Within the decision-making process, investors are interested in finding the most effective solutions that will allow them to obtain short-term benefits. Current economic environment is characterized by the emergence of new financial instruments that can assist investors to diversify their investment portfolio. Crypto-currencies represents a category of financial assets that can be used by investors to reduce risk and achieve significant returns. Therefore, the study intends to analyze the financial behavior of investors in the moment of publishing the financial statements. Financial statements could have a positive or negative influence on the investment portfolio and structure. The issue analyzed by this study is represented by the ability of the cryptocurrency Bitcoin to be considered as an alternative investment asset. The study is divided into two parts. In the first part, the study presents the review of literature about value-relevance, cryptocurrency term and speculative bubble. The second part presents the research methodology and results. The results of the study validate the hypothesis of this study, cryptocurrency Bitcoin being a financial asset that can be used as an alternative investment asset for diversification of investment portfolio.
Stephanie F. Cheng, Gus De Franco, Haibo Jiang, Pengkai Lin
This paper provides evidence on public firms’ initial 8-K disclosures that mention Blockchain and investors’ response to these disclosures. We categorize the description of Blockchain activities in firms’ 8-Ks as Speculative (e.g., a vague future plan that involves Blockchain) or Existing (e.g., a description of Blockchain product). We document a sharp increase in the number of initial 8-K disclosures of Blockchain, particularly by Speculative firms, coinciding with the rise of Bitcoin prices and excitement in Blockchain technology in the last quarter of 2017. Investors react positively to the Blockchain 8-Ks issued by Speculative firms in the initial seven-day event window although the reaction is mostly reversed over the 30 days following the disclosure. The reaction is stronger when Bitcoin returns are more positive. Overall, our results are consistent with a situation that troubles the SEC and the financial press: investors overreact to a firm’s first 8-K disclosure of a potential foray into Blockchain technology and that overreaction is a function of the Bitcoin price bubble. This paper was accepted by Brian Bushee, accounting.
Chelsea M. Anderson, Vivian W. Fang, James Moon, Jonathan E. Shipman
ABSTRACT This paper explores U.S. public firms’ cryptocurrency holdings and accounting practices from 2013 to 2022 against the backdrop of the recently enacted crypto accounting rule, ASU 2023‐08. Descriptive analyses suggest exponential growth in corporate crypto holdings and significant variation in crypto accounting practices, underscoring the rule's necessity. Hypothesis tests using the pre‐rule data reveal three insights with direct relevance to the rule. First, firms appear to view crypto assets more akin to investments than intangible assets, consistent with the rule's mandate of the fair value model. Second, Big 4 auditors steer firms toward the impairment model and less detailed presentation choices. This conservative approach is unlikely to meet the new rule's goal of providing the most decision‐useful information. Third, increased liquidity of crypto markets prompts the use of the fair value model and a more detailed presentation, consistent with the rule's focus on more actively traded tokens. However, within our sample, we find some evidence consistent with fair value reporting increasing stock return volatility and no evidence that it enhances earnings informativeness.
Abstract This paper examines the prediction that blockchain technology will transform accounting and the profession because transactions recorded on a blockchain can be aggregated into financial statements and confirmed as true and accurate. We argue that blockchain technology affects the database engine of the accounting information system (AIS) through digitisation of the current paper‐based validation process. In a blockchain‐based AIS, accountants will no longer be the central authority but will remain the preparer of financial reports required by regulations; they will continue to influence policies such as the choice and accreditation of validators and serve as validators of last resort. Audit evidence still needs to be gathered for rendering of an audit opinion in a blockchain‐based AIS. While digitisation of the validation process reduces the error rate and lowers the cost of vouching and tracing, and immutability of blockchain data reduces the incentive and opportunities for fraud, a blockchain‐based AIS alone does not guarantee that financial reports are true and fair. Lower error rates and reduced incentives for accounting fraud in a blockchain‐based AIS are expected to improve audit quality. This prediction will need to be empirically tested when blockchain‐based AIS become available. Using the three‐tier architecture of the AIS, this paper addresses the gap in the literature that misses how characteristics of blockchain technology can influence the implementation of a blockchain‐based AIS with related implications for the accounting profession.
Abstract Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology expected to have significant impacts on the accounting and auditing profession. This study, applicable and timely for both accounting and auditing scholars and practitioners, explores blockchain technology and its main implications for the accounting and auditing profession. The research question addressed in this study is: What are the major themes emerging from academic research and professional reports and websites debating blockchain technology in the accounting and auditing context? A literature review of academic literature and professional reports and websites is performed to identify a taxonomy of emerging themes. The study finds that the most discussed themes in scholarly works and professional sources are governance, transparency and trust issues in the blockchain ecosystem, blockchain‐enabled continuous audits, smart contract applications and the paradigmatic shift in accountants' and auditors' roles . Based on these four themes, practical implications for accountants and auditors on how to approach the blockchain development are provided. Moreover, this study offers suggestions for future research on accounting and auditing in the blockchain era.
Abstract We investigate whether Chinese cryptocurrency investors show confirmatory bias when processing authority‐related news. Authority‐related news is defined as news that is related to government authority (including central bank) policies or talk. By using data from the largest cryptocurrency exchange in China, we find that investors’ response to authority‐related news is negative and significant in general. Moreover, we find that the abnormal trading volume and standard deviation of abnormal trading volume are significantly higher for authority‐related news with higher readability, suggesting investors respond to the more readable authority‐related news with more trading behaviour.
Despite calls for regulation in the crypto utility token market, it is unclear how crypto token investors value current regulatory proposals. We find that on average, investors react negatively to news that increases the likelihood of securities and transparency-related regulation. We also find that this negative reaction is attenuated for tokens rated higher on quality and transparency by intermediaries, those that have higher levels of disclosure, and listed on more liquid exchanges. The observed variation in token transparency and this muted reaction suggest investors perceive disclosure costs to be lower for tokens in more transparent environments, suggesting that transparency matters to investors.
Erica Pimentel, Emilio Boulianne, Shayan Eskandari, Jeremy Clark
ABSTRACT Presently, auditing firms are hesitant to accept mandates from companies that hold a significant amount of cryptoassets, primarily because the blockchain sector introduces novel, technically sophisticated, and risky propositions that auditors are unequipped to handle. Abrupt recusals by auditors operating in this sector have led to several enterprises being placed on cease trade by securities regulators for failure to produce audited financial statements on time, thus impeding these companies from raising capital and bringing new investments to fund innovation in this space. Through an iterative process of interviews with senior accounting professionals, structured brainstorming among a multidisciplinary team of accountants and blockchain experts, and a focus group with experienced auditors, we critically analyze the purported roadblocks to auditing blockchain firms and map them to traditional auditing practices. We urge auditors to reconsider their resistance to the blockchain sector by demonstrating that providing an audit opinion is challenging but not insurmountable.
Günlük yaşama çok hızlı bir giriş yapan kripto para birimleri bireyin hayatını çevrelemeye başlamıştır. Muhasebe bilimi açısından konuya bakıldığında incelenmesi gereken finansal açıdan hayati derecede önemli yeni durumlar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunlara kripto para birimlerinin muhasebeleştirilmesi, meydana gelen kazancın vergilendirilmesi, işletmelerin bünyelerinde bulunan kripto paraların ve bu paralarla yapılan işlemlerin denetim açısından durumu sayılabilir. Bu çalışmada kripto para birimlerinin muhasebe açısından incelenerek muhasebeleştirilmesi, vergiye konu edilmesi ve denetim açısından durumunun irdelenmesi ve çeşitli önerilerde bulunulması amaçlanmaktadır.
SUMMARY A perennial challenge in the accounting profession is how to aggregate and share instances of practitioner misconduct among numerous relevant parties. At present, both the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) offer solutions for centralized collection of misconduct, but both likely experience issues with incomplete reporting from key constituents. I propose a novel use of blockchain technology to address this issue, such that all key parties in the accounting profession leverage an accountancy blockchain to aggregate and share instances of practitioner misconduct across the country on a nearly real-time basis. Such a network creates an immutable record of misconduct and allows key constituents in the accounting profession to work together and share information as peers without the risk of one party taking control of the ledger. I close by discussing blockchain-specific roadblocks to realizing this proposed model.
With innovation always comes unknowns. Blockchain technology and crypto–assets are no different. Often times, innovators are so worried about getting their product to market or scaling at mass that they overlook the legal ramifications of their innovations. As Mark Zuckerberg infamously said, “move fast and break things.” Facebook was in no way alone in this style of innovation. However, with respect to crypto–assets, the SEC has stepped in and is attempting to prevent the “break things” aspect. One of the major issues relating to crypto–assets is that many people still do not understand what they are, or how the underlying technology works. At the moment, we do not know what to classify crypto– assets as: property, commodities, or something else . If the SEC determines that crypto–assets are investment contracts, the regulation that follows is at risk of putting stranglehold on the underlying innovation and technology. It becomes an issue of balancing consumer protection and innovation for society. SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. laid out a pronged test to determine whether a transaction is an investment contract, subjecting it to securities laws. This note examines the Howey Test to explain why two popular crypto–assets, Bitcoin and Ethereum, are unlikely to satisfy the Howey Test, and briefly addresses the need for clarity in this area. }
This article provides a comprehensive critique of current corporate foreign exchange risk management (FXRM) practices. The authors characterize much of FXRM as a “legacy” activity, a set of outdated, often decentralized and “earnings‐driven” methods and procedures that have not been subjected to rigorous cost‐benefit analysis at the enterprise level. And according to the authors, the costs of poorly designed and executed FXRM have increased sharply in recent decades because of the growing demand by analysts and investors for cost‐efficiency, transparency, and predictability. After discussing six ways in which the FX policy of most large multinationals fails to serve the interests of their investors and other important stakeholders, the authors offer the following: (1) a restatement of the goals of FXRM; (2) an illustration of various ways of implementing a largely (if not completely) centralized approach to FXRM; (3) a proposal for aligning performance evaluation and executive pay with the goals of FXRM; (4) suggestions for improving decision‐support tools in relation to FXRM; (5) proposals for integrating FXRM into an enterprise‐wide risk management system, which include shifting responsibility for FXRM from the Finance/Treasury group to a centralized risk committee (typically under a Chief Risk Officer who reports to the board of directors); and (6) suggestions for improving communication of a company's risk management policies and practices to investors and other stakeholders.
Blockchains represent a novel application of cryptography and information technology to ag-eold problems of financial record-keeping, and they may lead to far-reaching changes in corporate governance. Many major players in the financial industry have began to invest in this new technology, and stock exchanges have proposed using blockchains as a new method for trading corporate equities and tracking their ownership. This essay evaluates the potential implications of these changes for managers, institutional investors, small shareholders, auditors, and other parties involved in corporate governance. The lower cost, greater liquidity, more accurate recordkeeping, and transparency of ownership offered by blockchains may significantly upend the balance of power among these cohorts.
Despite the frequent mention of Bitcoin in recent years in the press and business publications, many people are still uncertain what this cryptocurrency is or how it works. And although bitcoins (BTCs) are now an accepted medium of exchange for some businesses and not‐for‐profit organizations, no specific accounting guidance has been issued for these transactions. This article provides some basic information about BTCs and addresses six specific financial accounting issues: asset classification, mining activity, investment holdings, exchanges, merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions, and disclosure.
ABSTRACT This study focuses on three broad Finance organization roles: reporting, compliance, and internal control/risk management (RCCR); performance management; and strategic partner. Using data from a global survey of 832 firms, we examine the determinants of the various roles' importance and their relation with Finance effectiveness. While the effects of organizational change, market growth, international operations, firm size, decentralization, and industry on Finance responsibilities vary depending upon the role, we find little evidence of tradeoffs between the various roles. Instead, we find evidence of complementarities between roles, whereby greater emphasis on one role is associated with greater Finance effectiveness in the other roles. Additionally, we find that information system integration (ISI) not only has a positive direct impact on effectiveness in all three roles, but also interacts with the importance placed on RCCR and performance management roles to improve the Finance organization's effectiveness at carrying out these responsibilities.
Being asked to make a short speech as part of accepting the award inevitably leads to some introspection and reflection on major factors that have influenced one's career, be they events or individuals. Past recipients of the award have been very influential in putting management accounting on the map. Some have been instrumental in developing the way we think about management accounting and teach the subject; some have developed important perspectives such as information economics, combining economics with psychology, the importance of national culture, activity-based cost management, and balanced scorecards. The way these recipients developed their thoughts is well told in their acceptance speeches and collectively provides a wealth of ideas and a historical perspective on the development of our discipline.I commenced my studies in economics, and I maintain a keen interest in economic approaches to management accounting. However, early in my academic career, I was pressed into considering an organizational approach to management accounting, not because it was an easier option; rather it addressed the world of management accounting within which I found myself. In this address, I will share with you some personal reflections on the process of my discoveries in the area of organizational approaches to management accounting from the mid-1960s.The backdrop to this address is that research is something of a growth model. Stage 1: starting from a baseline of skills and knowledge gained at undergraduate studies; stage 2: progressing through refinement of skills with more graduate study; and stage 3: consolidating through work toward publications and other academic outputs. Stages 1 and 2 are somewhat planned and incremental, while stage 3 is more often associated with less ordered processes, often stumbling across potential research areas by way of reading and personal interactions. Research projects can be focused around existing ideas, sometimes being somewhat formulaic, sometimes highly innovative. Often ideas can be serendipitous and develop in unpredictable ways. The key is to recognize when there is a management accounting angle that will relate to an important organizational or social issue.I initially thought I would pursue a career in science; however, when it came time to enroll in an undergraduate degree, I selected economics. In the 1960s, economics degrees in Australia were focused on macro- and microeconomics with a strong orientation toward public policy. Macroeconomics examined the behavior of entire economies such as overall price levels, unemployment rates, inflation, and the like. Microeconomics studied the behavior of individual decision-making units, be they individual consumers or organizations, and typically how decisions by these units are coordinated by the market mechanism. While there are many crossovers in examining macro- and microeconomics and both are required to educate economists, most students developed a preference to specialize in either macro or micro issues. I had a preference for matters related to microeconomics.Microeconomics stressed the importance of prices, income, and quantity from the perspective of consumers. Consumer choice was examined by way of indifference curves and budget lines. Market mechanisms were studied mostly assuming perfect competition. Theories related to production functions and cost curves heralded a need to consider the nature of the technology of the firm. Costs were separated into marginal, average, and total costs. Fixed and variable behavior was defined, with the curious idea of marginal fixed costs flagging that costing was deserving of more attention. Marginal analysis and profit maximization required understanding cost behavior, and the various time lines on decisions. Economic profit was seen as cleverer than accounting profit as it included a charge for capital, a notion that sparked much debate later in accounting on issues such as residual income and shareholder value models. Looking back, contemporary management accounting had much to offer these traditional theories in microeconomics as it can unpick the nature of costs and their behavior depending on activity, time, and the nature of decisions involving costs.In some courses, malfunctioning market mechanisms were considered with the economics of environmental protection, including energy and natural resources, flagging an area that would be important in management accounting 30–40 years on. I found these particularly interesting, but public policy in the 1960s was not as focused on the environment as it is now. Other topics that received limited attention but enough to whet the appetite were the economics of poverty, inequality, and discrimination. This list of issues from basic microeconomics is only illustrative of topics, but there are strong echoes in this 1960s material of research agendas that have captured the attention of management accountants over the past 20 years.It was common in Australia during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s for individuals to go overseas to undertake graduate education, typically to the U.K. or U.S. However, in the mid-1960s, after completing my undergraduate degree, I was keen to enter the workforce and joined a bank as an economic researcher. I was involved in doing feasibility studies for client firms. After a couple of years, I decided to undertake a master's degree in financial management at Southampton University in the U.K. This was my formal introduction to more advanced ideas in finance, financial and management accounting. The area of financial accounting was heavy with theoretical debate on the meaning of income and asset valuation, with theories of finance being articulated and refined. Management accounting was pragmatic and practice oriented with the principles and practices being articulated in well-crafted books published out of both the U.S. and the U.K. In the main, theories were borrowed from financial accounting and finance to consider issues such as valuation, income, and discounted cash flows. There were some spirited debates on issues related to measuring income within divisionalized organizations and the transfer pricing issues that this might generate.Also, management accounting academics provided scholarly accounts on the application of operations research techniques to management accounting issues, such as linear programming and simulation. This generated much excitement but did not seem ever to fulfill its full promise. One suspects that the changes envisaged by the techniques were never accompanied by considering people and implementation issues in innovations driven by formal model building. In the 1990s, management accountants would address these implementation issues, in some depth, when considering changes accompanying the introduction of activity-based accounting and performance measurement systems such as balanced scorecards.On completing my master's degree, I accepted an appointment at Sheffield University. This opened up a new world of management accounting thinking, for me, being led at that time by Tony Lowe and Tony Tinker. While my background and predilections led me to study management accounting from a traditional economics approach, the Sheffield school was developing a much more sociological and critical orientation. More generally, these ideas were being advanced in the U.K. by scholars such as Anthony Hopwood, Wai Fong Chua, David Cooper, and others. While my background and orientation constrained my motivation to embrace these ideas fully at this time, the approach did open my mind to examining the assumptions behind many of the economic theories I had learned in my economics degree and graduate finance courses.My curiosity to examine economic theories with modified assumptions can be traced back to my work on feasibility studies and business plans for firms while working at the bank. Assumptions of rational behavior and perfect knowledge did not fit the business folk with whom I worked in both large- and medium-sized client organizations. While I knew that there were works in economics that had developed theories with assumptions that were flexible and realistic, I had not studied these in depth. My growing awareness that organizational context and individual behavior could be captured in solid economic theories derived from work on the behavioral theory of the firm (e.g., Simons 1947; Lindblom 1959; Cyert and March 1963), from economists who examined the behavioral ramifications of growth models (e.g., Penrose 1959; Marris 1964) and the ideas of Williamson (1975) on differences between market and non-market decision making, management, and service provision. These works had theoretical elegance combining economic and behavioral theories and resonated with my state of mind at this stage. Consideration of these works can still provide insights related to management accounting research and organizations, as can more recent work that focuses on economics and psychology.At about the same time, I became aware of another line of research that was examining diversified firms. The work of the business historian Chandler (1962) examined how divisionalized organizational structures were a response to growing diversification in U.S. firms. There followed a series of studies that examined this association between strategy and structure in the U.S. (Rumelt 1974), U.K. (Shannon 1973), France and Germany (Dyas and Thanheiser 1976), and Japan (Suzuki 1980). This was my introduction to the idea that an administrative arrangement might develop to suit a type of strategy. These studies followed an approach that was emerging known as contingency theories, or more correctly, organizational theories following contingency frameworks.More comprehensive contingency approaches were developed and articulated in the U.S. by Lawrence and Lorsch (1967), Thompson (1967), Perrow (1967), Galbraith (1973); in the U.K., Woodward (1958), Burns and Stalker (1961), the Aston school lead by Pugh and associates (Pugh et al. 1963); and later in Australia by Donaldson (1987). I found that these works combined interesting theories that context mattered when considering administrative change, and the ideas were embedded in practice. These works had a profound impact on the study of organizations and still provide important insights relevant to contemporary settings. Systems theory was also popular in some quarters but perhaps became overly complicated when applications were considered (Bertalanffi 1968). However, the seeds of configuration approaches can be seen in this thinking and important ideas, such as equifinality, are relevant to recognizing that different management control systems (MCS) can suit similar contexts.Around 1973, I returned to Australia, taking up a position at Macquarie University. Awareness of contingency approaches and the strategy and structure literature provided the impetus for my Ph.D., which looked at diversification strategies within Australian business, drawing on industrial economics to examine diversification, and organizational theory to identify elements of context that were associated with different forms of this I had the of with who was very influential in developing approaches to organizational In this I a configuration approach which was somewhat at the time and something of a to analysis to the 1970s, there was much in management accounting issues drawing on organizational My work at this stage involved considering the information of (e.g., as well as work on diversification and management there was enough published research on management accounting to David and me to a of and in the which we The of Management et al. In the main, these were with only a potential for the way organizational context was associated with the of gained a with the publications by and (1975) and These contingency research on the stage. and that firms with that are were associated with a strong on formal that firms more administrative on formal of and in in the early 1970s, Anthony published the of which considered performance in of profit budget and from a study of cost that profit is to in The potential for context to became with the of David Ph.D., which that did not when considering profit These publications generated much excitement and were to an of work that considered when organizations develop a on accounting performance and and provide critical of the While accounting performance measurement and the is somewhat with more recent topics the way we think about performance such as balanced that and context the of more recent practices provides many for the many management accounting with an organizational interest were management accounting practices and considering in which they were most of such as and became popular areas of study with an early lead in the area of and provide a of the was instrumental in the of in analysis to the impact of organizational context on This of was in research and generated many related to and other of More the of the applications were by and as part of in a growing in the application of techniques to Looking back, I that the application of this approach of on a and could be for somewhat the I developed a with a business school in with we had many to issues of management control with on development and to on ideas with academics in and organizational we developed of thinking about the information of and and the of information as and The was also somewhat in its time, in that it developed and a model for organizational to of environmental and about in of information to about the impact of by considering the information This something of a with many being published by who included in as the studied to me, and were very similar work at the same time and were to market with their These of were focused on the impact of organizational on the and of to both and organizational also led and to identify that firms open to accepted formal and These were the to the of of to the potential of the same time, the notion of in and was being developed by Simons the of the of control particularly and More the of formal and the attention of in and and provides many for important research et al. works involving which had theory driven that modified included that in decisions to costs on considering costs could be in in which there was and and how the of on the of the context and these projects had their in with and in their had joined University in which had only a in management accounting. In joined the at I had known as a master's at Macquarie University and was aware that had some interesting work on related to industrial and organizational psychology, in models. the was strong in financial accounting and finance, I was very of as a were the same and had a with work that focused on the organizational of this time, we were involved in an for Management This was the of the national by at the University of with an national research in management accounting, and a These provided a of with and public organizations and the need to research studies on innovations in management accounting in the Australian The from of these studies provided the to address the of some of organizational work in accounting that were considered in models. The of and was of the to a systems approach to relate of to strategy and various While there have been only a systems this area much to how of are embedded within an of organizational that the attention of and me on the world of management accounting and control was our in a Australian to management in firms that had received for practice including some in management accounting. This was of to undertake research with a budget and a highly of from the management were to insights into the of performance in and and the application of in organizational and These projects involved which was a in from my but was provided the to out the of organizational and the importance of individual factors such as and While somewhat in of and this provided for and theory building. from this et al. was in the list in business for about in this flagging the importance of management accounting to a management than management the of this I can working with academics from other management in our these were management during the my for research involved being in a at a time and with a particularly relevant a of with the Australian I was aware of their to activity-based accounting from the early these matters with who had published work on in the U.S. it was that was also aware of activity-based accounting in of the of the U.S. over the same time and gained from the Australian and the U.S. to study these this time, and implementation issues was highly and we were to identify a model that of the of these organizations and The approach we was well received by the organizations, as it on important issues the differences in the way time is in with time being different from the nature of time as a variable is in management accounting research that to and many for of the way events can research was the that my David had with an on early with people within this it was that they social as important to their and that recent to more through financial management practices was in this social This provided an for and me to ideas from management control and social to how management accounting could or the development of social in this et al. also opened the to undertake projects on the of management accounting in with and the context of their operations returned me to some of the most interesting of economics from my undergraduate economics with more sociological approaches to study the of management accounting in and other organizations would seem a to considering in it is interesting to on in the area of related early there been to research from solid theoretical been the of theories that have been drawing on traditional and contemporary organizational psychology, and as well as economic While some have been critical that management accounting been in theory development and on economics have that this is much to develop an understanding of management accounting in its organizational and social context the to in the by and and and that in to from other theories to how management accounting works and or social we develop theories of management accounting and While this would make management accounting I not it would that we study is about how different practices are embedded within the more social and that in organizations and However, it will be interesting to how for a management accounting theory go about developing this these I that we need to of in theories in related that how and their in contemporary in organizational accounting to be or studies toward a on approaches at the individual some studies have to organizational and These have to be well popular been and most of my early research in management accounting In it is important to that attention is to that the and measurement of are and the importance been stressed of that the meaning and of are and that the nature of between and is be they or et al. in the and can be in to of attention to these development and measurement issues. is required in the meaning of such as activity-based costing and balanced we are to a of knowledge around these the literature on such as total approach et al. it is somewhat that many management accounting not the into the and of potential of to 20 are not in management accounting This response need not be a there is in but attention to practice can that are taking the the of is the way of doing a by way of or is to be in the have the of being at from the and have the of being more Often these are gained at the of not how the were to the and of the and their would seem an and often when this studies involving the of have but they in this as an is often a of students and studies skills in and and insights to and make of the many of management accounting studies and publications in management accounting and in other that some studies in management accounting can be In my I have the when research that understanding the and that are involved in the of and management accounting, such as the of in organizational and of planned in and and the of in social et al. need to and their skills in of the to they undertake This in and and in study perhaps by way of courses, often in such as psychology, or of more research examined and with and the of these studies were not their development been the application of various forms of analysis to models involving organizational and work analysis and while more including have measurement and models to be combined considering contingency there are various to examine the ideas of fit The techniques in contingency studies are in and and systems is that to be to that the the notion of contingency that is being study of and context systems or configuration the of analysis been theory on how of context can be but this approach much as it the of a need to a more understanding of various of and their with different of context in However, as with other there is a need to theory to the of and how they might be at in the study can be as being a are other techniques that are in management accounting but promise. These and such as and theory can address more sometimes an process between and the ideas or the are the be modified or of the often a such as or which of for or and other such as and This can who and they it and identify This is a way to which can be combined with material and the need to be to and This might be a process as new and are examined to the emerging issues or This can be both and at the same time, but can provide insights which to develop emerging issues can be While there is much to be in the way practices such as and balanced are there is a need to study more of management accounting within on the idea of combining formal and practices and and This might such as social as well and formal and et al. The idea of a of is often a more of than with its of practices and organizational theories, attention to the organizational can provide a solid theoretical for many issues contemporary organizations. The have the have the are the management are and the way we think about strategy been However, many of the issues in the still have theoretical it is important to with new theories that have in recent years as these provide to our research into the of management accounting and These for theories that address and change, theories from behavioral economics that economics with psychology, ideas on organizational the of in and social on management accounting. Some of these ideas are in organizational and innovations are examined that can in developing and by a and focused orientation. recent events during the we be more how management accounting to management, which been studied from a of will be relevant to the study of have much to to and control in the areas of management, and social with in the of economics, financial accounting, operations management, management, and information technology can be very and an way of up to on a of approaches to organizational analysis relevant to research in management we often develop our ideas with the of be they or the of I have been to have had over the years who have the research it both and In management accounting, these David and who have me my understanding of management accounting research by way of many or over the years Anthony Hopwood, and the management accounting at University and the of There have been many who have provided and from time to time, and I could another to my for and critical of my research over the this of my how I have the management accounting research from an organizational perspective and how organizational issues can the development and of management accounting. of my research been driven by through with organizations and and a of theory driven to and how management accounting is in the the of my to the of for me this which is a that I
This paper studies the relationship between R&D decentralization and financial performance. It examines also the impact of this decentralization on earnings management. To specify what does matter in the decentralization of the R&D we try to examine the relationship between centralization or decentralization of the R&D and the firm’s performance on one hand and the earnings management as measured by discretionary accruals on the other hand. We use two internal finance indexes (internal cash flows, internal market capital) and two mechanism of governance (stock-options, institutional investors) to explain the determinants of the R&D’s strategy.Using a sample of 160 U.S. Multinational companies (MNCs) between 2001 and 2006 our results show that MNCs decentralize their R&D for dual goal to improve firm’s profitability or performance and to help manager to manage earnings in their own interest. Moreover, despite the fact that R&D decentralization has a positive impact on performance, institutional shareholders and performance-based compensation encourage managers to decentralize their R&D in order to spur their opportunistic behavior.