Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTIn this essay, I reflect on my roughly 25 years in accounting research by discussing 25 topics related to (1) the journal review process, (2) specific types of accounting research, and (3) the research process. I hope that these observations will prompt additional thought and discussion, help accounting doctoral students and faculty to publish their research, and potentially challenge some readers.

In this commentary, I offer several observations for managing a successful and satisfying academic accounting career. First, I encourage readers to appreciate two key realities of the academic accounting labor market: the rewards derived from research and the massive shortage of accounting Ph.D.s. Second, I encourage readers to carefully consider the culture of potential employers, including such issues as the emphasis on "face time," homogeneous versus heterogeneous treatment of faculty, and the fit between an institution's research culture and its resources and constraints. Finally, I encourage readers to maintain personal focus on critical goals by choosing opportunities judiciously, achieving multiple outputs from one effort, and recognizing that personal organization promotes success. These observations are based primarily on my own experiences and those of experienced, successful colleagues. While my comments are primarily for Ph.D. students and junior faculty, I hope that faculty at all ranks will find useful insights.

ABSTRACTBased on a survey of professionally oriented (PO) accounting faculty, tenure-track faculty, and administrators, we examine the integration of PO faculty members into accounting departments. We find fairly positive views regarding PO faculty members' integration into accounting departments, the leveraging of PO faculty members' skills, and PO faculty members' contribution to achieving departmental missions. However, PO faculty are less positive than others about their integration and the leveraging of their skills, and they are more positive than tenure-track faculty about their contribution to achieving departmental missions. PO faculty primarily contribute in teaching and service, with limited research focus. We find evidence of needed improvements in PO faculty benefits, with broad support for certain improvements, but PO faculty are significantly more likely than others to offer specific suggestions for change. We offer four action steps primarily to bolster the strategic and decision-making roles of PO faculty.

ABSTRACTThis essay addresses key needs for research in five areas related to developing and utilizing accounting faculty: faculty development (the backgrounds of who enters academia, how these individuals are trained in doctoral programs, and what advice is given to them), faculty management (the ongoing performance measurement and reward systems that are applied to individual faculty members), faculty portfolio (who provides administrative oversight, how workloads may vary across individuals, and how faculty are utilized), departmental culture (broader issues of culture), and academic freedom (the climate of academic freedom). Within each area, we pose research questions designed to provide faculty members and administrators with insights to enhance the development and utilization of accounting faculty.

ABSTRACTThe three of us devote a significant portion of our research time to publishing in peer-reviewed practitioner accounting journals, in addition to our focus on traditional academic journal publishing. In this article, we first discuss overall considerations when publishing for practitioners, including finding topics, writing, statistics, and implications. Then, we describe the five types of practitioner papers we typically produce and how we develop each type of paper: small literature reviews, empirical papers, thought pieces, skills papers, and current topic updates. We conclude with discussion of related educational opportunities and issues, including using practitioner articles in class, exposing doctoral students to practitioner publishing, and getting academic credit for practitioner publishing in tenure, promotion, and annual performance reviews. At a time when accounting academia is seeking to enhance the relevance and impact of research, we hope this paper will prompt other academics to begin or increase their contributions to practitioner journals.

ABSTRACTFor the period 2013–2017, we examine top contributors to five practitioner journals published by leading U.S. accounting practitioner or professional organizations, based on an analysis of the authorship of over 1,000 main articles. Further, we survey leading contributors. Our authorship analysis reveals that the leading academic institutions and academic authors in practitioner journals are more likely to be top 100 in accounting education research, rather than in traditional academic accounting research. Further, most of the academic authors are tenured faculty members, and many have extensive practice experience. While some large accounting firms are leading contributors to practitioner journals, most of the top non-academic institutions are other accounting, consulting, and law firms. The survey findings highlight that authors' key motivations to publish in practitioner journals relate to potentially contributing to/influencing practice and gaining wide readership of their work, but the formal rewards to authors often are limited.

ABSTRACT
AACSB Accounting Standard A5 requires accounting programs to integrate data analytics and other technology topics into the accounting curriculum. Through semistructured interviews of 15 accounting chairs, we examine the overall approaches used by accounting programs to integrate data analytics into the curriculum. We find that most programs have used a "hybrid model" of integrating analytics into the accounting curriculum with assistance from other business departments, primarily information systems, management, and data analytics. Most programs have integrated data analytics with little or no additional external resources, and most have relied heavily on input from their departmental advisory board. Based on internal or external measures, most chairs provide some evidence of improved student outcomes. Programs plan to keep their analytics content current primarily through ongoing interaction with and feedback from external stakeholders and former students or reliance on internal stakeholder expertise. We discuss implications and directions for future research.

ABSTRACT
Based on interviews of 20 accounting chairs, we examine chairs' perceptions of current challenges facing accounting academia and the chairs individually. Overall, the most significant issue facing accounting programs today is declining enrollments and students' negative perceptions of accounting, with low pay in accounting as a major element. Key challenges facing chairs individually relate to enrollment declines and students' negative perceptions of accounting, heavy workload, faculty hiring, department culture, and motivating faculty. We further examine enrollment and research issues, including how programs are attempting to address enrollment declines, emerging impacts of enrollment declines, often somewhat nebulous research standards (including recognition of practitioner publications), and a growing collection of research impact measures. We hope that the discussion of how to address key challenges will be useful to chairs and that our findings will spur additional research.

ABSTRACT
The academic accounting labor market is experiencing rapid changes on several fronts. We examine accounting program leaders' perceptions of Assistant Professor hiring criteria, including how the criteria have changed in recent years. We ask program leaders to provide qualitative perspectives, rate the importance of 56 possible hiring criteria, and, in a supplemental analysis, rank and rate four hypothetical Assistant Professor candidates. Based on responses from 54 accounting program leaders, the results reveal a complex setting with research and teaching considerations, a focus on collegiality and professional experience, and an increasing focus on diversity. Specifically, Research Intensive schools (Carnegie R1 and/or doctorate in business) are more top-tier research and top-tier doctoral program focused, while Non-Research Intensive schools (all others) are more focused on general skills, other refereed journals, practitioner research, teaching experience, service, CPA licensure, and other professional certifications.