Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a better, empirically grounded and theoretically informed understanding of data analytics (DA) use and nonuse in accounting for decision-making. To that end, it explores the links between accounting logic, commercial logic and DA use in financial due diligence (FDD).

The paper reports the findings of a case study of DA use in the FDD practice of a Big Four accounting firm in Sweden (Pseudonym: DealCo). The primary data comprises semistructured interviews, observations and additional meetings. Institutional logics is mobilized as method theory.

First, accounting logic and commercial logic both drove and hindered DA use in DealCo’s FDD practice in different ways. Second, conflicting prescriptions for DA use existed mostly within commercial logic rather than between accounting logic and commercial logic. Third, accounting logic and commercial logic, as perceptual and conceptual filters, seemed to shape DealCo’s advisors’ understanding of DA and give rise to an efficiency-centric DA logic. This logic, in turn, as a high-level model of how to use DA in the context of FDD, governed DA use broadly.

The paper draws attention to direct and indirect links between accounting logic and commercial logic, on the one hand, and DA conceptions and use, on the other hand. It, thereby, advances prior theorization of DA use in accounting for decision-making.

New digital technologies are reshaping the business landscape and accounting work. This paper aims to investigate how incorporating more data and new data analytics (DA) tools impacts the role and use of judgment in financial due diligence (FDD).

The paper reports findings from a field study at a Big Four accounting firm in Sweden (“DealCo”). The primary data includes semi-structured interviews, observations and other meetings. Theoretically, it draws on Dewey’s The Logic of Judgments of Practise and Logic: The Theory of Inquiry and distinguishes between theoretical (what is probably true) and practical judgment (what to do).

In DealCo’s FDD practice, using more data and new DA tools meant that the realm of possibility had expanded significantly. To manage the newfound abundance and to use DA effectively, DealCo’s advisors invoked practical and theoretical judgments in different stages and areas of the data-driven FDD. The paper identifies four critical uses of judgment: Setting priorities and exercising restraint (practical judgment) and forming hypotheses and doing sense checks (theoretical judgment). In these capacities, practical judgment and theoretical judgment were essential in transforming raw data into actionable insights and, in effect, an indeterminate situation into a determinate one.

The study foregrounds the practical dimension of knowledge production for decision-making and contributes to a better understanding of the role, use and importance of accounting professionals’ judgment in a data-driven world.