This study aims to assess the methodological rigor of case studies in management accounting published in Brazilian journals. The study is descriptive. The data were collected using documentary research and content analysis, and 180 papers published from 2008 to 2012 in accounting journals rated as A2, B1, and B2 that were classified as case studies were selected. Based on the literature, we established a set of 15 criteria that we expected to be identified (either explicitly or implicitly) in the case studies to classify those case studies as appropriate from the standpoint of methodological rigor. These criteria were partially met by the papers analyzed. The aspects less aligned with those proposed in the literature were the following: little emphasis on justifying the need to understand phenomena in context; lack of explanation of the reason for choosing the case study strategy; the predominant use of questions that do not enable deeper analysis; many studies based on only one source of evidence; little use of data and information triangulation; little emphasis on the data collection method; a high number of cases in which confusion between case study as a research strategy and as data collection method were detected; a low number of papers reporting the method of data analysis; few reports on a study's contributions; and a minority highlighting the issues requiring further research. In conclusion, the method used to apply case studies to management accounting must be improved because few studies showed rigorous application of the procedures that this strategy requires.
case study; management accounting; research strategy
