Unformatted text preview:

Is Accounting an Academic Discipline? American Accounting Association Annual Meeting Plenary Session Washington, D. C. August 9, 2006 John Fellingham1Over 80 years ago Henry Rand Hatfield addressed this organization on the general question of “Is Accounting an Academic Discipline?” Hatfield’s address was entitled “An Historical Defense of Bookkeeping,” (Journal of Accountancy, April, 1924) and he offered a reasoned and, in my opinion, eloquent defense of accounting. Nonetheless, “defense” is the key work here, and there is no doubt that Hatfield believed accounting to be under attack. Consider his first sentence: “I am sure that all of us who teach accounting in the university suffer from the implied contempt of our colleagues, who look upon accounting as an intruder, a Saul among the prophets, a pariah whose very presence detracts somewhat from the sanctity of the academic halls.” After 80 years it does not seem premature to revisit the question. What has been our effect on “the sanctity of the academic halls”? What contributions have we made? How are we earning our keep? Have we increased or decreased the “implied contempt” effect? Do we belong? Should we be located at the University? Should we move to PWC University? May I begin by posing three questions? Actually I think it is three different ways to frame the same question. There are lots of accounting journals. Are the contents read or noticed by other citizens of the University? It seems hard to find evidence that that is so. Indeed, at yesterday’s plenary session Anthony Hopwood offered evidence that accounting journals are very internally focused and self-referential. More casually, but perhaps more telling, is this question: what big intellectual ideas have we contributed to the University? Can we say human genome, or options pricing, or something of that magnitude? While we have figured some things out, we are not used to thinking in terms of our contribution, as a discipline, to the University. Nor do we have a practiced response when, or if, the question comes up.2Hatfield, by the way, says the answer to the previous question is double entry accounting – that it is a significant intellectual contribution. Well, we still study that and can make that contribution. More about that later. Here’s another way to ask the same question. This way of posing the question stresses the inseparability of research and teaching in an academic discipline. If they become seriously separated, it is another reason to question “academic sanctity.” When we teach accounting courses, especially those attended by students from various other parts of the University, do we put our best ideas forward? Do we document our contributions to the University, or explain why the thinking in math or physics or other disciplines is better because we are around? We can all make our own judgments here, but I am skeptical. The codification of accounting rules provides an alternative way to organize and frame the teaching of accounting. That is, we teach the rules, and contribution to the academy is de-emphasized. So the tendency is to think in terms of contributions to the students, the current generation of students – to prepare them for a job – and not to think in terms of contributions to the academy, and future generations of students. So the emphasis in our teaching, and, to a large extent, in our research for that matter, is on the vocational. And vocational is different from academic, so location of accounting at the academy is problematic. And, we are back to Hatfield’s concern: if it is job training, do we belong in the sacred halls of academe? But accounting is an important job. And here’s another potential argument for housing accounting training in the halls of the University. (An argument that I do not find persuasive.) It is too important a job to be relegated to vocational training programs housed in industry. Rather the training should be University housed so we can access the best thinking the University has to offer, and make it available to the students who are training to do accounting’s important work.3But that argument gets a little tenuous. Let’s skip, for now, how often we go out of our way to access the University’s best thinking (and the University is supposed to do the best thinking). The real reason the argument gets tenuous is that is sets up accounting as a citizen of the University with a separate and different kind of citizenship. This class of citizen extracts benefits from University residence but does not feel responsible for making legitimate scholarly contributions. This reduces accounting’s ability to speak as a respected source on University and scholarly matters. Here a broader issue comes into view. The University is a very special institution in society. Historically, it has made contributions to civilization which could not have occurred elsewhere. Currently, and maybe always, the University is under pressure. The stakes are high; nothing less than the continued health of the American University is at issue. And not acting as full citizens takes accounting out of play in this high stakes game. Note carefully: the contributions required for full academic citizenship are contributions to the academy; not to the current generation of students nor notably, to ourselves. It is not uncommon to frame an academic career in terms of “career management.” How to get published; how to get tenure; and so forth. This is a dangerous frame to use. Science, that is the contribution to the university, may be traded off against “career management.” The objectives of career management and science may not be congruent. We have seen some high profile examples of this dynamic gone wrong: what happens when the science is shaded so the results advance a career. To return to career management for students, there are significant forces emanating from the accounting profession. Perhaps understandably the profession (implicitly or explicitly) exerts pressure so that an accounting education is appropriate training for4immediate entry into the accounting profession – the emphasis is vocational, not academic. There is a bit of a puzzle for me here. It seems that the argument could be made (though I seldom hear it) that a dynamic academic discipline of accounting would well serve the accounting profession. The


View Full Document

PSU ACCTG 597E - CLASS NOTES

Download CLASS NOTES
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view CLASS NOTES and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view CLASS NOTES 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?