In recent years, numerous studies have investigated whether individual executives and their characteristics relate to financial reporting choices. In this article, we review archival, experimental and survey research on the influence of individual executives on corporate financial reporting and use upper echelons theory as our organizing framework. Our review of 60 studies shows that research consistently finds that top management executives exert significant influence on financial reporting decisions, particularly on disclosure quality. Empirical research has developed promising approaches to investigate executives' psychological attributes and character traits. The results of studies examining the influence of demographic characteristics of individual executives are, however, sometimes contradictory and ambiguous. Nevertheless, the overall empirical results we review are supportive of upper echelons predictions. Additional research in this field is needed to clarify the influence of unexamined upper echelon characteristics, important moderator variables, and adverse selection effects. We also suggest that future research more closely investigates the magnitudes of managerial influence and adopts a more holistic perspective on financial reporting outcomes.

Management accounting in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has been an issue of growing interest in the management accounting literature in recent years. However, published research is fragmented, spanning various fields such as accounting, small business and entrepreneurship, general management, and production and operations management. This paper aims to synthesize extant knowledge on management accounting in SMEs and provide concrete suggestions on how to proceed. We performed a systematic literature review, synthesized the results, and identified research gaps. Our findings show that usage of management accounting is not only lower but also different in SMEs compared to larger entities. Based on a comparison of SMEs, the review explains how environmental, staff, and organizational factors significantly influence the organization of management accounting in SMEs and that SME performance in general benefits from proper management accounting. We conclude with several concrete research questions and opportunities.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic literature review of available research evidence on risk management in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The authors aim to reveal ambiguities, gaps and contradictions in the literature, and to sketch avenues for further research. Design/methodology/approach – The authors follow the tenets of Tranfield et al. (2003) for conducting a systematic literature review. Following a key word search and an assessment of fit for this review, 27 papers were analyzed with respect to bibliographical information, research design and findings. Findings – The review identified various types of risks that may occur in SMEs. In addition, the publication analysis demonstrates the importance of a risk management process in SMEs and that the characteristics of SME owners have a significant impact on their business strategies. Research limitations/implications – Additional empirical research on risk identification, risk analysis, strategy implementation and control in the SME risk management process is needed. Originality/value – This paper is the first comprehensive review of the body of literature on risk management in SMEs.

Systematic review techniques are about to become the “new normal” in reviews of management research. However, there is not yet much advice on how to organize the sample selection process as part of such reviews. This article addresses this void and analyzes this vital part of systematic reviews in more detail. In particular, it offers a critical review of systematic literature reviews published in the Academy of Management Annals and the International Journal of Management Reviews between 2004 and 2018. Based on this methodological literature review, the article presents issues to consider in the most critical choices during the sample selection process. Furthermore, this review identifies several descriptive features such as the mean number of research items included in systematic reviews, the mean number of databases used, and the mean coverage period of such reviews. These numbers may be used as benchmark figures in future reviews.