No abstract

In face of broad adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is considering its quality and acceptability. This paper reports a study that examines changes in value relevance with a sample of Peru firms mandated to use international accounting standards between 1999 and 2007. The period under study is broken into a period of International Accounting Standards (IAS) between 1999 and 2001, a period of early IFRS between 2002 and 2004, and a more recent period of IFRS between 2005 and 2007 by major changes to accounting standards. The empirical results generally indicate that value relevance improved from the IAS period to the early IFRS period when the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) took over the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC), but worsened from the early IFRS period to the recent IFRS period when more accounting standards started to reflect IASB's preference for fair value measurement of assets and liabilities. Quality weakens to a greater extent for firms with more discretion for fair value estimates. Further analysis shows that such changes are less likely to result from changes in economic conditions, but from the changes of the standards. The findings are particularly alarming in face of rising IFRS adoptions and call for quality improvement to IFRS.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is report the importance of research publications for the tenure promotion and for faculty in accounting, finance, and information system (IS) areas, developing valid criteria for the assessment of quality in related journals is necessary. Design/methodology/approach -Existing rankings are usually based on a survey among faculty members, while ignoring the chairs' critical role in tenure evaluation. This paper uses department chairs' responses to a survey asking to assess relative journal quality, and hence provides quantitative standards to measure research productivity. The rankings are primarily obtained by the familiarity-rank position index method. Different sets of rankings for the decision-makers in universities, with various requirements for research are provide. Findings -It is found that the rankings in accounting and finance areas are consistent with the prior research, but the rankings in the IS have changed significantly. This difference to the rapid growth in the field of IS is attributed. The robustness check also corroborates the ranking lists. Originality/value -In addition, this paper reports not only a comprehensive ranking list including most journals in accounting, finance, and IS areas, but also separate rankings in each field.