Search results

Self-regulatory organizations (SROs) can be found in education, healthcare, and other not-for-profit sectors as well as in the accounting, financial, and legal professions. DeMarzo et al. (2005) show theoretically that SROs can create monopoly market power for their affiliated agents, but that governmental oversight, even if less efficient than oversight by the SRO, can largely offset such market power. We provide an experimental test of this conjecture. For carefully rationalized parameterizations and implementation details, we find that the predictions of DeMarzo et al. (2005) are borne out.

After discussing recent academic attempts to assess the status of worldwide military transparency and accountability in nations which adopted open governance paradigms, this paper tries to show that such countries allegedly committed to democracy and open data should coherently fight for military transparency and citizen inclusion in the governance process, avoiding the prevalence of military secrecy over military transparency. The most important contribution of the paper is discussing the lack of military transparency, until now taken for granted as a traditional armed forces ’informal right, and proposing concrete definitions of military transparency and secrecy within the context of the open government partnership. In addition to the definitions, an exploratory model of how military accountability can affect military transparency has been suggested.

For the proposed endeavour, first a description on the context of open governance where the involved public defence sector is inserted is given. Second, notions of military transparency and secrecy are proposed. Finally, the paper discusses when military secrecy could be granted and what it means for military information to be unjustifiably kept secret. At the end, the urge of the citizen involvement to open the still insulated military governance systems is highlighted.

This paper proposes notions of military secrecy and military transparency and suggests the second term as a broader notion which includes the first. This paper also indirectly identifies the conditions for the inadmissibility of military secrecy and calls attention to the bad externalities of unjustifiably holding public information back.

The consideration of the proposed notions of military secrecy and military transparency could minimize the traditional excuse of military confidentiality that armed forces worldwide tend to not to convey public information to the public while making military accountability perfectly possible without overexposing its strategies regarding national defence.

Providing armed forces and citizens with concrete definitions of military secrecy and military transparency could not only help military institutions to develop a sincere transparency policy based on open government terms, but it could also guide interested media and citizens with their control and oversight tasks by establishing clear limits for alleged secrecy while releasing the borders for military transparency.

The suggested approach for military transparency and secrecy is not only adequate to the globalized strategy of open governance but also mainly a way to finally reward citizens’ often misused and manipulated trust.

It is the first attempt of an academic definition for military secrecy and military transparency taking into consideration the open government terms and aiming at improving military accountability.

We investigate whether auditor size is associated with the disclosure of internal control exceptions among Circular A-133 audits of nonprofit healthcare organizations. Our analysis is motivated by recent growth and transparency concerns within the sector. Using a sample of 1,180 audit reports from 2004 to 2008, we find evidence that audits performed by Big 4 firms are less likely to disclose internal control weaknesses than those performed by smaller firms. Additional analyses indicate this relation only remains statistically significant for a subsample of small organizations, possibly due to greater selectivity or lower efforts by the Big 4 auditors. We discuss the implications of these findings from an audit quality, market dominance, and client size perspective. The results are relevant to hospital financial managers seeking high quality audits at low cost.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the existence of a professional oversight body and certain country‐specific education regulations in auditing are associated with a country's perceived level of corruption.

Drawing on data from the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) database, the authors used the Mann‐Whitney U analysis technique to test the difference between countries' perceived level of corruption based on whether they have or have not developed professional oversight bodies and licensing regulations.

Results suggest that countries that have established an audit profession oversight body are, indeed, perceived to be less corrupt. Similarly, countries that require practical experience, academic study, and a licensing examination in order to practice auditing are perceived to be less corrupt. On the other hand, the analysis shows that requiring auditors to fulfil continuing education requirements is not significantly related to a perception of lower levels of corruption.

The paper provides important insights for policy makers, business leaders, education and the audit profession as a whole.

This paper provides some of the first empirical support for the relationship between corruption and the use of oversight bodies and licensing regulations in professional auditing at a country level.

Drawing on network and fiscal federalism theories, we investigated central government patronage and donor aid as antecedents of budget performance in local government (LG). A mixed methods design with data collected from 18 LGs, two ministries, and four donor agencies in Uganda was employed. Results revealed that both central government patronage and donor aid predict budget performance. Moreover, autonomy does not mediate the interactions as initially hypothesized. Implications for theory and practice are discussed and future research direction is provided.

Recent corporate scandals such as WorldCom, Enron, and others suggest a failure of corporate governance, that is, of the allocation of power and its lawful use and accountability within the corporation.

This chapter presents a game theoretic model for analyzing the power dynamics among the three groups responsible for oversight in the Anglo-American corporate model – namely the Board of Directors through its audit committee, corporate management, and the external auditors.

The chapter shows, among other findings, that the current governance structure results in an extreme imbalance of power among the three groups that not only permits but even induces management to conceal necessary financial data and often to ignore the long-term interests of the firm.

The chapter also derives changes in principles of governance that can right such imbalances and prevent defalcations from taking place through institutionalizing effective ex-ante checks and balances of power in addition to the ex post measures that come into play only after a wrong has been committed and which are the case with recent exchange rules and Congressional enactments.

None.

No prior analysis along these lines.

This paper explores how firms within the audience measurement industry, specifically its radio and television markets, have navigated myriad market and nonmarket challenges. The market strategies and the nonmarket forces that constrain those strategies are largely defined by two features: the delineation of its geographic markets by political boundaries and markets that have natural monopoly characteristics. While the pre-monopoly stage or periods of competition may be comparatively short-lived, they are still telling. Monopolists undertake market strategies designed to ensure that they are not supplanted and nonmarket actions geared to avoiding undesirable constraints and reputational damage. Depending on their legal and regulatory environment, customers of the measurement services have used both market and nonmarket actions to mitigate the market power of the audience measurement firms. This paper focuses primarily on the U.S. radio and television audience measurement markets that Arbitron and Nielsen, respectively, have dominated for decades. Non-U.S. markets, which frequently feature America’s foremost firms, illustrate alternatives to America’s largely laissez-faire approach.

The purpose of the paper is to look at the relationship between attitudes toward direct‐to‐consumer (DTC) advertising and its impact on consumer requests for a particular drug.

A sample of 154 consumers completed the survey on‐site at a pharmacy while waiting for their prescription(s) to be filled. Based on exploratory research (focus groups), survey items were developed to capture opinions of pharmaceutical advertising as well as the influence of DTC advertising on consumer behavior.

The findings show that consumers are skeptical of DTC advertising and believe that not enough information is provided about these products. Despite the high level of exposure and the opinions that these ads were effective and informative, few respondents believed that the ads motivated them to request these drugs or put them on a more equal footing with their physician.

The results provide useful information to policy makers, drug companies and researchers. Even though consumers appear to be critical of DTC advertising oversight, these ads appear to motivate consumers to seek more knowledge about drugs or medical conditions mentioned in the ads and request prescriptions from physicians.

This research fills an identified gap in the literature on DTC advertising and its impact on consumer decision making. Limited research has been done on the relationship between consumer perceptions of DTC advertising and its impact on consumer requests for pharmaceutical products.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the major provisions of the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed by the US Congress and signed into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.

This does not offer any empirical analysis of the new law given that it has just been adopted. The paper does provide discussion of the major provisions with some commentary on the arguments for an against each provision.

The new law represents the most sweeping changes in financial regulation and supervision in the USA since the Great Depression. The role of the Federal Government is greatly expanded in almost all aspects of the financial sector of the economy and will affect consumers, investors, and managers of financial service firms. Many feel that the effect of the law will be to adversely affect the competitive environment while others feel the additional regulation is necessary to prevent another financial crisis.

As the provisions of this law become more clear, much research will be needed to assess the true economic impact of the law and whether it is indeed providing the additional safeguards against a financial crisis.

This review of the new law offers a concise discussion of the major provisions of the recently passed law. This review is of value to those seeking an introduction to the law and its provisions and implications.

Recent lapses in the management of high hazard organizations, such as the Fukushima event or the Deepwater Horizon blast, add considerable urgency to better understand the complicated and complex phenomena of leading and managing high reliability organizations (HRO). The purpose of this paper is to offer both theoretical and practical insight to further strengthen reliability in high hazard organizations.

Phenomenological study based on over three years of research and thousands of hours of study in HROs conducted through a scholar-practitioner partnership.

The findings indicate that the identification and the management of competing tensions arising from misalignment within and between public policy, organizational strategy, communication, decision-making, organizational learning, and leadership is the critical factor in explaining improved reliability and safety of HROs.

Stops short of full-blown grounded theory. Steps were made to ensure validity; however, generalizability may be limited due to sample.

Provides insight into reliably operating organizations that are crucial to society where errors would cause significant damage or loss.

Extends high reliability research by investigating more fully the competing tensions present in these complex, societally crucial organizations.