Search results

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.

This study examines the relationship between gender orientation (as measured by the Bern Sex Role Inventory) and success and between gender orientation and job satisfaction among accounting professors. Prior studies have shown that women in professions formerly dominated by men (among them public accounting) possess stereotypically masculine characteristics to a greater degree than average (Wong et al., 1985; Lemkau, 1983; Maupin & Lehman, 1994). Existence of these conditions in accounting academia would carry important implications for accounting professors, and for the profession of which they are a part. Results indicate that female accounting faculty at higher ranks are more likely to possess masculine characteristics than those at lower ranks. Job satisfaction was found to be related to gender orientation, but not to gender.

Purpose – Recruiting sufficient participants who adequately represent the population of interest is an ongoing issue for accounting experimental researchers. This study investigates the impact of recruitment method on the number of participants, effort on the experimental task, and sample bias with respect to three individual difference variables (locus of control, social desirability response bias, and prosocial behavior). We employ five different recruitment methods: three forms of monetary compensation and two levels of an appeal for help with a research project.

Methodology – We recruit students in five sections of the same course taught by the same instructor (not one of the researchers), manipulating recruitment method across sections. Immediately following recruitment, participants completed a simple experimental task and scales for the individual difference variables.

Findings – We find that the method of recruiting resulted in different response rates, with appeal from a fellow student yielding the highest response rate, and appeal from a professor yielding the lowest response rate. Effort was greatest for the appeal from the professor and least for the draw. While the five subsamples that resulted from the five recruiting methods were not different with respect to the individual difference variables, the relationship of those variables to effort did vary.

Research Implications – Our findings suggest that researchers must carefully consider recruitment method not only in terms of how many participants can be attracted, but also in terms of the potential impact of the manner in which recruitment was conducted on the attitudes and behaviors of the participants during the experiment.

With the changing business environment, skills rather than familiarity with rules are more important to accountants’ success. In response to mounting criticisms of accounting education and supported by calls from the Accounting Education Change Commission, efforts have been made by some accounting educators to adapt accounting education to this changing environment. However, there is little research to date about the individual characteristics that can be leveraged to improve the outcome of accounting education. We investigate three individual characteristics: anti-intellectualism, tolerance for ambiguity, and internal locus of control. The results show that all three variables may impact performance in accounting education and that the structure of an accounting program may reward characteristics that are not in line with skills required by the profession. Fortunately, the design of an accounting program may help students alter their skills to be more in line with professional requirements.

This paper explores who among the AACSB categorization of academics conducts the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research within business schools and how AACSB-accredited business schools capture SoTL research as part of their portfolio of intellectual contributions.

This study adopts a qualitative-method research design by collecting primary data through surveys, semi-structured interviews and secondary data in policy documents focused on AACSB-accredited business schools in Canada and the United States.

The findings establish that scholarly and practice academics who possess rigorously acquired research skills due to their terminal degrees are most likely to conduct SoTL research. The results also reveal an even split among respondents regarding whether their AACSB-accredited business school captures SoTL with their journal ranking frameworks.

Based on the findings, two recommendations are offered to foster more SoTL research at AACSB-accredited schools. First, higher education leaders (e.g. business school deans) can further inculcate a culture of SoTL research at the department and institutional levels by creating communities of practice (CoPs). Second, AACSB-accredited business schools could adopt more inclusive journal ranking frameworks to capture better and incentivize SoTL research.

This is the first known study to explore how AACSB Standards 3 and 8 are implemented and operationalized regarding SoTL research. Understanding how these standards are adopted and implemented could help institutional leaders, standard setters and administrators better facilitate SoTL research.

This study explores the implementation of two Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) standards by business schools across Canada and the US. First, this study examines how teaching effectiveness is defined and measured in light of Standard 7 (Teaching Effectiveness and Impact). Second, this study explores the value of research on teaching and learning in relation to Standard 8 (Impact of Scholarship).

This study adopts a thematic analysis framework based on data obtained from an online survey, semi-structured interviews, and policy documents.

The results reveal that business schools rarely define teaching effectiveness; instead, they adopt various measures to evaluate teaching effectiveness. The results reveal that research on teaching and learning alone usually does not lead to tenure; however, it is valued if part of a portfolio that includes discipline-specific research. Lastly, this research highlights a stigma associated with research on teaching and learning relative to discipline-specific research.

This study introduces a comprehensive and integrated teaching evaluation framework that can be adopted to define teaching effectiveness and elevate the teaching function. In addition, the authors argue that business schools should nurture a niche set of academics that holds PhDs in their respective disciplines and are education experts to increase the production of research-informed instructional strategies curated for business schools.

This is the first study to explore how AACSB standards related to teaching effectiveness and research on teaching and learning are interpreted and implemented at AACSB accredited business schools.

Audit negotiations are impacted by many factors. This study aims to investigate how two such factors, communication of the National Office Accounting Consultation Unit (ACU) and the auditor’s approach, affect chief financial officers’ (CFOs’) willingness to adjust the financial statements and satisfaction with the auditor.

This study uses a 2 × 3 between-subjects experimental design. Participants are 169 highly experienced CFOs and financial officers. The experimental design crosses the two multi-dimensional auditor approaches found in the literature with two influence tactics used to communicate ACU involvement, as well as a control condition, with no communication of the ACU involvement.

Communicating the ACU’s involvement as a higher authority (similar to a boss) results in greater willingness to record an adjustment to the financial statements when auditors use a hands-off “compliance-officer” auditor approach, but lower willingness by CFOs to adjust the financial statements when auditors use an expert-advisor auditor approach as compared to when coalition tactics are used. Results also show that communicating the ACU as a higher authority negatively impacts a CFO’s satisfaction with the audit partner. Overall, these results highlight the importance of the auditor’s approach and communication of ACU involvement within the auditor–client relationship. The outcomes of this study are limited to situations where unexpected audit adjustments are found during the year-end process and thus cannot be discussed pre-emptively with clients.

This paper advances the understanding of how the multi-dimensional auditor’s approach can shape and limit the effectiveness of influence tactics. These factors are important, as auditors are tasked with maintaining not only quality audits but also client relationships. However, although rich in detail, factors other than auditor approach may have inadvertently been manipulated and are driving results.

The approach taken by the auditor with a client throughout the audit sets the stage during the auditor–client negotiations. Therefore, audit partners must consider their own approach with the client before communicating the ACU’s involvement as the auditor approach shapes and limits the tactics available for use. Using ill-suited tactics may undermine the client’s willingness to record an adjustment to the financial statements and cause undue harm to the auditor–client relationship.

This paper uses highly experienced CFOs and financial officers to examine how two common elements in the audit negotiation context can significantly affect the outcome to the financial statements and the relationship between the client and audit partner.