This study reviews the existing literature on the U.S. peer review system and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection system to assess our knowledge of…
Abstract
This study reviews the existing literature on the U.S. peer review system and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection system to assess our knowledge of audit regulation. The traditional self-regulatory system of the accounting profession came to an end, in 2002, when the PCAOB was established to oversee the audit firms of publicly traded companies. This paper contributes to the controversial debate about self-regulation versus independent regulation by analyzing, categorizing, and comparing the research findings on the peer review system and the PCAOB system along three dimensions: the validity of peer reviews and PCAOB inspections, the recognition of reviews and inspections by decision-makers (e.g., investors, bankers, committees), and the effect of reviews and inspections on audit quality. Synthesizing the research on the regulatory regimes suggests that the notion of external quality control, both through peer reviews and government inspections, is positively linked with an improvement of audit quality. At the same time, the analysis indicates that external users do not seem to recognise peer review and PCAOB reports as very useful instruments for decision-making, which is in line with an identified rather skeptical perception of the audit profession on reviews and inspections. Overall, this study reveals that although the academic literature on peer review and PCAOB inspection is extensive it has not produced definitive conclusions concerning various aspects of audit regulation. This paper shows how this blurred picture is due to conflicting research findings, the dominance of the quantitative research paradigm, and unchallenged assumptions within the literature, and concludes by proposing research opportunities for the future.
Details
Keywords
Lukas Löhlein and Christian Huber
A total of 25 years of research on the audit society has provided rich and engaging accounts of the ways in which rituals of verification have conditioned organizations and…
Abstract
Purpose
A total of 25 years of research on the audit society has provided rich and engaging accounts of the ways in which rituals of verification have conditioned organizations and individuals to think and act. In contrast, this paper aims to explore the possibility of conditions through which things and spaces are enacted to be non-auditable.
Design/methodology/approach
Using the concept of proliferation and rarefaction (Callon and Law, 2005), the paper adopts a case-comparison design to explore two empirical sites. The first investigates a vast excess of audit structures against the case of the biggest corporate fraud in German accounting history, the Wirecard scandal. The second discusses the configuration of Tinder, the most popular provider of mobile dating and the absence of visible verification mechanisms.
Findings
The paper argues that things can become non-auditable through two mechanisms. Based on the two empirical sites, non-auditability can happen through an overload of auditable resources or, through the withdrawal of required resources. The paper discusses the consequences of this finding and suggests avenues for future research on non-auditability.
Originality/value
While accounting scholars have extensively addressed the audit explosion and traced how audit practices have journeyed into ever more novel terrains, this paper discusses forms of escape from the value-subverting and reductive accounts incorporated in the audit society. It thereby points to conditions under which accounting ends.
Details
Keywords
Dominic Detzen and Lukas Löhlein
This paper studies the interactive valuation discourses of an online user community (transfermarkt.de) that seeks to determine market values for soccer players. Despite their…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper studies the interactive valuation discourses of an online user community (transfermarkt.de) that seeks to determine market values for soccer players. Despite their seemingly casual nature, these values have featured in newspapers, transfer negotiations, academic research, and capital market communication – and have thus become reified.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper employs netnographic research methodology to collect and thematically analyze a wide range of user entries on the platform. These entries are studied using theoretical insights from the sociology of quantification and valuation.
Findings
The analysis reveals how values are constructed in constant interaction between value-proposing users and value-justifying “experts.” This dynamic form of relational valuation positions players relative to one another as well as to actual transactions on the transfer market. In the absence of authoritative guidelines, it is this possibility and affordance for interaction that enacts a coherent valuation regime. The paper further reveals the platform's response to a disruptive event, which risked bringing the user-expert dynamics to a halt, requiring intervention from the platform to repair its valuation frame.
Originality/value
The paper responds to increased scholarly interests in the valuation of professional athletes. It contributes to the extant literature on valuation, first, by analyzing the dynamic valuation work that feeds into the social construction of values and, second, by studying platform participation and user interaction in a socially engineered online space.
Details
Keywords
Josua Oll, Theresa Spandel, Frank Schiemann and Janna Akkermann
The purpose of this study is to investigate whether a unified understanding of materiality is possible, given that conceptual pluralism represents a key characteristic of…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate whether a unified understanding of materiality is possible, given that conceptual pluralism represents a key characteristic of materiality approaches in sustainability reporting.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper systematically reviews and examines materiality conceptualizations in sustainability disclosure research and practice, utilizing Gallie’s (1956) analytical framework of essentially contested concepts. The framework enables the separation of conceptual confusion from essential contestation. Whereas reaching conceptual consensus is possible in the former, the hurdles to conceptual agreement are insurmountable in the latter.
Findings
This paper reveals that the prevailing lack of consensus surrounding materiality is grounded in its essential contestation, not in conceptual confusion. This robustly supports the projection of conceptual plurality as materiality’s most probable future.
Research limitations/implications
Building on the materiality concept’s essentially contested nature, this paper calls for future research that explicitly embraces the concept’s plural character and more interdisciplinary research.
Practical implications
As a unified understanding of materiality is unlikely to evolve, standard-setters should provide a clear definition of the underlying materiality concept, offer specific guidance on materiality assessment and issue joint documents that detail the similarities, differences and interconnections between their respective materiality frameworks.
Social implications
Projecting plurality as materiality’s most probable future underscores the importance of users of sustainability reports understanding the materiality concept applied by the reporting entity and the respective consequences for identifying material sustainability issues.
Originality/value
From this paper’s novel insight that materiality is an essentially contested concept, this paper derives two overarching future research directions and offers a broad set of exemplary research questions.
Details
Keywords
Nathalie Repenning and Kai DeMott
This study aims to better understand the emotional challenges that inexperienced accounting researchers may face in conducting ethnographies. To do so, the authors use Arlie…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to better understand the emotional challenges that inexperienced accounting researchers may face in conducting ethnographies. To do so, the authors use Arlie Russell Hochschild’s (1979, 1983) notions of “feeling rules” and “emotion work” to shed light on the possible nature and impact of these challenges, and how her ideas may also become fruitful for academic purposes.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors take a reflective approach in sharing the raw observation notes and research diaries as first-time ethnographers in the area of management accounting. The authors use these to analyze “unprocessed” experiences of emotional challenges from the fieldwork and how the authors learned to cope with them.
Findings
The authors illustrate how emotional challenges in conducting ethnographies can be rooted in a clash with prevalent feeling rules of certain study situations. The authors explore the conditions under which these clashes occur and how they may prompt researchers to respond through means of emotion work to (re-)stabilize those situations. Based on these insights, the authors also discuss how wider conventions of the accounting academy may contribute to emotional challenges as they stand in contrast to principles of ethnographic research.
Originality/value
There remains a tendency in the accounting domain to largely omit emotional challenges in the making of ethnographies, especially in writing up studies. In this paper, the authors are motivated to break this silence and openly embrace such challenges as an asset when the authors talk about the process of creating knowledge.
Details
Keywords
Sameh Farhat Ammar, Martin R.W. Hiebl and Martin Quinn
Burns and Scapens (2000) (B&S hereafter) offered a well-cited framework conceptualising management accounting change. This paper aims to provide a systematic review of how B&S has…
Abstract
Purpose
Burns and Scapens (2000) (B&S hereafter) offered a well-cited framework conceptualising management accounting change. This paper aims to provide a systematic review of how B&S has been used to inform management accounting research and presents an updated framework as a point of departure for future work.
Design/methodology/approach
A systematic literature review method is used to ascertain various contexts and designs of B&S-based research. After an extensive examination of citations, 77 journal articles published are identified, described and analysed.
Findings
The systematic review shows that the B&S framework has been applied in many contexts, yet its main tenets remain unchallenged. Several researchers have suggested additions and amendments, and this paper synthesises these to an updated framework. Similar theoretical advancements were noted, indicating that future contributions should be grounded in comprehensive reviews of literature.
Research limitations/implications
A limitation is that the analysis is limited to journal articles and the results of the review are contingent on the authors’ reading.
Originality/value
An updated framework is a core contribution, serving as a basis for further advances in the understanding of the complexity of management accounting change/stability. In addition, concrete and fruitful areas for future research are presented.
Details
Keywords
Michelle Carr and Stefan Jooss
COVID-19 has forced Big 4 firms to challenge existing management control arrangements and adapt their ways of working. Yet, we know little about how management control might be…
Abstract
Purpose
COVID-19 has forced Big 4 firms to challenge existing management control arrangements and adapt their ways of working. Yet, we know little about how management control might be enacted in the future of the sustainable workplace. The objective of the study is to examine the patterns of management control change in the Big 4 accounting firms during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design/methodology/approach
Adopting an exploratory qualitative research design, the authors draw on 42 interviews with directors and associates in the Big 4 professional services firms.
Findings
The findings reveal two pathways of management control change including alignment and displacement. The authors found that relatively minor adaptions to action and result controls were relied upon to respond to substantial cultural and personnel control changes.
Originality/value
The contributions are threefold: the authors take a temporal perspective to (1) unpack the changes to management control arrangements; (2) theorise the findings by developing a three-dimensional taxonomy of change pathways encompassing pace, scope and longevity of management control change and (3) contextualise management control arrangements in a hybrid work setting.
Highlights
COVID-19 has forced Big 4 firms to challenge existing management control arrangements.
Literature has focused on traditional, onsite work settings and largely ignored change pathways.
The authors take a temporal perspective to unpack changes to management control arrangements.
Big 4 firms adapted to hybrid work with substantial changes to personnel and cultural controls.
The authors theorise the findings by developing a three-dimensional taxonomy of change pathways.
COVID-19 has forced Big 4 firms to challenge existing management control arrangements.
Literature has focused on traditional, onsite work settings and largely ignored change pathways.
The authors take a temporal perspective to unpack changes to management control arrangements.
Big 4 firms adapted to hybrid work with substantial changes to personnel and cultural controls.
The authors theorise the findings by developing a three-dimensional taxonomy of change pathways.
Details
Keywords
Lukas Goretzki, Martin Messner and Maria Wurm
Data science promises new opportunities for organizational decision-making. Data scientists arguably play an important role in this regard and one can even observe a certain…
Abstract
Purpose
Data science promises new opportunities for organizational decision-making. Data scientists arguably play an important role in this regard and one can even observe a certain “buzz” around this nascent occupation. This paper enquires into how data scientists construct their occupational identity and the challenges they experience when enacting it.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on semi-structured interviews with data scientists working in different industries, the authors explore how these actors draw on their educational background, work experiences and perception of the contemporary digitalization discourse to craft their occupational identities.
Findings
The authors identify three main components of data scientists’ occupational identity: a scientific mindset, an interest in sophisticated forms of data work and a problem-solving attitude. The authors demonstrate how enacting this identity is sometimes challenged through what data scientists perceive as either too low or too high expectations that managers form towards them. To address those expectations, they engage in outward-facing identity work by carrying out educational work within the organization and (paradoxically) stressing both prestigious and non-prestigious parts of their work to “tame” the ambiguity and hype they perceive in managers’ expectations. In addition, they act upon themselves to better appreciate managers’ perspectives and expectations.
Originality/value
This study contributes to research on data scientists as well as the accounting literature that often refers to data scientists as new competitors for accountants. It cautions scholars and practitioners alike to be careful when discussing the possibilities and limitations of data science concerning advancements in accounting and control.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to identify specific challenges and opportunities when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. In addition, it offers potential remedies to…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to identify specific challenges and opportunities when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. In addition, it offers potential remedies to frequent challenges when conducting such reviews.
Design/methodology/approach
This piece is based on recent methodological advice on conducting literature reviews and my own experience when conducting and publishing reviews that primarily cover qualitative accounting research.
Findings
The author chart three typical advantages and three typical use cases of literature reviews of qualitative accounting research, as well as the typical process steps and outputs of such reviews. Along with these process steps, The author identifies three overarching specific challenges when conducting such reviews and discusses potential remedies. Overall, this paper suggests that literature reviews of qualitative accounting research feature idiosyncratic challenges but offer specific opportunities at the same time.
Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to offer advice on the specific challenges and opportunities when conducting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research.
Details
Keywords
Jan A. Pfister, David Otley, Thomas Ahrens, Claire Dambrin, Solomon Darwin, Markus Granlund, Sarah L. Jack, Erkki M. Lassila, Yuval Millo, Peeter Peda, Zachary Sherman and David Sloan Wilson
The purpose of this multi-voiced paper is to propose a prosocial paradigm for the field of performance management and management control systems. This new paradigm suggests…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this multi-voiced paper is to propose a prosocial paradigm for the field of performance management and management control systems. This new paradigm suggests cultivating prosocial behaviour and prosocial groups in organizations to simultaneously achieve the objectives of economic performance and sustainability.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors share a common concern about the future of humanity and nature. They challenge the influential assumption of economic man from neoclassical economic theory and build on evolutionary science and the core design principles of prosocial groups to develop a prosocial paradigm.
Findings
Findings are based on the premise of the prosocial paradigm that self-interested behaviour may outperform prosocial behaviour within a group but that prosocial groups outperform groups dominated by self-interest. The authors explore various dimensions of performance management from the prosocial perspective in the private and public sectors.
Research limitations/implications
The authors call for theoretical, conceptual and empirical research that explores the prosocial paradigm. They invite any approach, including positivist, interpretive and critical research, as well as those using qualitative, quantitative and interventionist methods.
Practical implications
This paper offers implications from the prosocial paradigm for practitioners, particularly for executives and managers, policymakers and educators.
Originality/value
Adoption of the prosocial paradigm in research and practice shapes what the authors call the prosocial market economy. This is an aspired cultural evolution that functions with market competition yet systematically strengthens prosociality as a cultural norm in organizations, markets and society at large.