IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v25y2016i4d10.1007_s10726-015-9456-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Accounting Court: Some Speculations on Why Not?

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Kleinman

    (Montclair State University)

  • Pamela Strickland

    (Methodist University)

  • Asokan Anandarajan

    (New Jersey Institute of Technology)

Abstract

The accounting court proposed by Spacek (Account Rev 33(3):368, 1958) was a potent and controversial idea. The court would provide a venue to which auditing firms and clients could bring disputes over the application of accounting principles and over time would build a database of casework illustrating the court’s decisions on proper application and interpretation of accounting principles. In this paper, we contribute to the literature on the accounting court and on standard setting by analyzing group value orientations and motivations that should promote the likelihood of an accounting court appearing in these times. We base our analysis in value group theory (Shakun 1988 Evolutionary systems design: policymaking under complexity and group group decision support systems. Holden-Day, Oakland, CA.), an analysis rooted in an examination of operational and terminal values of key participants. The analysis brings to light a contradiction between the terminal values of the key players and the actions of those players. We argue that common conditions of existence came between the operational goals and terminal values in the accounting domain and key actors willingness to seek the specified values. This analysis provides a flexible but powerful tool for analyzing motivations that may influence behavior of key organizations in the accounting domain.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Kleinman & Pamela Strickland & Asokan Anandarajan, 2016. "The Accounting Court: Some Speculations on Why Not?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 845-871, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:25:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s10726-015-9456-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-015-9456-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-015-9456-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-015-9456-4?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. Kleinman Gary & Anandarajan Asokan & Palmon Dan, 2012. "Who's to Judge? Understanding Issues of Auditor Independence Versus Judicial Independence," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52, August.
    2. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    3. Gary Kleinman & David Hossain, 2009. "Issue Networks, Value Structures and the Formulation of Accounting Standards: An Exercise in Theory Building," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 5-26, January.
    4. Gary Kleinman & Asokan Anandarajan & Ann Medinets & Dan Palmon, 2010. "A theoretical model of cognitive factors that affect auditors' performance and perceived independence," International Journal of Behavioural Accounting and Finance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 239-267.
    5. Gary Kleinman & Dan Palmon, 2000. "A Negotiation-Oriented Model of Auditor-Client Relationships," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 17-45, January.
    6. Paul F. Williams & Sue P. Ravenscroft, 2015. "Rethinking Decision Usefulness," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(2), pages 763-788, June.
    7. Dan Palmon & Marietta Peytcheva & Ari Yezegel, 2011. "The Accounting Standards Setting Process in the U.S.: Examination of the SEC–FASB Relationship," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 165-183, March.
    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. Gary Kleinman & Dan Palmon, 2023. "A Values-based Approach to Understanding Corporate- Stakeholder Interactions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 301-326, April.

    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. Nguyen, Thu Ha & Lan, Yihui & Treepongkaruna, Sirimon & Zhong, Rui, 2023. "Credit rating downgrades and stock price crash risk: International evidence," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(PB).
    2. Kyle D. Allen & Drew B. Winters, 2021. "Auditor response to changing risk: money market funds during the financial crisis," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1057-1086, April.
    3. Krishnamurti, Chandrasekhar & Chowdhury, Hasibul & Han, Hien Duc, 2021. "CEO centrality and stock price crash risk," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    4. Kleinman, Gary & Anandarajan, Asokan, 2011. "Inattentional blindness and its relevance to teaching forensic accounting and auditing," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 37-49.
    5. Sarowar Hossain & Jeff Coulton & Jenny Jing Wang, 2023. "Client Importance and Audit Quality at the Individual Audit Partner, Office, and Firm Levels," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 59(2), pages 650-696, June.
    6. Hou, Canran & Liu, Huan, 2020. "Foreign residency rights and corporate cash holdings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Anna Che Azmi & Yuen Hoong Voon, 2016. "The Effect of Clients’ Auditing Experience and Concession-Timing Strategies on Auditor-Client Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 1049-1069, September.
    8. Anthony D. Miller & David Oldroyd, 2018. "An Economics Perspective on Financial Reporting Objectives," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(1), pages 104-108, March.
    9. Danielle E. Warren & Miguel Alzola, 2009. "Ensuring Independent Auditors: Increasing the Saliency of the Professional Identity," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 41-56, January.
    10. Kim, Jeong-Bon & Liao, Shushu & Liu, Yangke, 2021. "Married CEOs and Stock Price Crash Risk," QBS Working Paper Series 2021/09, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    11. Mostafa Monzur Hasan & Grantley Taylor & Grant Richardson, 2022. "Brand Capital and Stock Price Crash Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(10), pages 7221-7247, October.
    12. Wally Smieliauskas & Kathryn Bewley & Ulfert Gronewold & Ulrich Menzefricke, 2018. "Misleading Forecasts in Accounting Estimates: A Form of Ethical Blindness in Accounting Standards?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 437-457, October.
    13. Min Jung Kang & Y. Han (Andy) Kim & Qunfeng Liao, 2020. "Do bankers on the board reduce crash risk?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 26(3), pages 684-723, June.
    14. Chu Chen & Giorgio Gotti & Tony Kang & Michael C. Wolfe, 2018. "Corporate Codes of Ethics, National Culture, and Earnings Discretion: International Evidence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 141-163, August.
    15. Bhargava, Rahul & Faircloth, Sheri & Zeng, Hongchao, 2017. "Takeover protection and stock price crash risk: Evidence from state antitakeover laws," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 177-184.
    16. Yi Si & Chongwu Xia, 2023. "The Effect of Human Capital on Stock Price Crash Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 589-609, October.
    17. Chen, Yangyang & Ge, Rui & Zolotoy, Leon, 2017. "Do corporate pension plans affect audit pricing?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 322-337.
    18. Ana Albuquerque & Julie Lei Zhu, 2019. "Has Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act Discouraged Corporate Investment? New Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 3423-3446, July.
    19. Wen, Fenghua & Xu, Longhao & Ouyang, Guangda & Kou, Gang, 2019. "Retail investor attention and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. Jacco L. Wielhouwer, 2015. "The public cost of broken trust: Spillover effects of financial reporting irregularities," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 132-152, October.

    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:spr:grdene:v:25:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s10726-015-9456-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.