No abstract

Purpose This study aims to better understand how academics-in-the-making construe doctoral performance and the impacts of this construal on their positioning in relation to doctoral performance expectations. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on 25 semi-structured interviews with PhD students from Canadian, Dutch, Scottish and Australian business schools. Findings Based on Decoteau’s (2016) concept of reflexive habitus, this study highlights how doctoral students’ construal is influenced by their previous experiences and by expectations from other adjacent fields in which they simultaneously gravitate. This leads them to adopt a position oscillating between resistance and compliance in relation to their understanding of doctoral performance expectations promoted in the academic field. Research limitations/implications The concept of reflexivity, as understood by Decoteau (2016), is found to be pivotal when an individual integrates into a new field. Practical implications This study encourages business schools to review expectations regarding doctoral performance. These expectations should be clear, but they should also leave room for PhD students to preserve their academic aspirations. Originality/value It is beneficial to empirically clarify the influence of performance expectations in academia on the reflexivity of PhD students, as the majority of studies exploring this topic mainly leverage auto-ethnographic data.

No abstract

No abstract

This article explores how valuers construct value opinions. Although some implications of outsourcing valuation to valuers for accounting purposes have been highlighted in the literature, we add a valuer perspective complementing the accountant's standpoint in order to obtain a fuller picture of these ramifications. Drawing on 62 interviews, we study the role of judgment in valuation and find that judgment is largely tied with the sensemaking of valuers. By examining the valuation activities of art and real estate valuers, we show that these specialized valuers follow a similar valuation process which allows them to grasp how to go on with valuation. This four‐phase process starts and ends by situating the opinion in its specific valuation context and is centered on iterations between researching, analyzing, and relativizing comparable data that may be adjusted to connect with a sense of what the value should be. Overall, judgment is shown to be enacted based on a practical sense of conducting valuation that includes a “gut feeling” of what represents a plausible value. This study suggests that the valuer's input should be recognized as situated, sense‐contingent, and vulnerable to the underlying politics and risks tied to providing an opinion. Our results also point to stark differences between how valuers approach the use of judgment compared to how judgment is typically exercised by accounting specialists.