Search results

The evolution of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) was nurtured by economists and accountants loyal to the philosophical basis of what is often referred to as “Western” market economies, being classical and neoclassical contracting theories. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how a particular Asian cultural attribute (guānxì ) impacts on the efficacy of fair value measurement.

Using a literature review and research of studies of the adoption of IFRS in China, studies of both guānxì and fair value in Chinese accounting research, this study unbundles Williamson’s governance structure and contracting theory to examine how guānxì is positioned orthogonally to fair value (market-oriented valuation) principles for financial reporting. This is followed by a case study of the events surrounding the collapse of China Medical Technologies.

Guānxì is integral to Asian economies and economic transactions. Resulting conditions, characterised by relational contracting, may not meet the qualitative characteristics of neutrality and faithful representation in fair value measurement of assets and liabilities. The same may be true when insider or “trusted party transaction” values prevail for large ticket transactions among entities in any jurisdiction.

Future research on the impact of guānxì may be constrained by its often hidden, and yet dynamic, character; and the varieties of its manifestations.

This study highlights how difficult it may be to achieve both comparability and relevance in the asset and liability recognition and measurement rules in Asian (and possibly also other) economies adopting accounting principles that are developed in a Western context.

A gap between research and practice is commonly perceived throughout accounting academia. However, empirical evidence on the magnitude of this detachment remains scarce. The authors provide new evidence to the ongoing debate by introducing a novel topic-based approach to capture the research-practice gap and quantify its extent. They also explore regional differences in the research-practice gap.

The authors apply the unsupervised machine learning approach Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to compare the topical composition of 2,251 articles from six premier research, practice and bridging journals from the USA and Europe between 2009 and 2019. The authors extend the existing methods of summarizing literature and develop metrics that allow researchers to evaluate the research-practice gap. The authors conduct a plethora of additional analyses to corroborate the findings.

The results substantiate a pronounced topic-related research-practice gap in accounting literature and document its statistical significance. Moreover, the authors uncover that this gap is more pronounced in the USA than in Europe, highlighting the importance of institutional differences between academic communities.

The authors objectify the debate about the extent of a research-practice gap and stimulate further discussions about explanations and consequences.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper to deploy a rigorous machine learning approach to measure a topic-based research-practice gap in the accounting literature. Additionally, the authors provide theoretical rationales for the extent and regional differences in the research-practice gap.