Prior research (Bens and Heltzer, 2004) shows that the market penalizes firms less for reporting goodwill write-downs below-the-line than it does for presenting them above-the-line.  Only in 2002, the year SFAS No. 142 became effective, did goodwill impairments enjoy below-the-line treatment.  The current research provides evidence that firms “cherry picked” this year to recognize large impairment losses, thus removing much of the burden from future years when these losses otherwise would have been reported above-the-line.  The study also indicates that, even though the number of firms taking goodwill write-offs declined subsequent to 2002, those entities that did so seemed to be taking these discretionary hits because earnings were already depressed in the current year.  As such, the big bath earnings management observed in the year of adoption in previous studies (Jordan and Clark, 2004 and 2005) appears to continue even though these impairment losses no longer receive favorable below-the-line treatment.

Many of those who advocate the adoption of a set of high‐quality global financial accounting standards (International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRSs) do so on the basis of enhanced cross‐border financial statement comparability. Indeed, the notion that financial statements would be prepared on a single set of accounting standards regardless of the country of domicile of the underlying businesses certainly has its merits. However, there is a growing body of academic research providing evidence that simply adopting IFRSs, by itself, is not sufficient to result in an enduring improvement in financial reporting quality within IFRS‐adopting countries. National culture, for instance, has the potential to affect accountants' judgments in applying financial accounting standards—regardless of those standards' origin—and to impact national institutions that further influence national accounting. Here, we highlight the findings of some of the relevant research on national culture published in accounting journals in recent years and discuss some potential implications of those findings. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Prior studies on gender differences in the research output of accounting faculty have provided contradictory findings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The current study examines the publication productivity of male and female associate professors of accounting at doctoral and nondoctoral granting institutions and shows that no gender effect exists in the publication output of faculty at nondoctoral institutions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>At doctoral institutions, however, men publish at greater rates than women in the top tier accounting journals and also in a broadened set of academic accounting journals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>No gender effect exists when the journal list is expanded to include academic and professional journals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition, results show that a gender selection bias for coauthors occurs as men tend toward male coauthors and women gravitate toward female collaborators.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With women underrepresented at the associate professor level at doctoral institutions, this gender selection bias may put women at a disadvantage for finding suitable research partners, which could explain their lower publication productivity.</span></span></p>

While clawback provisions have been used in legal cases for decades, only after the passage of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd‐Frank Act of 2010 has the idea of clawback provisions in executive compensation contracts begun to talk hold in the U.S. Although the Securities and Exchange Commission has yet to implement final rules regarding clawback provisions for public companies, in recent years academic researchers have begun to investigate how the voluntary adoption of clawback provisions might impact financial reporting quality, compensation paid to covered executives, firm value, and a host of other firm‐level factors. The purpose of this article is to review select relevant clawback research published in premiere accounting and finance academic journals in recent years to better gauge the implications of clawback adoption and to attempt to discern any corporate governance effects of clawback adoption.

The importance of supply chain management has increased over time as a result of more intense global competition, shorter product life, and rapidly changing technologies. This study examines recent academic research to offer practitioners insight into the benefits of incorporating three‐dimensional concurrent engineering and strategic cost management into the design of their supply chain. It has been shown that this integration can enable companies to achieve their strategic goals of improving their organization's operational and financial performance, reducing costs, increasing customer value and satisfaction, and maintaining a competitive advantage in the marketplace. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.