A study of accounting standard-setting using graph theory
- 307 Downloads
Abstract
The setting of accounting standards is subject to political influences by commercial companies which prepare financial statements. Despite strong objections from them, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) decided to set conceptual and user-oriented accounting standards on business combinations. The aim of this article is to clarify which groups play a central role using graph theory. These analyses using voice data and data produced from voting behaviors in board meetings reveal that the centrality of the preparers (group) is low, and those of academics (group) and users (group) are high in this project. This result may indicate that there are factors that undermine the power of the preparers in the FASB.
Key words
Accounting standard-setting Graph theory Centrality FASB Business combinationsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Kelly-Newton L (1980) Accounting policy formulation: the role of corporate management. Addison-Wesley, Reading PublishingGoogle Scholar
- 2.Zeff SA (2002) “Political” lobbying on proposed standards: a challenge to the IASB. Accounting Horizons 16(1):43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Wolk HI, Dodd JL, Tearney MJ (2004) Accounting theory: conceptual issues in a political and economic environment, 6th edn. Thomson South-WesternGoogle Scholar
- 4.FASB (2005) Business combinations. A replacement of FASB Statement No.141 (exposure draft). FASBGoogle Scholar
- 5.FASB (1991) An analysis of issues related to consolidation policy and procedures (discussion memorandum). FASBGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dennis D (2008) The process towards convergence continues. Accountancy Ireland 40(2):18–21Google Scholar
- 7.IASB (2008) Business combinations phase II, project summary, feedback and effect analysis. IASBGoogle Scholar
- 8.Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 9.Scott J (2000) Social network analysis. A handbook. 2nd edn. Sage, Beverley HillsGoogle Scholar
- 10.Hanneman B, Riddle M (2005) Introduction to social network methods. University of California, Riverside, CA (published in digital form at http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/)Google Scholar
- 11.Knoke D, Yang S (2008) Social network analysis. 2nd edn. Sage, Beverley HillsGoogle Scholar
- 12.Perry J, Nöelke A (2005) International accounting standard setting: a network approach. Business Politics 7(3.5):1–32Google Scholar
- 13.Richardson AJ (2009) Regulatory networks for accounting and auditing standards: a social network analysis of Canadian and international standard-setting. Accounting, Organizations and Society 34(5):571–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) UCINET for Windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, HarvardGoogle Scholar
- 15.Borgatti SP (2002) Netdraw network visualization. Analytic Technologies, HarvardGoogle Scholar