Interventionist research (IVR), such as the constructive research approach (CRA), has been suggested as a method to improve the relevance of management accounting (MA) research. Although literature identifies several perspectives on relevance, the current assessment of CRA focuses on practical relevance. Moreover, an overreliance on pragmatism in assessing CRA research in the form of CRA market tests has been criticized. This article analyses the challenges inherent in conducting and assessing CRA research, both conceptually and with a CRA case example. In order to overcome these possible CRA challenges, we suggest analyzing CRA relevance from multiple perspectives. The perspectives in question are those of practical value relevance, legitimative decision relevance, academic value relevance, and instrumental decision relevance. Further, we suggest that indications of relevance in CRA studies can be analyzed during the research project. In particular, we introduce the relevance test as an explicit part of the CRA research process. We suggest a new tool, the Relevance Diamond would facilitate conducting the relevance test and aid the analysis of CRA relevance from multiple perspectives. Furthermore, we suggest new interpretations of what should constitute a pass in the CRA market tests under special circumstances, thereby contributing to CRA methodology, and especially to the analysis of relevance and ‘battlefields’ of different interests in CRA/IVR projects.