IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/crpeac/v22y2011i2p236-242.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collective intentionality and aggressive earnings management: Developing Norman Macintosh's arguments in the debate over principles- versus rules-based accounting standards

Author

Listed:
  • Okamoto, Noriaki

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, the author considers Norman Macintosh's recent arguments regarding the “bullshit” prevalent in accounting, and explicates the crux of problems raised in disputes concerning corporate aggressive earnings management. Second, the author suggests a theoretical and institutional framework to reconcile the disputes by applying implications from the Searlean theory of collective intentionality. To these ends, this paper draws mainly on related philosophical investigations, and attempts to shed new light on the present debate over principles- versus rules-based accounting standards and aggressive earnings management. Based on a theoretical analysis, this paper concludes by supporting principles-based accounting standards accompanied by the true and fair override provisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Okamoto, Noriaki, 2011. "Collective intentionality and aggressive earnings management: Developing Norman Macintosh's arguments in the debate over principles- versus rules-based accounting standards," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 236-242.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:crpeac:v:22:y:2011:i:2:p:236-242
    DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2010.06.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045235410001309
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.cpa.2010.06.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McKernan, John Francis, 2007. "Objectivity in accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 155-180.
    2. David Alexander & Eva Jermakowicz, 2006. "A true and fair view of the principles/rules debate," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 42(2), pages 132-164, June.
    3. Hamilton, Gavin & Ó hÓgartaigh, Ciarán, 2009. "The Third Policeman: ‘The true and fair view’, language and the habitus of accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 910-920.
    4. Macintosh, Norman B. & Shearer, Teri & Thornton, Daniel B. & Welker, Michael, 2000. "Accounting as simulacrum and hyperreality: perspectives on income and capital," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 13-50, January.
    5. Anil Arya & Shyam Sunder & Jonathan Glover, 2002. "Are Unmanaged Earnings Always Better for Shareholders?," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm295, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Feb 2003.
    6. George J. Benston & Michael Bromwich & Alfred Wagenhofer, 2006. "Principles‐ versus rules‐based accounting standards: the FASB's standard setting strategy," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 42(2), pages 165-188, June.
    7. Norman Macintosh, 2009. "Accounting and the Truth of Earnings Reports: Philosophical Considerations," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 141-175.
    8. Gilad Livne & Maureen McNichols, 2009. "An Empirical Investigation of the True and Fair Override in the United Kingdom," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1‐2), pages 1-30, January.
    9. Schweiker, William, 1993. "Accounting for ourselves: Accounting practice and the discourse of ethics," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 231-252, April.
    10. David Alexander & Eva Eberhartinger, 2009. "The True and Fair View in the European Union," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 571-594.
    11. Shearer, Teri, 2002. "Ethics and accountability: from the for-itself to the for-the-other," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 541-573, August.
    12. Mouck, Tom, 2004. "Institutional reality, financial reporting and the rules of the game," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(5-6), pages 525-541.
    13. John Francis McKernan & Katarzyna Kosmala, 2007. "Doing the truth: religion – deconstruction – justice, and accounting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(5), pages 729-764, September.
    14. Searle, John R., 2005. "What is an institution?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heinz, Philip & Patel, Chris & Hellmann, Andreas, 2013. "Some theoretical and methodological suggestions for studies examining accountants' professional judgments and earnings management," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 299-311.
    2. François-Régis Puyou, 2014. "Ordering collective performance manipulation practices: How do leaders manipulate financial reporting figures in conglomerates?," Post-Print hal-01069276, HAL.
    3. Puyou, François-Régis, 2014. "Ordering collective performance manipulation practices: How do leaders manipulate financial reporting figures in conglomerates?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 469-488.
    4. Mala, Rajni & Chand, Parmod, 2014. "Impacts of Additional Guidance Provided on International Financial Reporting Standards on the Judgments of Accountants," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 263-288.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roberts, John & Wang, Timothy, 2019. "Faithful representation as an ‘objective mirage’: A Saussurean analysis of accounting and its participation in the financial crisis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. Barker, Richard & Schulte, Sebastian, 2017. "Representing the market perspective: Fair value measurement for non-financial assets," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 55-67.
    3. Anne Marie Garvey & Laura Parte & Bridget McNally & José Antonio Gonzalo-Angulo, 2021. "True and Fair Override: Accounting Expert Opinions, Explanations from Behavioural Theories, and Discussions for Sustainability Accounting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    4. McPhail, Ken, 2011. "A review of the emergence of post-secular critical accounting and a provocation from radical orthodoxy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 516-528.
    5. Erb, Carsten & Pelger, Christoph, 2015. "“Twisting words”? A study of the construction and reconstruction of reliability in financial reporting standard-setting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 13-40.
    6. Huikku, Jari & Mouritsen, Jan & Silvola, Hanna, 2017. "Relative reliability and the recognisable firm: Calculating goodwill impairment value," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 68-83.
    7. Shapiro, Brian, 2009. "A comparative analysis of theological and critical perspectives on emancipatory praxis through accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 944-955.
    8. Viorel TURCANU & Irina GOLOCIALOVA, 2016. "Accounting truth and its assurance in entities from the Republic of Moldova," The Audit Financiar journal, Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania, vol. 14(139), pages 769-769.
    9. Joannides, Vassili, 2012. "Accounterability and the problematics of accountability," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 244-257.
    10. McKernan, John Francis, 2011. "Deconstruction and the responsibilities of the accounting academic," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 698-713.
    11. Lehman, Glen, 2013. "Critical reflections on Laughlin's middle range research approach: Language not mysterious?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 211-224.
    12. John Francis McKernan & Katarzyna Kosmala, 2007. "Doing the truth: religion – deconstruction – justice, and accounting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(5), pages 729-764, September.
    13. Marie Zelenková, 2010. "The True and Fair View in the European Union [Věrný a poctivý obraz v Evropské unii]," Český finanční a účetní časopis, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(3), pages 101-110.
    14. Vassili Joannides & Stéphane Jaumier, 2011. "Accounterability ou l'accountability par la bande," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00645359, HAL.
    15. Vassili Joannides, 2012. "Accounterability and the problematics of accountability," Post-Print hal-00676561, HAL.
    16. Graham, Cameron, 2008. "Fearful asymmetry: The consumption of accounting signs in the Algoma Steel pension bailout," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 756-782.
    17. Williams, Paul F. & Jenkins, J. Gregory & Ingraham, Laura, 2006. "The winnowing away of behavioral accounting research in the US: The process for anointing academic elites," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 783-818, November.
    18. Bayou, Mohamed E. & Reinstein, Alan & Williams, Paul F., 2011. "To tell the truth: A discussion of issues concerning truth and ethics in accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 109-124, February.
    19. Dewi, Miranti Kartika & Manochin, Melina & Belal, Ataur, 2021. "Towards a conceptual framework of beneficiary accountability by NGOs: An Indonesian case study," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    20. Claudine Grisard, 2012. "Accountability and Bottom of the Pyramid projects: the two sides of the mirror," Post-Print hal-00690956, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:crpeac:v:22:y:2011:i:2:p:236-242. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/critical-perspectives-on-accounting/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.