Search results

After the effective date of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 15, the accounting treatment of credit card rewards programmes (CCRPs) is no longer explicitly prescribed. Uncertainty regarding what constitutes faithful representation, and the inconsistent accounting practices observed, has created a need for guidance on the appropriate accounting treatment of CCRP transactions. Accounting theory has the potential to provide the foundation for this guidance. As a result, the objective of this study was to develop a theoretical model for the accounting treatment of CCRP transactions using accounting theory.

This non-empirical qualitative conceptual study utilised document analysis, focussing specifically on accounting theory, to construct an accounting treatment model.

Applying the relevant accounting theory (International Accounting Standards Board's (IASB's) Conceptual Framework), a theoretical model for the accounting treatment of CCRP transactions was developed, which emphasises the importance of understanding the economic phenomenon (the CCRP transaction) and determining how management views the transaction (in isolation as marketing or as an integral part of the credit card transaction).

Addressing the problem of accounting for CCRP transactions with reference to accounting theory (which is the main element of scholarly activity in accounting) distinguishes this study from previous research on the topic. The CCRP accounting treatment theoretical model could assist CCRP management in faithfully accounting for a CCRP transaction and reduce uncertainty and inconsistency in practice. Moreover, this study identified the procedures to be employed when using accounting theory to determine the appropriate accounting treatment of business transactions. These procedures could be employed by accountants when faced with other transactions not covered by specific accounting standards.

The purpose of this essay is to explore the opportunities and challenges that early-career researchers (ECRs) face when they seek to contribute to academic knowledge production through research activities “other than” those directly focused on making progress with their own, to-be-published, research papers in a context associated with the “publish or perish” (PoP) mentality.

Drawing broadly on the notion of technologies of humility (Jasanoff, 2003), this reflective essay develops upon the experiences of the authors in organizing and participating in a series of nine workshops undertaken between June 2013 and April 2021, as well as the arduous process of writing this paper itself. Retrospective accounts, workshop materials, email exchanges and surveys of workshop participants provide the key data sources for the analysis presented in the paper.

The paper shows how the organization of the workshops is intertwined with the building of a small community of ECRs and exploration of how to address the perceived limitations of a “gap-spotting” approach to developing research ideas and questions. The analysis foregrounds how the workshops provide a seemingly valuable research experience that is not without contradictions. Workshop participation reveals tensions between engagement in activities “other than” working on papers for publication and institutionalized pressures to produce publication outputs, between the (weak) perceived status of ECRs in the field and the aspiration to make a scholarly contribution, and between the desire to develop a personally satisfying intellectual journey and the pressure to respond to requirements that allow access to a wider community of scholars.

Our analysis contributes to debates about the ways in which seemingly valuable outputs are produced in academia despite a pervasive “publish or perish” mentality. The analysis also shows how reflexive writing can help to better understand the opportunities and challenges of pursuing activities that might be considered “unproductive” because they are not directly related to to-be-published papers.

Scholarly interest in the business effects of organised crime (OC) has recently increased. This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on the conditions under which OC could pose a threat to or take control of firms within a particular context.

We use narrative synthesis and thematic analysis, with a sample of 46 theoretical and empirical studies published over the past 30 years on the relationship between OC and firms within the disciplines of Business, Management and Accounting (BMA).

SLR and thematic analysis show that scholarly interest has focused on four key domains: OC as a firm, the impact of OC on firms, firms’ efforts to counter OC’s influence and governmental interventions. Using medical metaphors, we also develop a diagram depicting the interplay between OC and firms within the BMA literature.

This study contributes to the literature shaping an agenda to steer future research towards these four key themes. The effectiveness of anti-OC tools and measures depends on a thorough understanding of local norms, behaviours and business practices. In addition to measurement and methodological challenges, several grey areas remain, including the distinction between criminal enterprises and legitimate businesses. Ambiguities also surround the circumstances under which the OC preys upon firms or employs them to establish dominance over a territory.

The study aims to use bibliometric and scientometric analysis to conduct a detailed investigation on the impact of disruptive technologies in accounting and reporting literature. To draw both academics and practitioners through accelerated research activities, the study also aims to look into the significance of these disruptive technologies, their potential and the opportunities they present for the accounting profession.

With the use of the Scopus database and a combination of accounting, reporting, auditing and technology-related keywords, 1660 research articles published between 2008 and 2023 were included in the sample. To provide graphical analysis of bibliometric data and visualize research findings such as bibliographic coupling, co-citation and keyword co-occurrence, this study used the R-biblioshiny and VOSViewer tools.

The findings demonstrate a growth in scholarly interest in the study’s area, particularly in recent years. The bibliometric analysis focuses on three key uses and applications of technology in the accounting and auditing professions: the adoption of continuous auditing and monitoring in the audit profession, the use of software tools in the audit and accounting professions and the connections between information systems and audit.

This study contributes to the literature by examining current research trends on the use of technology in the accounting and reporting professions, identifying gaps in the literature and, most importantly, proposing a research agenda for the field. This study’s data came entirely from English-language articles and reviews in the Scopus database. It also considers studies that are directly relevant to the use of technology in accounting and reporting.

This study aims to objectively synthesize the volume of accounting literature on financial statement fraud (FSF) using a systematic literature review research method (SLRRM). This paper analyzes the vast FSF literature based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. These criteria filter articles that are present in the accounting fraud domain and are published in peer-reviewed quality journals based on Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) journal ranking. Lastly, a reverse search, analyzing the articles' abstracts, further narrows the search to 88 peer-reviewed articles. After examining these 88 articles, the results imply that the current literature is shifting from traditional statistical approaches towards computational methods, specifically machine learning (ML), for predicting and detecting FSF. This evolution of the literature is influenced by the impact of micro and macro variables on FSF and the inadequacy of audit procedures to detect red flags of fraud. The findings also concluded that A* peer-reviewed journals accepted articles that showed a complete picture of performance measures of computational techniques in their results. Therefore, this paper contributes to the literature by providing insights to researchers about why ML articles on fraud do not make it to top accounting journals and which computational techniques are the best algorithms for predicting and detecting FSF.

This paper chronicles the cluster of narratives surrounding the inadequacy of current accounting and auditing practices in preventing and detecting Financial Statement Fraud. The primary objective of this study is to objectively synthesize the volume of accounting literature on financial statement fraud. More specifically, this study will conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine the evolution of financial statement fraud research and the emergence of new computational techniques to detect fraud in the accounting and finance literature.

The storyline of this study illustrates how the literature has evolved from conventional fraud detection mechanisms to computational techniques such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). The findings also concluded that A* peer-reviewed journals accepted articles that showed a complete picture of performance measures of computational techniques in their results. Therefore, this paper contributes to the literature by providing insights to researchers about why ML articles on fraud do not make it to top accounting journals and which computational techniques are the best algorithms for predicting and detecting FSF.

This paper contributes to the literature by providing insights to researchers about why the evolution of accounting fraud literature from traditional statistical methods to machine learning algorithms in fraud detection and prediction.

In 2000, Cañibano et al. published a literature review entitled “Accounting for Intangibles: A Literature Review”. This paper revisits the conclusions drawn in that paper. We also discuss the intervening developments in scholarly research, standard setting and practice over the past 20+ years to outline the future challenges for research into accounting for intangibles.

We conducted a literature review to identify past developments and link the findings to current accounting standard-setting developments to inform our view of the future.

Current intangibles accounting practices are conservative and unlikely to change. Accounting standard setters are more interested in how companies report and disclose the value of intangibles rather than changing how they are determined. Standard setters are also interested in accounting for new forms of digital assets and reporting economic, social, governance and sustainability issues and how these link to financial outcomes. The IFRS has released complementary sustainability accounting standards for disclosing value creation in response to the latter. Therefore, the topic of intangibles stretches beyond merely how intangibles create value but how they are also part of a firm’s overall risk and value creation profile.

There is much room academically, practically, and from a social perspective to influence the future of accounting for intangibles. Accounting standard setters and alternative standards, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and European Union non-financial and sustainability reporting directives, are competing complementary initiatives.

Our results reveal a window of opportunity for accounting scholars to research and influence how intangibles and other non-financial and sustainability accounting will progress based on current developments.

This article aims to systematically review the literature published in recognized journals focused on cognitive heuristic-driven biases and their effect on investment management activities and market efficiency. It also includes some of the research work on the origins and foundations of behavioral finance, and how this has grown substantially to become an established and particular subject of study in its own right. The study also aims to provide future direction to the researchers working in this field.

For doing research synthesis, a systematic literature review (SLR) approach was applied considering research studies published within the time period, i.e. 1970–2021. This study attempted to accomplish a critical review of 176 studies out of 256 studies identified, which were published in reputable journals to synthesize the existing literature in the behavioral finance domain-related explicitly to cognitive heuristic-driven biases and their effect on investment management activities and market efficiency as well as on the origins and foundations of behavioral finance.

This review reveals that investors often use cognitive heuristics to reduce the risk of losses in uncertain situations, but that leads to errors in judgment; as a result, investors make irrational decisions, which may cause the market to overreact or underreact – in both situations, the market becomes inefficient. Overall, the literature demonstrates that there is currently no consensus on the usefulness of cognitive heuristics in the context of investment management activities and market efficiency. Therefore, a lack of consensus about this topic suggests that further studies may bring relevant contributions to the literature. Based on the gaps analysis, three major categories of gaps, namely theoretical and methodological gaps, and contextual gaps, are found, where research is needed.

The skillful understanding and knowledge of the cognitive heuristic-driven biases will help the investors, financial institutions and policymakers to overcome the adverse effect of these behavioral biases in the stock market. This article provides a detailed explanation of cognitive heuristic-driven biases and their influence on investment management activities and market efficiency, which could be very useful for finance practitioners, such as an investor who plays at the stock exchange, a portfolio manager, a financial strategist/advisor in an investment firm, a financial planner, an investment banker, a trader/broker at the stock exchange or a financial analyst. But most importantly, the term also includes all those persons who manage corporate entities and are responsible for making their financial management strategies.

Currently, no recent study exists, which reviews and evaluates the empirical research on cognitive heuristic-driven biases displayed by investors. The current study is original in discussing the role of cognitive heuristic-driven biases in investment management activities and market efficiency as well as the history and foundations of behavioral finance by means of research synthesis. This paper is useful to researchers, academicians, policymakers and those working in the area of behavioral finance in understanding the role that cognitive heuristic plays in investment management activities and market efficiency.

The study aims to investigate market reactions associated with the JUST 100 rankings published by JUST Capital, a non-profit organization, as well as differences in financial reporting quality and performance between selected firms and their industry peers.

This study uses a sample of 431 firms selected as the 100 America’s Most Just Companies between 2016 and 2020 by JUST Capital. This study performs both an event study to determine whether the rankings are useful to investors and cross-sectional regression analyses on the characteristics of selected firms compared to their peers.

This study finds that investors react positively to selected firms around the time of the release of the JUST 100 rankings, suggesting that the rankings are decision-useful. This study also finds that selected firms exhibit higher accounting quality and financial performance than their peers.

Rankings may not be free from bias because of JUST Capital’s ownership of an exchange-traded fund.

The findings validate the rankings as well as the methodology used by JUST Capital, as they show market participants value firms that engage in socially responsible actions through their commitment to positively impact five key stakeholder groups: employees, customers, communities, environment and shareholders.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that shows the importance of the JUST 100 rankings for investment decisions. Considering the growing push for companies to disclose environmental, social and governance (ESG) activities, this study provides evidence to support ESG disclosure regulations.

This study aims to identify the publication phase, performance and scientific contributions of research papers related to enterprise risk management (ERM) and to visualise the emerging themes in addressing volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA).

The biblioshiny technique based on the bibliometrix R package was used to draw journal papers’ performance and scientific contributions by displaying distinctive features from the bibliometric method used in prior studies. The data was extracted from the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus databases.

Since the 1990s, ERM publication has gained momentum, and it is generally categorised into four main themes. Studies by Miller (1992) and Bromiley et al. (2015) scored the highest in global and local citations, respectively. However, the Economic Outlook ranked first in quality of publications while the Journal of Risk and Insurance topped in quantity of publications. Collaborative research mainly exists between two authors, and the dynamic number of collaborative networks is evident in the USA.

This study is limited by the filtered keywords used to generate the search on journal papers’ in WOS and Scopus. It is imperative to have more comprehensive and rigorous analytics on ERM research to enable a direction for future research. Finally, ERM implementation better equips firms to mitigate risk in a VUCA environment.

This study attempts to fill a vacuum of ERM literature, specifically in business economics, in addressing VUCA. Moreover, it covers a comprehensive predetermined period of from its inception in 1983 until 2022.

This article explores whether six broad categories of activities undertaken by Canadian business scholars’ academics: publications record, citations record, teaching load, administrative load, consulting activities, and knowledge spillovers transfer, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to occur.

A multivariate probit model is estimated to take into account that business scholars have to consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake many different academic activities. Metrics from Google Scholar of scholars from 35 Canadian business schools, augmented by a survey data on factors explaining the productivity and impact performances of these faculty members, are used to explain the heterogeneities between the determinants of these activities.

Overall, the results reveal that there are complementarities between publications and citations, publications and knowledge spillovers transfer, citations and consulting, and between consulting and knowledge spillovers transfer. The results also suggest that there are substitution effects between publications and teaching, publications and administrative load, citations and teaching load, and teaching load and administrative load. Moreover, results show that public and private funding, business schools’ reputation, scholar’s relational resources, and business school size are among the most influential variables on the scholar’s portfolio of activities.

This study considers simultaneously the scholar’s whole portfolio of activities. Moreover, the determinants considered in this study to explain scholars’ engagement in different activities reconcile two conflicting perspectives: (1) the traditional self-managed approach of academics, and (2) the outcomes-focused approach of university management.