Bridging the gap between academia and standard setters

Abstract

2Bridging the gap between academia and standard setters ABSTRACT. PurposeThis commissioned paper reviews literature outlining reasons for a perceived gap between academics and standard setters as policy makers. It emphasises how academics and standard setters can collaborate on accounting and audit research and assist standard setters to act in the public interest. Design/methodology/approachThe approach is primarily a literature and document review of relevant issues, summarising New Zealand's standard setting arrangements, providing examples of successful policychanging research, and making recommendations on future research topics. FindingsDespite the long-held views of a gap between academic researchers and standard setters, increasingly standard setters utilise research and request input from academics in their deliberations. Standard setters can increase the likelihood of relevant research by promoting critical issues for research and connecting their practitioner networks with academics.Academics can bridge the gap by selecting topics of mutual interest, and communicating their findings widely and well. Practical implicationsIncreasing collaboration should lead to better accounting and audit standards. Originality/valueThis paper highlights matters of concern in the New Zealand standard setting environment where there is a strategic objective to undertake research. Key wordsAudit standard setters; financial accounting standard setting; public interest; legitimacy; regulation; research; standard setters; standards Article Classification: Viewpoint Acknowledgements This paper has been reviewed for accuracy by senior staff at the New Zealand standard setter. 3Bridging the gap between academia and standard setters

How the XRB Uses Research in Setting Accounting and Assurance Standards

“…9 In order to increase participation, the selection of participants is targeted towards constituents that are likely to have been impacted by the proposals and those that have been involved in similar consultations. 10 Based on their experience, Sinclair and Cordery (2016) describe how to bridge the gap between academia and standard setters. 11 The XRB, along with its Australian counterparts, are active participants at the Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand's annual conference, especially the auditing and financial reporting special interest group forums.…”

“…1010Based on their experience, Sinclair and Cordery (2016) describe how to bridge the gap between academia and standard setters.…”

The governance of standard setting and the role of academia in Italian accounting regulation, 1942 to the present

“…The societal impact of academic research is increasingly under scrutiny and academics are facing increasing demands to address issues closer to practice and to increase their real impact on society (Parker et al, 2011). In such a scenario, standard setting is one of the main areas to which financial accounting scholars can contribute (Evans et al, 2011; Sinclair and Cordery, 2016) by aiding standard setters to resolve financial reporting issues with competence and authority (Barth, 2007).…”

Barriers to Transferring Auditing Research to Standard Setters

“…The objectives of this article are (i) to examine the barriers encountered by auditing regulators and standard setters (hereafter, auditing policymakers) to systematically utilizing the large extant and growing body of audit academic research and (ii) to identify potential strategies to enhance systematic and effective academic audit knowledge transfer that are suggestive for developing a research agenda. There are numerous studies by academic researchers and professional accounting bodies that suggest that the current knowledge translation process is not as successful as needed or desired, for example, Evans, Burritt, and Guthrie () in Australia; Leisenring and Johnson (), AAA Research Impact Task Force (), and Franzel () in the United States; Humphrey, Loft, and Woods () in the United Kingdom; Sinclair and Cordery () in New Zealand; and Monitoring Group () internationally.…”