib et al., 2008). This activity, however, undermines

RI
their ability to commit to research endeavours (Perkmann & Walsh, 2008).
Consistent with Sewell (1992, p. 13), it is argued that behaviour that is not “empowered or

SC
regenerated by resources would eventually be abandoned and forgotten, just as resources without
cultural schemas to direct their use would eventually dissipate and decay”. Although individual

U
academics in the region appear to be positively disposed toward research, neither the cultural-
cognitive nor the normative pressures stemming from the research environment in the accounting
AN
departments in the region appear to support such a behaviour. Furthermore, weak regulative
pressures epitomised by inadequate research funding, poor salaries and lack of the necessary
M

‘resources’ to foster quality research may have contributed to the abandonment of research
activities by accounting academics in the region.
D

6.3 National, international and other factors impacting accounting research output
TE

The survey and interview findings also indicate that the regulative (coercive), normative,
and cultural-cognitive elements that operate at national and international levels have a bearing on
EP

the behaviour of accounting academics in the region. For example, the commoditisation,
massification and vocationalisation of (accounting) higher education (Guthrie & Parker, 2014;
C

Milton & O’Connell, 2009) have turned the accounting departments of Anglophone SSA’s
universities in general, and South African universities in particular, into large undergraduate
AC

teaching units that are primarily preoccupied with knowledge dissemination, revenue generation
and teaching to the syllabi prescribed by professional organisations (see, for example, Venter &
de Villiers, 2013; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017). While this situation appears to resemble what has
occurred in developed countries, the reality is often very different. While an individual staff
member in a developed country may have overall responsibility for teaching a class of several
hundred students, teaching, tutorial, administrative and marking support is usually available.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
34

However, in Anglophone SSA’s universities this is not the case. Often a single staff member is
responsible for all aspects of a course. A further complicating matter is that while the language
of instruction is English, this may often be a student’s second or even third language.
In practical terms, programme accreditation by outside organisations, particularly the
professional accounting body in South Africa, ensures that departments continue to maintain

PT
hiring, promotion and remuneration policies that favour chartered accountants (Venter & de
Villiers 2013; Verhoef & Samkin, 2017). The reluctance of professional organisations and

RI
accounting/auditing firms to provide funds for accounting research further constrains research
activity by accounting academics in the region. A possible reason for the reluctance of

SC
accounting/auditing firms to fund university research is the possibility that such research would
compete with that undertaken by the multi-purpose training centres set up as ‘universities’ and

U
‘academies.’ This idea suggests that normative pressures stemming from accreditation or
certification standards by professional bodies, the corresponding professionalisation of
AN
accounting education and the lack of the necessary ‘resources’ that support research (Scott,
2014) are shaping the accounting academe and the disposition of academics in the region toward
M

research.
Accounting academics in Anglophone SSA’s universities perceive challenges associated
D

with deficiencies, at the national level, in research assessment policies and procedures; research
funding schemes that disfavour accounting/business research; editorial and/or reviewer biases
TE

that are not necessarily favourable for research carried out in (or about) the region; and internet
connectivity issues. In their opinion, all of these undermine research activity (see also Zeleza,
EP

2002; Atuahene, 2011). Although these perceptions would have to be viewed with some
circumspection, they point to how perceived regulative and normative institutions and lack of
C

supporting ‘resources’ work in tandem to undermine an accounting academic’s research

productivity in the region. After all, as Kelly and Warmbrod (1986, p. 31) contend, it is the
AC

individual’s perception about the institutional support s/her receives that largely determines
her/his research activities. An individual’s perception of institutional support determines, to a
degree, how the staff member sees her/his professorial role. That is, it defines the cognitive-
cultural template that s/he would use to ‘interpret’ the ‘social reality.’ This view is consistent
with Scott’s (2014, p. 79) observation that “cultural-cognitive elements are amenable to strategic
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
35

manipulation” by the regulative and normative elements, as the latter tends to “shape the
interpretations” made by the actors.

6.4 Summary
The findings in this paper indicate that an individual academic’s commitment, motivation

PT
and research competency are important factors in determining the research productivity of
accounting academics in the region. It also shows the critical role of not only ‘processes and

RI
structures’ adopted at department and/or university level (e.g., recruitment, tenure and promotion
policies and research assessment policies) but also the availability of the requisite ‘resources’

SC
(e.g., departmental leadership, research supervisors, co-authors and research infrastructure) in
accentuating or attenuating the research productivity of an accounting academic in the

U
Anglophone SSA region. Outside forces such as commoditisation, lack of public and private
investment in accounting research, quality of manuscripts and perceived bias from journal
AN
“gatekeepers” also impact the research output of the region. Furthermore, accounting academics
in the Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African universities are at the receiving end of pressures from
M

agents such as the nation-states, professional associations and audit/accounting firms (Scott,
2014, p. 119). However, it was found that institutional factors at departmental and/or university
D

level appear to have a more significant role in shaping an accounting academic’s disposition
towards research than do her/his personal attributes.
TE

Accounting academics in the Anglophone SSA region are favourably disposed toward
research. However, the regulative (coercive) pressure stemming from departmental, university
EP

and government ‘processes and structures’ in the region appear to be weak. Consequently,
accounting academics in the region are unlikely to be persuaded to adopt a strong research
C

culture. Further, the normative and cognitive-cultural pressures stemming from professional
associations and audit/accounting firms that push accounting departments to focus on producing
AC

accounting/auditing clerks (Scott, 2014, p. 71) appear to be more potent in the region than
elsewhere. Consistent with the contention of institutional theorists, academic actors in
Anglophone SSA’s universities focus on carrying out teaching rather than research because the
latter is simultaneously constrained by the institutional pillars, while the former is empowered by
the existing social structures (Scott, 2014, p. 93). In other words, factors that constitute the
regulative pillar which support research are weak, whereas the factors that constitute the
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
36

normative and cultural-cognitive pillars that promote teaching are strong. Thus, the “pillars are
misaligned” and those that promote teaching dominate. As a result, the accounting academics in
the region can not deliver on their professed research ambition. This misalignment explains the
paucity of meaningful research participation by accounting academics in the Anglophone SSA
region.

PT
Given the findings in this paper, an important question that needs to be raised is: How do
accounting academics in the region earn legitimacy to ensure successful careers, given the

RI
challenges they face in developing a research profile? The disregard for research is supported by
‘process and structures’ residing at multiple levels (Colyvas & Jonsson, 2011). For instance,

SC
accreditation or certification by entrenched professional bodies (particularly in South Africa) is
routinely employed as a prime indicator of teaching rather than research legitimacy (Dowling &

U
Pfeffer, 1975; Ruef & Scott, 1998). The low research bar that focuses on quantity rather than
quality of scholarship, indiscriminate reward structures that fail to recognise research-active staff
AN
and poor research culture are yet more departmental and/or university-related factors that support
Anglophone SSA’s universities’ accounting faculties’ disengagement from research. The
M

findings in this paper suggest that effort that would create an enabling department and/university
environment (that is, better reward structures, improved infrastructure, tighter research
D

requirements) along with tightened regulative pillars could improve the research output of
accounting academics in the Anglophone SSA region.
TE

7. Conclusions
EP

Having the ability to undertake research and successfully publish the findings in peer-
reviewed journals is a necessary prerequisite for an academic career. However, a number of
C

factors may exist that conspire against individuals, particularly those in developing countries,
from being able to engage with the wider academic research community. The object of this paper
AC

was to identify those factors that impact accounting research output in Anglophone SSA’s
universities. A sequential research process comprising a questionnaire followed by interviews
was used to answer four research questions developed to achieve the paper’s objectives. This
paper’s primary contribution to the literature is that it identifies those factors that impact
accounting academics’ research productivity in Anglophone Sub-Sahara-African universities, an
area neglected in prior research. The theoretical contribution of this paper is that it integrates the
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
37

research findings with the theoretical framework to provide insight into the interplay between the
factors and the different institutional forces that impact accounting research output in the
Anglophone SSA region.
Despite using both a questionnaire and interviews to collect data, this study nevertheless
has a number of limitations. These relate primarily to the environment under which the research

PT
was undertaken. First, the number of responses to the questionnaire was disappointing. This poor
response rate can partly be explained by the problems associated with conducting an electronic

RI
survey in a continent where internet connection is weak, where access to it is more expensive
than in developed countries, and where power outages are a frequent occurrence. Second, the

SC
length and breadth of the instrument may also have resulted in questionnaire fatigue. Third,
although the interviewees were drawn from a wide number of countries, their views are likely to

U
be influenced by the circumstances of the particular institution they are employed by. As such,
these findings may not be generalisable to the whole country represented by an interviewee.
AN
Finally, given that this is an exploratory study, caution needs to be exercised in generalising the
findings.
M

However, an extension of this study to include Francophone Sub-Saharan-African

countries to establish whether the colonial past has influenced research outputs there would be
D

useful. In addition, extending the study to other developing regions to establish whether the
Anglophone SSA is an outlier or whether accounting scholars in these areas experience similar
TE

problems could provide insights into the support that these individuals need to join the
community of scholars.
EP

Referecnes
Adler, N. J., & Harzing. A. (2009). When knowledge wins: Transcending the sense and nonsense of
C

academic rankings. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(1),72–95.

Albert, C., Davia, M. A., & Legazpe, N. (2016). Determinants of research productivity in Spanish
Academia. European Journal of Education, 51(4), 535–549.
AC

Altbach, P. G. (2004). Globalisation and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary
Education & Management, 10(1), 3–25.
Andrews, M. (2009). Isomorphism and the limits to African public financial management reform (HKS
Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP09‐012). Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University.
Argilés, J. M., & Garcia‐Blandon, J. (2011). Accounting research: A critical view of the present situation
and prospects. Revista de Contabilidad, 14(2), 9–34.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
38

Ashworth, R., Boyne, G., & Delbridge, R. (2007). Escape from the iron cage? Organizational change and
isomorphic pressures in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
19(1), 165‐187.
Atuahene, F. (2011). Re‐thinking the missing mission of higher education: An anatomy of the research
challenge of African universities. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 46(4), 321–341.
Babu, A. R., & Singh. Y. P. (1998). Determinants of research productivity. Scientometrics, 43(3), 309–329.
Baily, J. R. (2013). The iron cage and the monkey's paw: Isomorphism, legitimacy, and the perils of a

PT
rising journal. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(1), 108–114.
Baker, S. E., & Edwards, R. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough? Expert voices and early
career reflections on sampling and cases in qualitative research. National Centre for Research

RI
Methods, Middlesex: Economic & Social Research Council.
Beattie, V., & Goodacre, A. (2012). Publication records of accounting and finance faculty promoted to
professor: Evidence from the UK. Accounting and Business Research, 42(2), 197–231.
Bégin‐Caouette O. (2016). Building comparative advantage in the global knowledge society: Systemic

SC
factors contributing to academic research production in four Nordic Higher Education systems. In
C. Sarrico, P. Teixeira, A. Magalhães, A. Veiga, M. João Rosa, & T. Carvalho (Eds.), Global
challenges, National initiatives, and institutional responses: The transformation of higher
education (9th ed.) (pp. 29–54). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

U
Bisman, J. (2010). Postpositivism and accounting research: A (personal) primer on critical realism.
AN
Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, 4(4), 3–25.
Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., & Chan, K. (2006). Higher education and economic development in Africa.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
Bonchek, M. S., & Shepsle, K. A. (1996). Analyzing politics: Rationality, behavior and institutions. New
M

York, NY: WW Norton & Co.

Boxenbaum, E., & Jonsson, S. (2017). Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling: Concept evolution and
theoretical challenges. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence& R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The Sage
D

handbook of organisational institutionalism (pp. 77–101). London, England: Sage Publications.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology,
3(2), 77–101.
TE

Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H‐L. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: Where are we
now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3),
421–440.
EP

Chan, K. C., Chang, C., Tong, J. Y., & Zhang, F. (2012). An analysis of the accounting and finance research
productivity in Australia and New Zealand in 1991–2010. Accounting & Finance, 52(1), 249–265.
Chan, L., & Costa, S. (2005). Participation in the global knowledge commons: Challenges and
opportunities for research dissemination in developing countries. New Library World, 106(3/4),
C

141–163.
Chow, C. W., & Harrison, P. (1998). Factors contributing to success in research and publications: insights
AC

of influential accounting authors. Journal of Accounting Education, 16(3), 463–472.

Coates, R., Sturgeon, B., Bohannan, J., & Pasini, E. (2002). Language and publication in Cardiovascular
Research articles. Cardiovascular Research, 53(2), 279–285.
Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional
environmnet and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211–244.
Coetsee, D., & Stegmann, N. (2012). A profile of accounting research in South African accounting
journals. Meditari Accountancy Research, 20(2), 92–112.
Colyvas, J. A., & Jonsson, S. (2011). Ubiquity and legitimacy: Disentangling diffusion and
institutionalization. Sociological Theory, 29(1), 27–53.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
39

Coyne, I. T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or
clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), 623–630.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice,
39(3), 124–130.
Dacin, M. T., Goodstein, J., & Scott, R. W. (2002). Institutional theory and institutional change:
Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 45–56.
De Jager, P., van der Spuy, P., & de Kock, F. (2016). Do not feed the predators. Retrieved from SSRN:

PT
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2858750
De Lange, P., O’Connell, B., Mathews, M. R., & Sangster, A. (2010). The ERA: A brave new world of
accountability for Australian university accounting schools. Australian Accounting Review, 20(1),

RI
24–37.
DiCicco‐Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4),
314–321.
Dillard, J. F., Rigsby, J. T., & Goodman, C. (2004). The making and remaking of organization context:

SC
Duality and the institutionalization process. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4),
506–542.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective

U
rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional
AN
patterns and organizations (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior.
Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122‐136.
Dundar, H., Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in
M

Higher Education, 39(6), 607–631.

Evans, E., Burritt, R., & Guthrie, J. (2013). The virtual university: Impact on Australian accounting and
business education. Academic Leadership Series, 4(1), 9‐24.
D

Everett, J., Neu, D., & Green, D. L. (2003). Commentary: Research productivity measurement and the
field of academic accounting. Accounting Perspectives, 2(2), 153–175.
Fan, W., & Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review.
TE

Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 132–139.

Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly,
35(1), 121–150.
EP

Fogarty, T. J., & Ruhl, J. M. (1997). Institutional antecedents of accounting faculty research productivity:
A LISREL study of the ‘best and brightest’. Issues in Accounting Education, 12(1), 27–48.
Fogarty, T. J., & Ravenscroft, S. P. (1999). The importance of being ‘wordy’: Willingness to write and
publication productivity among accounting academics. Accounting Education, 8(3), 187–202.
C

Gelman, A., & Basbøll, T. (2014). When do stories work? Evidence and illustration in the social sciences.
Sociological Methods & Research, 43(4), 547–570.
AC

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative
Report, 8(4), 597–606.
Golden‐Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (2007). Composing qualitative research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gray, E. (2010). Access to Africa’s knowledge: Publishing development research and measuring value.
The African Journal of Information and Communication, 10, 4–19.
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. (2014). The global accounting academic: what counts! Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal, 27(1), 2–14.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
40

Guthrie, J., Parker, L. D., & Gray, R. (2004). Requirements and understandings for publishing academic
research: An insider view. In C. Humphrey & B. Lee (Eds.), The real life guide to accounting
research (pp. 411–432). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Gyimah‐Brempong, K., Paddison, O., & Mitiku, W. (2006). Higher education and economic growth in
Africa. The Journal of Development Studies, 42(3), 509–529.
Habib, A., & Morrow, S. (2006). Research, research productivity and the state in South Africa.
Transformation: Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa, 62(1), 9–29.

PT
Habib, A., Morrow, S., & Bentley, K. (2008). Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the
corporatised university in contemporary South Africa. Social Dynamics, 34(2), 140–155.
Hay‐Gibson, N. V. (2010). Interviews via VoIP: Benefits and disadvantages within a PhD study of SMEs.

RI
Library and Information Research, 33(105), 39–50.
Hopwood, A. G. (2007). Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review, 82(5), 1365–1374.
Humphrey, C., Moizer, P., & Owen, D. (1995). Questioning the value of the research selectivity process in
British university accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(3), 141–164.

SC
Jepperson, R. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J.
DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 204–231). Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.

U
Johnson, B., & Lundvall, B. (2003). National systems of innovation and economic development. In M.
Muchie, P. Gammeltoft & B. A. Lundvall (Eds.), Putting Africa first: The making of African
AN
innovation systems (pp. 13‐28). Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press.
Kaplowitz, M. D., Hadlock, T. D., & Levine, R. (2004). A comparison of web and mail survey response
rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 94–101.
Kelly, M., & Warmbrod, J. (1986) Developing and maintaining productive researchers in agricultural
M

education. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Education in Agriculture. 27(1), 27–32.
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430(6997), 311–316.
Kotrlik, J. W., Bartlett, J. E., Higgins, C. C., & Williams, H. A. (2002). Factors associated with research
D

productivity of agricultural education faculty. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(3),1–10.

Kraatz, M. S., & Block, E. S. (2008). Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In R.
Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational
TE

institutionalism (pp. 243–275), London, England: Sage Publications.

Kury, K. W. (2007). Decoupled earnings: An institutional perspective of the consequences of maximizing
shareholder value. Accounting Forum, 31(4), 370–383.
EP

Levitan, A. S., & Ray, R. (1992). Personal and institutional characteristics affecting research productivity
of academic accountants. Journal of Education for Business, 67(6), 335–341.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Long, R., Crawford, A., White, M., & Davis, K. (2009). Determinants of faculty research productivity in
C

information systems: An empirical analysis of the impact of academic origin and academic
affiliation. Scientometrics, 78(2), 231–260.
AC

Lounsbury, M. (2008). Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional
analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4), 349–361.
Lowe, A., & Locke, J. (2005). Perceptions of journal quality and research paradigm: Results of a web‐
based survey of British accounting academics. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(1), 81–
98.
Lukka, K., & Kasanen, E. (1996). Is accounting a global or a local discipline? Evidence from major research
journals. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(7/8), 755–773.
Man, J. P., Weinkauf, J. G., Tsang, M., & Sin, D. D. (2004). Why do some countries publish more than
others? An international comparison of research funding, English proficiency and publication
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
41

output in highly ranked general medical journals. European Journal of Epidemiology, 19(8), 811–
817.
Manfreda, K. L., Bosnjak, M., Berzelak, J., Haas, I., Vehovar, V., & Berzelak, N. (2008). Web surveys versus
other survey modes: A meta‐analysis comparing response rates. Journal of the Market Research
Society, 50(1), 79–104.
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–526.
Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum:

PT
Qualitative Social Research, 11(3). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative‐
research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1428/3027.%20%20%20%20%5BAccessed
Mathieu, R., McConomy, B. J. (2003). Productivity in “Top‐Ten” academic accounting journals by

RI
researchers at Canadian universities. Accounting Perspectives, 2(1), 43–76.
Meneghini, R. (2012). Emerging journals. EMBO reports, 13(2), 106–108.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and
ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

SC
Milana, M., Holford, J., Jarvis, P., Waller, R., & Webb, S. (2015). Journal listing and rating: Who decides
which journals ‘count’? What can academics do? International Journal of Lifelong Education,
34(3), 247–250.

U
Milton, A., & O'Connell, B. (2009). Commodification of higher education in accounting: A Marxist
perspective. International Journal of Critical Accounting, 1(3), 204–227.
AN
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing
reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2),
13–22.
Mouton, J., & Valentine, A. (2017). The extent of South African authored articles in predatory journals.
M

South African Journal of Science, 113(7/8), 1–9.

Mouton, J., Gaillard, J., & van Lill, M. (2015). Functions of science granting councils in Sub‐Saharan
Africa. In N. Cloete, P. Maassen, & T. Bailey (Eds.), Knowledge production and contradictory
D

functions in African higher education (pp. 148–170), Cape Town, South Africa: African Minds.
Moya, S., Prior, D., & Rodriguez‐Pérez, G. (2014). Research patterns in the Spanish accounting academia.
Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación, 1(9), 567‐583.
TE

Ngai, L. R., & Samaniego, R. M. (2011). Accounting for research and productivity growth across
industries. Review of Economic Dynamics, 14(3), 475–495.
Negash, M. (2011). Resource allocation challenges in South African universities: A management
EP

accounting perspective. International Journal of Critical Accounting, 3(2), 265–292.

Nieuwoudt, M. J., Wilcocks, J. S. (2005). The attitudes and perceptions of South African accounting
academics about research. Meditari Accountancy Research, 13(2), 49–66.
Nieuwoudt, M. J., Wilcocks, J. S., & Kilpert, O. V. (2006). Time perceptions of South African accounting
C

academics. Meditari Accountancy Research, 14(2), 17–32.

North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance: Cambridge, England:
AC

Cambridge University Press.

Nyamori, R. O., Abdul‐Rahaman, A. S., & Samkin, G. (2017). Accounting, auditing and accountability
research in Africa: Recent governance developments and future directions. Accounting, Auditing
& Accountability Journal, 30(6), 1206–1229.
Nygaard, L. P. (2017). Publishing and perishing: An academic literacies framework for investigating
research productivity. Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 519–532.
Papaioannou, A. G., Machaira, E., & Theano, V. (2013). Fifteen years of publishing in English language
journals of sport and exercise psychology: Authors' proficiency in English and editorial boards
make a difference. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 1–10.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
42

Parker, L., & Guthrie, J. (2005). Welcome to “the rough and tumble”: Managing accounting research in a
corporatised university world. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18(1), 5–13.
Parker, L., Guthrie, J., & Gray, R. (1998). Accounting and management research: Passwords from the
gatekeepers. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 11(4),371–406.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2008). Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their

PT
impact on universities and industry. Research Policy. 37(10), 1884–1891.
Prather‐Kinsey, J., & Rueschhoff, N. (1999). An analysis of the authorship of international accounting
research in US journals and AOS: 1980 through 1996. The International Journal of Accounting,

RI
34(2), 261–282.
Rahaman, A. S. (2010). Critical accounting research in Africa: Whence and whither. Critical Perspectives
on Accounting, 21(5), 420–427.
Romer, P. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 3–22.

SC
Ruef, M., & Scott, W. R. (1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival
in changing institutional environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 877–904.
Ruiz, M. A. (2012). Challenges of emerging countries: Barriers to get published. Revista Brasileira de

U
Hematologia e Hemoterapia, 34(2), 71–72.
Rusch, E. A., & Wilbur, C. (2007). Shaping institutional environments: The process of becoming
AN
legitimate. The Review of Higher Education, 30(3), 301–318.
Salager‐Meyer, F. (2008). Scientific publishing in developing countries: Challenges for the future. Journal
of English for Academic Purposes, 7(2), 121–132.
Samkin, G., & Schneider, A. (2014). Using university websites to profile accounting academics and their
M

research output: A three country study. Meditari Accountancy Research, 22(1), 77–106.
Samkin, G., & Stainbank, L. (2016). Teaching and learning: Current and future challenges facing
accounting academics, academics, and the development of an agenda for future research.
D

Meditari Accountancy Research, 24(3), 294–317.

Schwandt, T. A. (2007). Judging interpretations: But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in
naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 114, 11–25.
TE

Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(4),
493–511.
Scott, W. R. (2004). Institutional theory. In G. Rizer (Ed.) Encyclopedia of social theory (pp. 408‐414).
EP

Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Scott, W. R. (2012). Embedding the examination of multilevel factors in an organization field context.
Journal of National Cancer Institute Monographs, 44(1), 32–33.
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
C

Scott, W .R., & Meyer, J. W. (1991). The rise of training‐programs in firms and agencies‐an institutional
perspective. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 13)
AC

(pp. 297–326). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Sewell, W. H, Jr. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of
Sociology. 98(1), 1–29.
Slaughter, S. (2014). Retheorizing academic capitalism: Actors, mechanisms, fields and networks. In B.
Cantwell & I. Kauppinen (Eds.), Academic capitalism in the age of globalization (pp.3–10).
Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Smeby, J. (2003). The impact of massification on university research. Tertiary Education & Management,
9(2), 131–144.
Stensaker, B., Frølich, N., Huisman, J., Waagene, E., Scordato, L., & Botas, P. P. (2014). Factors affecting
strategic change in higher education. Journal of Strategy and Management, 7(2), 193–207
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
43

Strang, D., & Sine, W. D. (2002). Interorganizational institutions. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell
companion to organizations (pp. 497–519). Oxford, England: Wiley‐Blackwell.
Su, S., & Baird, K. (2017). The impact of collegiality amongst Australian accounting academics on work‐
related attitudes and academic performance. Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 411–427
Sunder, S. (2008). Building research culture. China Journal of Accounting Research, 1(1), 83–85.
Tauringana, V., & Mangena, M. (2012).Introduction. In V. Tauringana & M. Mangena (Eds.), Accounting
in Africa (pp. xi–xviii). Bingley, England: Emerald.

PT
Teferra, D., & Altbach, P. G. (2004). African higher education: Challenges for the 21st century. Higher
Education, 47(1), 21–50.
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2015). The institutional logics perspectiv. In R. A. Scott, &

RI
M. C. Buchmann (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: an interdisciplinary,
searchable, and linkable resource (pp. 1–22). Wiley Online Library
Tucker, B. P., Parker, L. D., & Merchant, K. A. (2016). With a little help from our friends: An empirical
investigation of co‐authoring in accounting research. The British Accounting Review, 48(2), 185–

SC
205.
Tuttle, B., & Dillard, J. (2007). Beyond competition: Institutional isomorphism in US accounting research.
Accounting Horizons, 21(4), 387–409.

U
Van der Schyf, D. B. (2008a). The essence of a university and scholarly activity in accounting, with
reference to a department of accounting at a South African university. Meditari Accountancy
AN
Research, 16(1), 1–26.
Van der Schyf, D. B. (2008b). Five recent developments’ impact on the traditional academic culture of
departments of accounting at South African universities. Meditari Accountancy Research, 16(2),
1–12.
M

Van Dijk, T. A. (1994). Academic nationalism. Discourse & Society, 5(3), 275–276.
Venter, E. R., & de Villiers, C. (2013). The accounting profession's influence on academe: South African
evidence. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(8), 1246–1278.
D

Verhoef, G., & Samkin, G. (2017). The accounting profession and education: The development of
disengaged scholarly activity in accounting in South Africa. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, 30(6), 1370–1398.
TE

Walker, E., & Brown, A. (2004). What success factors are important to small business owners?
International Small Business Journal, 22(6), 577–594.
Westney, D. E. (1993). Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In D. E. Westney
EP

(Ed.). Organization theory and the multinational corporation (pp. 53‐76). London, England:
Palgrave Macmillan.
White, C. S., James, K., Burke, L. A., & Allen, R. S. (2012). What makes a “research star”? Factors
influencing the research productivity of business faculty. International Journal of Productivity and
C

Performance Management, 61(6), 584–602.

Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2012). UK business school rankings over the last 30 years (1980–2010): Trends
AC

and explanations. Higher Education, 63(3), 367‐382.

Wills, D., Ridley, G., & Mitev, H. (2013). Research productivity of accounting academics in changing and
challenging times. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 9(1), 4–25.
Wilson, D., & McKiernan, P. (2011). Global mimicry: Putting strategic choice back on the business school
agenda. British Journal of Management. 22(3), 457–469.
Wilson‐Strydom, M., & Fongwa, S. N. (2012). A profile of higher education in Southern Africa: A regional
perspective (Vol. 1). Johannesburg, South Africa: Southern African Regional Universities
Association (SARUA).
World Bank Group. (2018). Research and development expenditure (% of GDP). Retrieved from
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
44

Yizengaw, T. (2008). Challenges of higher education in Africa and lessons of experience for the Africa–
U.S. Higher Education Collaboration Initiative. Washington, DC: NASULGC.
Zeleza, P. T. (2002). The politics of historical and social science research in Africa. Journal of Southern
African Studies, 28(1), 9–23.
Zhang, G., Boyce, G., & Ahmed, K. (2014). Institutional changes in university accounting education in
post‐revolutionary China: From political orientation to internationalization. Critical Perspectives
on Accounting, 25(8), 819–843.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2: Profile of accounting departments in selected Anglophone SSA universities
Estimated Number of Number of
Number of full time female Faculty members
Country African students accounting academics in with PhD or
Region ranking 000s academics department equivalent degrees
1 Addis Ababa University Ethiopia Eastern 22 42.4 28 2 5
2 Ahmadu Bello University Nigeria Western 75 35 37 4 13
3 Egerton University Kenya Eastern 21 13 14 5 1
4 Jimma University Ethiopia Eastern 73 33.7 23 0 1
5 Kenyatta University Kenya Eastern 32 74 31 6 8
6 Kwami Nikrumah university Ghana Western 35 23.6 12 0 4

PT
7 Makerere University Uganda Eastern 11 40 NA NA NA
8 Obafemi Awolowo University Nigeria Western 30 35 30 NA 6
9 Rhodes University South Africa Southern 12 8 19 7 1
10 Sudan University of Science Sudan Eastern 107 18 NA NA NA

RI
11 University of Benin Nigeria Western 102 50 50 22 20
12 University of Botswana Botswana Southern 43 15 10 2 2
13 University of Cape Coast Ghana Western 89 16 20 3 2
14 University of Cape Town++ South Africa Southern 1 26 62 35 5

SC
15 University of Dar Salaam Tanzania Eastern 33 19.6 23 7 12
16 University of Ghana Ghana Western 20 37.8 12 3 7
17 University of Ibadan Nigeria Western 16 26.7 NAP NAP NAP
18 University of Khartoum Sudan Eastern 29 24.5 24 4 6

U
19 University of Kwazulu Natal South Africa Southern 5 37.8 36 18 2
20 University of Lagos Nigeria Western 54 57 16 NA NA
21 University of Mauritius Mauritius Eastern 51 12.5 17 NA 7
AN
22 University of Nairobi Kenya Eastern 8 74.6 32 3 14
23 University of Namibia Namibia Southern 57 21 21 10 0
24 University of Nigeria Nigeria Western 56 57 10 6 7
25 University of Pretoria South Africa Southern 4 62 53 37 8
M

26 University of South Africa+++ South Africa Southern 15 187 145 79 10

27 University of Stellenbosch South Africa Southern 2 22.4 67 38 4
28 University of Witwatersrand South Africa Southern 3 24.5 39 27 4
29 University of Zimbabwe Zimbabwe Southern 38 12 7 2 3
D

Note:
++ Former Department of Accounting was restructured.
TE

+++ UNISA is a distance education or online university.

NA= Data not available in the website
NAP= No accounting programme at the university.
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 3 Factors impacting individual research output

1* 2 3 4 5 N X
1. I am committed to research. 54.17% 33.33% 4.17% 6.25% 2.08% 48 1.69 0.96
2. I am perseveringly working to complete my
33.33% 45.83% 6.25% 10.42% 4.17% 48 2.06 1.09
research.
3. I am ambitious in my research pursuits. 40.43% 38.30% 14.89% 4.26% 2.13% 47 1.89 0.95
4. I strive to obtain research grants. 21.28% 19.15% 23.40% 23.40% 12.77% 47 2.87 1.33
5. I strive to publish the findings of my research
48.94% 29.79% 8.51% 10.64% 2.13% 47 1.87 1.08
endeavours.
6. I am motivated to do research. 36.17% 38.30% 8.51% 10.64% 6.38% 47 2.13 1.20
7. The fact that I thoroughly understand the

PT
current literature in my area of specialisation 31.91% 40.43% 19.15% 4.26% 4.26% 47 2.09 1.03
motivates me to engage in research.
8. The fact that I thoroughly understand the
methodologies pertaining to research in my
25.53% 31.91% 23.40% 12.77% 6.38% 47 2.43 1.18
field of specialisation motivates me to engage

RI
in research.
9. The fact that I am able to communicate my
research findings in a manner acceptable for 21.74% 50.00% 15.22% 6.52% 6.52% 46 2.26 1.07
publishing motivates me to engage in research.
10. The availability of suitable databases needed for

SC
my research motivates me to engage in 15.22% 28.26% 41.30% 6.52% 8.70% 46 2.65 1.09
research.
11. The availability of editorial support motivates
13.64% 27.27% 36.36% 18.18% 4.55% 44 2.73 1.05
me to engage in research.
12. The existence of clerical support for research
6.82% 20.45% 29.55% 29.55% 13.64% 44 3.23 1.13

U
motivates me to engage in research.
13. The existence of statistical support for research
17.78% 24.44% 26.67% 17.78% 13.33% 45 2.84 1.28
motivates me to engage in research.
AN
14. The availability of outlets to publish my
24.44% 37.78% 28.89% 6.67% 2.22% 45 2.24 0.97
research encourages me to engage in research.
15. The research culture that we have at my
department/school motivates me to engage in 8.89% 31.11% 24.44% 24.44% 11.11% 45 2.98 1.16
research.
M

16. The recognition I receive from

colleagues/department/school/university 17.78% 28.89% 20.00% 24.44% 8.89% 45 2.78 1.25
motivates me to engage in research.
17. The type of research training I received
15.56% 26.67% 24.44% 17.78% 15.56% 45 2.91 1.30
encourages me to engage in research.
D

18. The availability of senior researchers who could

provide feedback on my research encourages 4.44% 31.11% 31.11% 22.22% 11.11% 45 3.04 1.07
me to publish.
TE

19. The availability of funding for research

8.89% 15.56% 44.44% 22.22% 8.89% 45 3.07 1.04
encourages me to engage in research.
20. The availability of co-author(s) in my
17.78% 26.67% 24.44% 22.22% 8.89% 45 2.78 1.23
department/school encourages me to publish.
21. The existence of the opportunity to be assigned
EP

a reduced teaching load encourages me to 20.00% 22.22% 17.78% 20.00% 20.00% 45 2.98 1.42
publish.
22. The existence of the opportunity to go on
research sabbatical encourages me to engage in 26.67% 28.89% 13.33% 13.33% 17.78% 45 2.69 1.45
research.
23. The existence of promotion criteria aligned with
C

research performance motivates me to engage 22.22% 44.44% 13.33% 15.56% 4.44% 45 2.36 1.12
in research.
AC

24. The existence of adequate financial rewards for

17.78% 26.67% 31.11% 13.33% 11.11% 45 2.73 1.22
researchers motivates me to engage in research.
25. The existence of clearly articulated
tenure/probation/ policy in my 8.89% 28.89% 24.44% 26.67% 11.11% 45 3.02 1.16
department/school encourages me to publish.
26. The existence of clearly articulated promotion
policy in my department/school encourages me 17.78% 33.33% 17.78% 24.44% 6.67% 45 2.64 1.21
to publish.
* 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree or disagree; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly Disagree; N = total Number of Observations; X =
Mean value; δX = standard deviation.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4: Departmental factors impacting accounting research

1* 2 3 4 5 N X
1. Potential research supervisors/promoters who could
encourage me to carry out research are available in my 7.89% 26.32% 18.42% 31.58% 15.79% 38 3.21 1.22
department/school.
2. Potential co-authors who could cooperate with me in
carrying out research are available in my 10.53% 26.32% 21.05% 34.21% 7.89% 38 3.03 1.16
department/school.
3. The research infrastructure (space, equipment, data,
software, research assistants, journals) in my department 10.53% 26.32% 18.42% 34.21% 10.53% 38 3.08 1.20

PT
is adequate for conducting accounting research.
4. There is a noticeable urge for excellence in research in
2.63% 31.58% 23.68% 31.58% 10.53% 38 3.16 1.06
my department.
5. There is adequate funding for supporting research in my
5.26% 15.79% 28.95% 31.58% 18.42% 38 3.42 1.12
department.

RI
6. There is an adequate number of senior researchers who
can share their research experiences and/or co-author with 5.26% 5.26% 23.68% 50.00% 15.79% 38 3.66 0.95
emerging researchers in my department
7. There is a clearly defined system of tenure for academics

SC
7.89% 28.95% 21.05% 26.32% 15.79% 38 3.13 1.22
in my department/school.
8. The requirements outlined in the tenure/probation policy
5.26% 23.68% 26.32% 26.32% 18.42% 38 3.29 1.17
of my department/school are consistently enforced.
9. My department/school classifies its academics as

U
academically qualified (i.e., PhDs) and professionally 22.22% 38.89% 11.11% 11.11% 16.67% 36 2.61 1.38
qualified (CPA, CIMA, CFA, CFE, CA, etc.)
10. A research-active academic is generally paid more than a
AN
13.51% 16.22% 37.84% 16.22% 16.22% 37 3.05 1.23
non-research-active academic in my department/school.
11. The majority of the academic staff are full-time
43.24% 45.95% 5.41% 2.70% 2.70% 37 1.76 0.88
employees at my department/school.
12. The majority of full-time academic staff in my
10.81% 18.92% 5.41% 18.92% 45.95% 37 3.70 1.47
department/school hold a PhD or an equivalent degree.
M

13. The majority of full-time academic staff in my

department/school hold professional qualifications (CPA,
59.46% 13.51% 10.81% 16.22% 0.00% 37 1.84 1.15
CIMA, CFA, CFE, CA, etc.) but not a PhD or equivalent
degree.
D

14. A significant portion of the research output of my

department/school is linked to thesis/dissertations of 5.41% 37.84% 24.32% 21.62% 10.81% 37 2.95 1.11
graduate programmes in the department/school.
TE

15. In my department, on the average, female academics

2.78% 11.11% 27.78% 27.78% 30.56% 36 3.72 1.10
publish more than their male colleagues.
16. In my department, on average, those with a PhD degree
40.54% 40.54% 8.11% 2.70% 8.11% 37 1.97 1.15
publish more than the academics without PhD degrees.
EP

17. The continued employment of academics who hold full-

time positions in my department/school is conditional on 8.11% 24.32% 18.92% 37.84% 10.81% 37 3.19 1.16
their continuing to publish peer-reviewed articles.
18. The chair/head of my department/school is an
10.81% 27.03% 18.92% 24.32% 18.92% 37 3.14 1.30
accomplished researcher.
C

19. In my department/school, funds for supporting research

2.70% 8.11% 16.22% 51.35% 21.62% 37 3.81 0.95
could be accessed without a lot of bureaucracy.
AC

20. In my department/school, many academic staff engage in

work outside the university to supplement their low 16.22% 18.92% 32.43% 27.03% 5.41% 37 2.86 1.14
salaries.
21. There is a regular research event
(seminar/symposium/guest speakers, faculty and graduate 5.41% 40.54% 21.62% 24.32% 8.11% 37 2.89 1.09
research presentations, etc.) in my department/school.
* 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree or disagree; 4 = Disagree; 5 =Strongly Disagree; N = total Number of Observations; X
= Mean value; δX = standard deviation.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 5 Country factors impacting accounting research

1* 2 3 4 5 N X
1. Universities are formally classified as
research universities and teaching
18.92% 29.73% 10.81% 27.03% 13.51% 37 2.86 1.36
universities. The higher education has
a formal two/three tier system.
2. Poor salaries offered by universities
discourage potential researchers from 21.62% 43.24% 16.22% 10.81% 8.11% 37 2.41 1.17
joining academia.

PT
3. Poor salaries offered by universities
encourage accounting academics to
18.92% 54.05% 8.11% 13.51% 5.41% 37 2.32 1.09
engage in commitments other than
research to supplement their earnings.

RI
4. Accounting professional
organisations (SAICA, ACCA,
CIMA, IIA, etc.) provide financial 2.70% 21.62% 29.73% 27.03% 18.92% 37 3.38 1.10
support for research endeavours in

SC
universities.
5. Accounting/audit firms provide
financial support for research 2.70% 5.41% 24.32% 32.43% 35.14% 37 3.92 1.02
endeavours in universities.

U
6. Funding for accounting research can
2.70% 8.11% 27.03% 37.84% 24.32% 37 3.73 1.00
be described as adequate.
AN
7. The existence of accounting
programmes offered by foreign-based
2.78% 22.22% 22.22% 30.56% 22.22% 36 3.47 1.14
universities has increased research
output in the country.
8. The increase in student enrolment has
M

led to a decreased research output by 27.03% 27.03% 18.92% 18.92% 8.11% 37 2.54 1.29
accounting faculty.
9. The research environment for
D

accounting faculty (i.e., policy,

5.41% 56.76% 24.32% 10.81% 2.70% 37 2.49 0.86
funding, quality assurance) has
improved in recent years.
TE

10. Academic freedom enjoyed by

accounting faculty results in higher 5.41% 40.54% 24.32% 16.22% 13.51% 37 2.92 1.15
research output.
11. There is a national association of
37.84% 35.14% 16.22% 8.11% 2.70% 37 2.03 1.05
EP

accounting academics.
12. The national association of
accounting academics promotes 18.92% 37.84% 27.03% 8.11% 8.11% 37 2.49 1.13
academic research.
C

13. Migration of accounting faculty has

8.11% 21.62% 48.65% 13.51% 8.11% 37 2.92 1.00
led to a decreased research output.
AC

14. Research grants to universities are tax

0.00% 19.44% 66.67% 8.33% 5.56% 36 3.00 0.71
deductible.
* 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree or disagree; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly Disagree; N = total Number
of Observations; X = Mean value; δX = standard deviation.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 6 International factors impacting accounting research

1* 2 3 4 5 N X
1. The professionalisation of accounting education
has changed the traditional labour process (e.g.,
large classes, profit centres, casualisation of
labour, rank inflation, emergence of 28.57% 51.43% 14.29% 5.71% 0.00% 35 1.97 0.81
entrepreneurial faculty members, etc.) in
academia and thus the cumulative effect has
been undermining research.
2. The bureaucratisation of assessing the quality

PT
of research (such as rating of academics,
journals, universities and aligning funding with
11.76% 26.47% 20.59% 26.47% 14.71% 34 3.06 1.26
these) is an effective instrument for the
advancement of accounting research in
developing countries.

RI
3. Editorial biases have made it difficult for
academics from developing countries to publish
25.71% 31.43% 28.57% 11.43% 2.86% 35 2.34 1.07
in peer-reviewed/reputable international

SC
accounting journals.
4. Reviewer biases towards certain thematic areas
have made it difficult for works that are
32.35% 35.29% 26.47% 2.94% 2.94% 34 2.09 0.98
relevant to developing countries to be published
in reputable journals.

U
5. Reviewer biases towards certain research
methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative) have
made it difficult to publish research that is 25.71% 42.86% 22.86% 5.71% 2.86% 35 2.17 0.97
AN
relevant to developing countries where data
streams are not readily available or are costly.
6. Internet search engines and social science and
science citation index do not capture the
accounting research output of many
M

8.57% 31.43% 45.71% 11.43% 2.86% 35 2.69 0.89

developing/Sub Sahara-African universities so
they cannot be used to assess the state of
accounting research in the region/continent.
7. Foreign aid has been critical for the
D

establishment of research capacity in

5.71% 28.57% 51.43% 14.29% 0.00% 35 2.74 0.77
accounting in many developing/Sub Sahara-
TE

African countries.
8. Foreign aid lacks transparency, and thus has
been a source of corruption and nepotism in 2.86% 11.43% 71.43% 11.43% 2.86% 35 3.00 0.68
academia.
9. Foreign aid has been critical for running
EP

accounting PhD programme(s) in many 0.00% 17.65% 64.71% 14.71% 2.94% 34

3.03 0.66
developing/Sub Sahara-African/countries.
10. Foreign aid has contributed to accounting
faculty development. Many faculty members
who earned their terminal degrees from 2.86% 22.86% 51.43% 20.00% 2.86% 35 2.97 0.81
C

reputable overseas universities would not have

been able to do so without foreign aid.
AC

11. Many overseas development assistance

programmes did not have tangible effect in
building accounting research capacity as the 2.86% 20.00% 68.57% 5.71% 2.86% 35 2.86 0.68
funds are often recycled through degree
exporting programmes of donor countries.
12. Foreign aid does not allow the growth of
independent accounting thought leadership as it
0.00% 25.71% 60.00% 11.43% 2.86% 35 2.91 0.69
often forces local researchers to work on donor-
driven research agenda.
* 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree or disagree; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly Disagree; N = total Number of
Observations; X = Mean value; δX = standard deviation.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Appendix 1: Interviewee Profiles

Gender
Participant M=male Earned
Number Profile of interviewees. F=Female PhD?
Round #1 (November-December 2015)
Former lecturer from an Ethiopian university and currently M Yes
1 Associate Professor at an American university.
Emeritus Professor from a university in the United Kingdom M Yes

PT
2 with experience on research in developing countries.
3 Professor of Accounting at a South African university. M Yes
Former South African university lecturer, currently teaching at M Yes
4 a university in New Zealand.

RI
5 Assistant professor of Accounting at a university in Ethiopia. M Yes
6 Assistant professor of Accounting at a university in Ethiopia. M Yes
Former lecturer from a Nigerian university and currently M Yes

SC
7 Professor of Accounting at an American university.
Round #2 (April- May 2017)
Senior Lecturer at a university in Ghana. PhD from an overseas M Yes

U
8 university.
Lecturer at a university in Ghana and currently registered for F No
AN
9 PhD at a university in South Africa.
10 Lecturer at a Zimbabwean university. M Yes
11 Lecturer at a university in Kenya. M Yes
Lecturer at a university in Mauritius and currently registered M No
M

12 for PhD studies.

Lecturer and (former) Head of the Department of Accounting M No
at a Kenyan university, currently enrolled for a PhD at a South
D

13 African university.
14 Senior lecturer at a Nigerian university. M Yes
Associate Professor of Accounting at a Tanzanian university M Yes
TE

15 and former Head of Department of Accounting.

Assistant lecturer at a Nigerian university currently completing F No
16 her PhD at an overseas university.
EP

Lecturer at a state-funded Nigerian university, currently M No

17 enrolled for PhD.
Former lecturer from a Ghanaian university, currently teaching M Yes
18 at a university in New Zealand.
C

Former lecturer from a Nigerian university, currently teaching M Yes

19 at a university in New Zealand.
AC

20 Lecturer at a Tanzanian university. F Yes

21 Head of Department of Accounting at a Tanzanian university. M Yes
22 Lecturer at a university in Nigeria. M Yes