Search results

This paper aims to explore problems facing the recruitment of accounting and finance staff in research-led universities. “University accounting and finance (A&F) departments are experiencing difficulty in attracting and retaining suitably qualified staff” (Duff and Monk, 2006, p. 194). The literature identifies a number of reasons for the shortage of A&F phenomenon (Duff and Monk, 2006; Smith and Urquhart, 2018), including, the wide salary gap between academe and industry profession, difficulty in achieving publications in highly rated journal, high workload in teaching and marking due the limited number of A&F staff.

The paper provides new insights for the use of the grounded theory and how the theory has been generated from the semi-structured interviews.

This study has resulted in eight main challenges emerged, and a final theory has been generated. Implications of this research on business schools are valuable in research-led universities, the A&F staff recruitment strategies and the A&F research strategies in research-led universities.

The novelty of this research is based on the induction of the challenges that a business school faces, as a case study for a research-intensive teaching-led UK university, in recruiting new A and F appointees and retaining existing members of staff.

This paper aims to present a comprehensive view of the assets recognition criteria by providing a coherent set of pre-measurement themes that should be taken into consideration to be a candidate asset.

This paper is a conceptual review paper.

This synthesis review results in seven themes; the social constructionist nature of the conceptual framework (CF), the nature of assets, the changing nature of asset recognition, asset measurement bases, entity-specific vs market-specific recognition, the economic resource comprising “rights”, and finally, the role of “separability” in asset recognition.

With the increasing importance of internally created assets and their implications on the financial position of the business entity, and with coinciding of revisiting the CF for financial reporting (at the time of writing this paper), this paper shows a synthesis and comprehensive themes of asset-based recognition criteria for tangible and intangibles assets.

The purpose of this paper is to present asset recognition criteria based on the idea that an asset should be functional, separable and measurable and that financial recognition should be triggered by the recognition of an artefact.

Criteria is applied to four organisational assets, that is, those intangible assets that are unlikely to be reported in the accounting domain.

The criteria is applied in order to show how one may expand the basis on which assets can be reported financially to elements of intellectual capital as well as financial capital.

Artefact‐based asset recognition criteria could be a conduit through which intellectual capital could enter the accounting domain, a domain dominated by the maintenance of financial capital, not intellectual capital.

This paper seeks is to enhance our understanding of intangible recognition by embracing an artefact‐based approach.

The paper presents an artefact‐based approach to intangible asset recognition, an artefact being a physical and visual representation (typically, documentary) of expended human intellectual and physical creativity. This output orientation (what people create: artefact‐based outputs) is compared to an input orientation (the investment inputs in human “assets”) using artefact‐based asset recognition criteria that have already received some exposure in the marketing literature in respect of brands.

Emphasis is placed on outputs, i.e. what people create, rather than on the more familiar input orientation, which focuses on investments in human assets. When compared to an output orientation, the more familiar input orientation is an unsatisfactory basis on which to recognise human assets.

The asset recognition criteria provide a useful checklist by which to delineate an intangible asset from an expense.

The criteria have already been applied to brand assets in the marketing domain. It is now being applied for the first time to human assets.