Search results

This paper proposes a revised analytical model for accounting professionals that can be used to evaluate the financial well being of innovative companies that rely on earnings management practices (EM) for their growth. Through an analysis of corporate governance, financial reporting standards, and ratio analysis this paper reaches the conclusion that Enron extended previously researched earnings management practices that could have been detected in early 2000. Results of the analysis indicate that by using price book, price earnings multiple, net margin percentage, and return on assets, and taking into consideration the so‐called risk management activities which seemed to disguise highly volatile speculative derivative‐based activities, Enron was headed for implosion at least one year before its collapse.

The purpose of this brief article is to describe the chasm between academic research and management practitioners and to call for assistance in closing the divide.

Using journal literature and inductive observation from our experiences we offer our conceptual understanding by way of an opinion/viewpoint piece.

If we are to truly lessen the gulf between organizational researchers and practitioners, movement must occur from both directions. Not doing so will result in a continuing myopic focus on the divide itself instead of fundamental discussions of the more crucial elements that influence organizational performance and productivity.

We outline the relevant implications of our thinking for academics and practicing managers and offer recommendations that, if implemented by all involved, could narrow this gap and enhance the effectiveness of researchers and managers.

The distinctive contribution of this article is that it provides a resolute call for practicing managers to become part of the solution with respect to the relevance of management and organizational research.

The authors critique Modell's proposition that critical realism is useful in elucidating and creating possibilities for emancipation.

The authors begin by outlining Modell's conception of enabling structures. If ‘activated’ by reflexive individuals, these are theorised to be a mechanism through which agents can begin to emancipate themselves. However, the authors argue that emancipation must be contextualised within the material realities of global capitalism, paying particular attention to the shape of inequality and the subjects of exploitation. In doing this, they draw on Marx to pose an alternative view of structure.

In offering a Marxist critique of critical realism, the authors show how capitalist superstructure and base work together to reinforce inequality. In doing this, they highlight the enduring importance of collective action as the engine of emancipation. It is for this reason that they advocate for an emancipatory politics, which is collectively informed outside of, and in conflict with, the logics of capitalism.

The authors argue that explicit discussions of capitalism and its structures must be at the centre of critical accounting research, especially when it pertains to emancipation.

Given the importance of the conceptual framing of critical accounting research, this article suggests that critical realism has much to offer. That said, the authors draw on Marx to raise a number of important questions about both the nature of structure and the identity of reflexive agents within critical realism. They do this to encourage further debate about the emancipatory possibilities of the critical accounting project and the ideas proposed by Modell (2020).