Accounting for change: the impact and implications of using the intervention-based research method GenderLAB at a big four accounting firm

Purpose This article shows how qualitative interventions can engender both an immediate impact and the possibility of sustained change at the research site. We investigate this by assessing the impact generated from a research project that utilized the GenderLAB method. In doing so, we expand the notion of impact to include the changes that intervention-based research can initiate at a research site. Design/methodology/approach We illustrate the impact of qualitative intervention-based research by exploring GenderLAB, which is a diversity and inclusion (D&I) intervention method that combines norm-critical approaches with design thinking to change norms and attitudes and to produce hands-on local solutions. Findings The GenderLAB intervention had immediate, medium-term and long-term impact in different participating organizations. As the intervention was aimed at participants’ attitudes and norms, the local impact it created resists numerical measurements. Nevertheless, we note how the organization’s leaders recreated exercises with their own staff and utilized ideas generated during the intervention to, for example, foster more inclusive working conditions for working parents, accommodate a broader spectrum of religious groups and cater to a larger variety of dietary needs. While we are currently in the process of publishing our theoretical findings from the research project to create research impact, the intervention itself has already had – and continues to have – practical impact on the D&I practices of the organizations in which we applied this methodology. Originality/value The intervention-based research method that we report on distinguishes itself from traditional qualitative methods, as it is designed to impact the research site as much as possible while gathering data. In contrast to quantitative approaches to interventions, it does not aim to generate quantifiable impact. Instead, we show how this research method pushes our definition of impact from a researcher-centered perspective to a perspective that emphasizes sustained change at the research site. Thus, we contribute to the growing literature on participatory methods, particularly the streams arguing for non-extractive methods that not only aim to take data but also to give knowledge to research sites.