Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
The aim of this paper is to highlight the relevance of academic input to the accounting standard setting process by way of both ex-ante research and direct participation. We propose the Delphi methodology as a rigorous scientific way to analyse the perception of a new IASB accounting regulation from an “ex-ante” constituency perspective. We argue that this tool can be used as a useful complementary analysis to introduce timely and comprehensive additional feedback to standard-setters’ deliberations regarding the potential effects of their proposals when some conditions are met, and that gaining academic input in the process could make a difference. We apply this to the specific case of the IASB Management Commentary project. The main contribution of this study is to show how this research yields different perceptions that can add to the analysis of comment letters in the deliberations of the IASB. The most remarkable findings are (1) that the introduction of academic opinions (practically absent in the formal consultation process) yields important and different inputs and (2) that the characteristics of this tool allow for additional arguments, which are not usually evident in the formal comment letters, to be obtained from constituents. This study attempts to respond to the recent standard-setter call for more academic contributions to the standard-setting process.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Abela, M., & Mora, A. (2012). Understanding the consequences of accounting standards in Europe: The role of the EFRAG. Accounting in Europe, 9, 147–170.
Adler, M., & Ziglio, E. (1996). Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
AICPA-FASB. (1994). Improving bussiness reporting: A customer focus. Washington, DC: American Institute of CPA.
ASB. (2006). Reporting statement. OFR’ Accounting Standard Board. London: Financial Reporting Council.
Barth, M. E. (2000). Valuation based accounting research: Implications for finnacial reporting and opportunities for future research. Accounting and Finance, 40(1), 7–31. CrossRef
Barth, M. E. (2007). Research, standard setting and global financial reporting. foundations and trends in accounting. Hanover: Now Publishers Inc.
Cañibano, L. (2002). Proyecto meritum: Directrices para la gestión y difusión de información sobre intangibles. Madrid: Fundación Airtel.
Cañibano, L., & Alberto, F. (2008). El control institucional de la información financiera: aplicación de un estudio DELPHI. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting, 37(140), 795–829.
Castells, M. (1999). La era de la información. Economía, sociedad y cultura. Madrid, Alianza Editorial.
Chaffin, W., & Talley, W. (1980). Individual stability in Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 16(1), 67–73. CrossRef
Cole, C. J., & Jones, C. L. (2004). The usefulness of MD&A disclosures in the retail industry. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 19(4), 361–388.
Cooper, D. J., & Robson, K. (2006). Accounting, professions and regulation: Locating the sites of professionalization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31, 415–444. CrossRef
Dajani, J. S., Sincoff, M. Z., & Talley, W. K. (1979). Stability and agreement criteria for the termination of Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 13, 83–90. CrossRef
Dalkey, N. C., & Helmer, O. (1964). An experimental application of the Delphi method to use of experts. Management Science, 9, 458–467. CrossRef
Durocher, S., Fortin, A., & Côté, L. (2007). Users’ participation in the accounting standard-setting process: a theory-building study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(2), 33–63.
EFRAG. (2011). Considering the effects of accounting standards. Discussion Paper, Brussels, www.efrag.org.
EU. (1983). Seventh council directive 83/349/EEC of 13 June 1983 based on article 54(3)(g) of the treaty on consolidated accounts. Brussels: The Council Of The European Communities.
EU. (2006). Directive 2006/46/Ec of The European Parliament And Of The Council of 14 June 2006 amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC on the annual accounts of certain types of companies, 83/349/EEC on consolidated accounts, 86/635/EEC on the annual accounts and consolidated accounts of banks and other financial institutions and 91/674/EEC on the annual accounts and consolidated accounts of insurance undertakings. Brussels: The European Parliament and The Council.
FASB. (2001). Improving business reporting: Insights into enhancing voluntary disclosure. Business reporting research project steering committee report. Norwalk, Financial Accounting Standard Board.
Fülbier, R. U., Hitz, J. M., & Sellhorn, T. (2009). Relevance of academic research and researchers’ role in the IASB’s finnacial reporting standard setting. Abacus, 4(4), 455–491. CrossRef
Georgiou, G. (2002). Corporate non-participation in the ASB standard-setting process. European Accounting Review, 11(4), 699–722. CrossRef
Georgiou, G. (2004). Corporate Lobbying on Accounting Standards: Methods. Timing and Perceived Effectiveness. Abacus, 40(2), 219–237.
Georgiou, G. (2010). The IASB standard-setting process: Participation and perceptions of financial statement. The British Accounting Review, 42, 103–118. CrossRef
Granof, M. H., & Zeff, S. A. (2008). Research on accounting should learn from the past. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 21 March.
Gupta, U. G., & Clarke, R. E. (1996). Theory and aplications of the Delphi technique: A bibliography (1975–1994). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 53(2), 185–211. CrossRef
Hopwood, A. G. (2007). Whither accounting research? The Accounting Review, 82(5), 1365–1374. CrossRef
IASB. (2005). Discussion paper: Management commentary a paper prepared for the IASB by staff of its partner standard-setters and others. London: International Accounting Standart Board.
IASB. (2009). Exposure draft ED/2009/6draft: Management Commentary London, International Accounting Standart Board.
Jeanjean, T., & Ramirez, C. (2009). Back to the origins of positive theories: A contribution to an analysis of paradigm changes in accounting research. Accounting in Europe, 6(1), 107–126. CrossRef
Jorissen, A., Lybaert, N., Orens, R., & Van der Tas, L. (2010). Formal participation in the IASB’s due process of standard setting: a multi-issue/multi-period analysis. European Accounting Review, (forthcoming).
Katsikas, D. (2011). Global regulation and institutional change in European governance. West European Politics, 34(4), 819–837. CrossRef
Landeta, J. (1999). El método Delphi: Una técnica de previsión para la incertidumbre. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel.
Larson, R. (2007). Constituent participation and the IASB’s International financial reporting interpretations committee. Accounting in Europe, 4, 207–254. CrossRef
Leisenring, J. J., & Johnson, L. T. (1994). Accounting research: On the relevance of research to practice. Accounting Horizons, 8(4), 74–79.
Lindalh, F. W. (1987). Accounting standards and Olson′s theory of collective action. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 6, 59–72. CrossRef
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. London: Addison-Wesley.
Loo, R., & Thorpe, K. (2003). A Delphi study forecasting management training and development for first-line nurse managers. Journal of Management Development, 22(9), 824–834. CrossRef
MacCarthy, B. L., & Atthirawong, W. (2003). Factors affecting location decisions in international operations: A Delphi study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(7), 794–818. CrossRef
McKee, A. J., Williams, P. F., & Frazier, B. K. (1991). A case study of accounting firm lobbying: Advice or consent. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2, 273–294. CrossRef
Nakatsu, R., & Lakovou, C. (2009). A comparative study of important risk factors involved in offshore and domestic outsourcing of software development projects: A two-panel Delphi study. Information & Management, 46, 57–68. CrossRef
Novakowski, N., & Wellar, B. (2008). Using the Delphi technique in normative planning research: methodological design considerations. Environment and Planning A, 40, 1485–1500.
Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42(1), 15–29. CrossRef
Pava, M. L., & Epstein, M. J. (1993). How good is MD&A as an investment tool? Journal of Accountancy, 175(3), 51–53.
Pope, P., & McLeay, S. (2011). The European IFRS experiment: Objectives, research challenges and some early evidence. Working Paper, University of Lancaster.
Puro, M. (1984). Audit firm lobbying before the financial accounting standards board: An empirical study. Journal of Accounting Research, 22(2), 624–646. CrossRef
Regier, W. (1986). Directions in Delphi developments: dissertations and their quality. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 29, 195–204. CrossRef
Richey, J., Mar, B., & Horner, R. (1985). The Delphi tecnique in enviromental assessment: Implementation and effectiveness. Journal of Enviromental Management, 21, 135–146.
Saemann, G. (1999). An examination of comment letters filed in the US financial accounting standard-setting process by institutional interest groups. Abacus, 35(1), 1–28. CrossRef
Schipper, K. (1994). Academic accounting research and the standard setting process. Accounting Horizons, 8(4), 61–73.
Schipper, K. (2010). How can we measure the costs and benefits of changes in financial reporting standards? Accounting and Business Research, 40(3), 309–327. CrossRef
SEC. (2003). SEC adapts rules on provision of Sarbanes-Oxley act, final rule: Disclosure in management’s discussion and analysis about off-balance sheet arrangements and aggregate contractual obligations. Release No. 33-8182 28. New York: SEC.
Sharma, H., & Gupta, A. (1993). Present and future status of system waste: A national-level Delphi in India. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 44, 199–218. CrossRef
Singleton-Green, B. (2010). The comunication gap: Why doesn′t accounting research make a greater contribution to debates on accounting policy? Acconting in Europe, 7, 129–145. CrossRef
Sutton, T. (1984). Lobbying of accounting standard-setting bodies in the UK and the USA: A downsian analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9(1), 81–95. CrossRef
Swieringa, R. J. (1998). Accounting research and policy making. Accounting and Finance, 38(1), 29–49. CrossRef
Van Lent, L. (1997). Pressure and politics in financial accounting regulation: The case of the financial conglomerates in the Netherlands. Abacus, 33(1), 88–114. CrossRef
Weetman, P., Davie, E. S., & Collins, W. (1996). Lobbying on accounting issues: Preparer/user imbalance in the case of operating and financial review. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9(1), 59–76. CrossRef
- Involving academics in the accounting standard setting process: an application of the Delphi methodology to the assessment of IASB proposals
José Antonio Calvo
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta