Monday, June 3, 2019
Grays framework is an extension of Hofstedes societal values
time-honoreds exemplar is an propagation of Hofstedes societal valuesCulture is utter to be an identifying mark of whatever gathering of persons. The impact of this identifying mark is felt in everything that is done in that environment such that it is reflected in their daily and operational activities. In explaining the impact of culture on activities, Hofstede (1980 26) defined culture as the collective programming of mind that distinguishes the members of one group from a nonher. This distinguishing accompanimentor belies lineaments that argon distinct to that particular group and give notice be effectuate in all aspects of life. One aspect that is not left out is the field of method of chronicle, the impact of culture is felt such it is reflected in the account practices of particular environments and it defines the systems that guide the practices done in that environment. This results in huge differences in international accounting practices even though the defini tion of accounting has one aim- to leave butt joint decision holdful information to users and to give evidence of stewardship.Outside the culture factor, other reasons have been put forth to explain the differences in accounting systems where they accept legal, tax, financing system (Nobes, 2006), political ideology ( Ezzamel et al, 2007). However, Gray argues that cultural values offer better explain the differences in accounting system and he bases his billet on Hofstedes theory. Going by his argument, if cultural values as posited by Hofstede be reflected in societal activities, then in that location should be an existing consanguinity such that a close pattern that among these societal values and the accounting systems practiced in those environments can be identified. He puts forward quaternion significant accounting concepts/values (professionalism, uniformity, conservatism and secrecy) that he colligates with Hofstedes societal value constructs ( personal identit y, power distance, uncertainness dodge and masculinity/femininity). In other words, the accounting values as given by Gray can be seen as a connective point between Hofstedes societal values and accounting practices. In explaining these links, he put forward four hypotheses. This paper seeks to esteem the validity of the accounting concepts as put forward by Gray, seeking to reach their relationships with Hofstedes societal constructs.Grays Theoretical Reasoning.It is a well known fact that the strength of a building lies in its foundation, where the foundation is faulty, then the building itself cannot be said to be strong. Applying this fact to Grays hypotheses means that the strength of his hypotheses lays on its basis which is the Hofstedian societal value constructs. Though Hofstede collected his data over the period of 1967 to 1973, giving him fair to middling time to incorporate changes in what he call societal values, it has undergone criticisms in research papers. The se criticisms weaken in turn weaken Grays accounting values. Some of these criticisms include the fact that the Hofstedian value framework is overage and a weak basis on which to base the accounting values framework (Jones, 2007). In sum total to this, there is the issue of measurability of the societal value constructs, the equation of national states with cultures, status of the observer, cultural homogeneity and political influences ( Baskervillle, 2003 Jones, 2007)Based on the fact that Grays framework is an concomitant of Hofstedes societal values, it can be said that the above criticisms apply to his accounting value theory as well, weakening the validity of his theory. Patterned after Hofstedes both dimensional societal value constructs, Gray put forward two dimensional accounting concepts as both ends of a continuum. He argues that a link exists between these concepts and each of Hofstedes societal values, where Hofstedes values be -Individualism vs Collectivism, Larg e power distance vs Small power distance, Strong vs light-colored dubiety avoidance and maleness vs femininity. The fundamental issues as regards these constructs be the degree of interdependence maintained in a society, human inequalities and relationships with role, reaction to uncertainties and role differentiation of gender respectively. As an extension of these values, Gray puts forward these accounting values-Professionalism vs statutory control, Uniformity vs Flexibility, Conservatism vs Optimism and Secrecy vs Transparency where the fundamental issues in these concepts are individual judgements as opposed to statutory judgements, consistency in reporting standards as opposed to optioned standards, cautious measurements as opposed to optimistic measurements and a cautious approach to disclosure respectively.Critique of Grays Hypotheses wholly of Grays hypotheses imply that accounting values have a stationary nature as is also implied by Hofstedes societal values and just a s Hofstede apply nations to equate culture, Gray used countries as a basis for comparison, thereby generalizing as country based on accounting values that can be subject to change. Baskerville (2003) notes that the use of nation states as units for comparison is wrong, stating that this has been the case in international accounting research. A further analysis of Grays hypotheses is given below to assess its validity.Hypothesis OneGray hypothesized that the higher(prenominal) a country crying(a)ed in call of individualism and the lower it ranked in terms of incredulity avoidance and power distance then the more than likely it is to rank highly in terms of professionalism. Though empirical studies carried out on this hypothesis have found support for it (Salter and Niswander, 1995 and Sudarwan and Fogarty, 1996), it can be argued that this hypothesis does not hold fully, especially when cognizance is given to the constant changes that occur even in these environments with disti nguishable cultural values. In addition to this, empirical studies focused on the relationship that exist between the value construct picked out by Gray, only if considering that the values given by Hofstede are two dimensional, it is also possible that the relationship posited by Gray to exist between professionalism and weak uncertainty avoidance can also exist between professionalism and strong uncertainty avoidance. This argument is based on the fact that the fundamental concept of uncertainty avoidance as given by Hofstede to be reaction to uncertainties and ambiguities. Strong uncertainty avoidance societys deal with uncertainties through the established and rigid rules and it can be argued that high levels of professionalism can be found in such societies. An example is Indonesia. Though the country is among the group classed as collectivist, strong uncertainty avoidant and large power distanced, Askary (2006) finds that Indonesia tops the amount for professionalism in his study of developing countries. In the case of Germany, Heidhues and Patel (2011) finds that the Grays proposed relationship between low uncertainty avoidance and high professionalism does not hold. This is because Germany is seen a medium uncertainty avoidant country simply it scores high on professionalism. This means that Grays accounting values and Hofstedes societal values can hold on some countries but not in some and this limits the generalizability of hypothesis one. In addition, going by the definition of professionalism which means independent judgement, the findings of Braun and Rodriguez (2008) does not support this hypothesis. Earnings centering which requires independent judgement is meant to be related to professionalism but in their study, it is related to statutory control.Hypothesis TwoThe higher a country ranks in terms of uncertainty avoidance and power distance and the lower it ranks in terms of individualism then the more likely it is to rank highly in terms of uniformity. Empirical studies on Grays argument for this hypothesis are mixed in that not all the purported values given by Gray can be linked to uniformity. The issue of applicability limits this hypothesis. Gray defined uniformity as a penchant for uniform accounting practices and countries in the western world are said to have a preference for flexible standards according to their perceived needs. However, the strength of this hypothesis is invalidated when the accounting standards used in the developed countries are considered. Though they are classed as countries that prefer flexible standards, the countries tend to use uniform standards in the name of enhancing their comparability. In addition to this, there is the issue of world(prenominal) reporting standards, which the UK and the US are founding members. The desire by both countries for a uniform accounting standards via global reporting standards reflects the weakness of the Hofstede-Gray framework. In track with thi s argument, Roberts and Salter (1999) test the relationships on the big 6 at that time and find that uncertainty avoidance (reaction to ambiguities) is not positively related to uniformity. The strength of any given hypothesis is in the positive relationships of all variables used in forming the hypothesis. Given that one of the relationships for this hypothesis does not hold, it can be argued that there are other values which result in uniformity of accounting practices. This means that not all of the relationships as hypothesized by Gray hold.Gray states that both hypotheses are most relevant to the authority and enforcement, however, the definition of the terms limits the extent of relevance that can be established. Gray defines the accounting values as a preference and not an exact activity carried out by accountants (Baydoun and Willett, 1995 Heidhues and Patel, 2011). For example, professionalism is defined as a preference for individual professional judgement and how this pre ference relates to the exercise of authority is not clear. Who exercises the authority? How many authoritative sources are there? Given the fact that professionalism belies opinionated judgement, this could refer to a number of individuals.Hypothesis ThreeThe higher a country ranks in terms of uncertainty avoidance and the lower it ranks in terms of individualism and masculinity then the more likely it is to rank highly in terms of conservatism. Empirical studies support Grays reasoning on this hypothesis (Salter and Niswander, 1995 Sudarwan and Fogarty, 1996, Doupnik and Ritcher, 2004) especially for the strong link but I would argue that the fact that a country dislikes ambiguous situations does not mean that it would be highly conservative, this is based on the fact that situations change and changing situations bring about a change in accounting methods used. This is a fact that the Grays framework does not take into consideration. In line with this argument, Arnold et al (2001) finds that an increase in uncertainty avoidance leads to an increase in materiality estimates. This supports the fact that changes in situations are incorporated into accounting activities and that a country that is highly conservative today would not needfully be conservative the next day. Regarding the relationship between conservatism and individualism, masculinity and uncertainty avoidance, it can be argued that these relationships are also subject to change. Going by the definition of masculinity, a high desire for quality of life can also lead to flexibility in accounting standard. Along this line of thought, Sudarwan and Fogarty (1996) found no relationship between masculinity and conservatism. This means that the accounting value of conservatism as defined by Gray limits the extent of connection that can be made between the relationships. For example, the word cautious approach can be seen to be a little muddy. Is it possible for the level of cautiousness interpreted by acc ountants to be placed on a continuum such that the varying levels can be used to seek for a matching relationship between the variables?Hypothesis FourThe higher a country ranks in terms of uncertainty avoidance and power distance and the lower it ranks in terms of individualism and masculinity then the more likely it is to rank in terms of secrecy. Empirical support for this hypothesis is inconclusive Sudarwan and Fogarty (1996) find that the relationship between uncertainty avoidance and secrecy is negative and a non significant relationship between power distance and secrecy (Salter and Niwander, 1995). This can be viewed as rendering the practicableness of Grays argument as quite unfit and therefore invalidates the hypothesis. The relationships as argued by Gray is vague and can be argued to have a different meaning.Gray states that hypotheses three and four relate to measurement and disclosure. As noted in the first two hypotheses, the relationship between the conservatism and measurement or secrecy and disclosure remains unclear. Baydoun and Willett (1995) argue that the interpretation of this relationship is tenable owing to the fact that secrecy can be seen as a social characteristic and that its importance in determining accounting values is not evident. Other problems with Grays theory include measuring the terms used in the hypotheses, the fact that it applicable in some countries and not in others as well as the implied presence of other values in determining accounting practices (Baydoun and Willett, 1995 Doupnik and Tsakumis, 2004 Heidhues and Patel, 2011).Applicability of Grays surmise in the Use of IFRSGrays theory can be seen as a contribution to the publications on the harmonization of accounting and the essence of most literature in that line of research aim to help the easy adoption and increasing use of the international financial reporting standards. Furthermore, a lot of countries are adopting the international financial reporting sta ndards (herein after referred to as IFRS) despite the differences in culture. The successful adoption and implementation of the IFRS in countries means that Grays theory of cultural influences is outdated in that culture is no longer deemed to be a barrier to international accounting systems. However, to assess the usefulness of Grays theory in assisting with the increasing use of IFRS, Spain will be used to check the applicability of Grays theory. Spain is a country whose accounting system is defined as that of a Continental European standard, this is as a result of the fact that its legal system is Roman law and that its accounting laws are embedded in its legislation. Going by Hofstedes classification, Spain has a medium individualist culture, medium power distance, low masculinity and high uncertainty avoidance. Using Grays framework to classify their accounting systems places them as a country with more emphasis on uniformity, more emphasis on conservatism, less emphasis on pro fessionalism and less emphasis on secrecy. Going by Grays framework, one major problem with Spains accounting systems is the preference for conservative measurements and reporting as opposed to the true and fair value methods of the IFRS. Moreover, the adoption of IFRS is meant to improve the quality of financial information, kick upstairs comparability, and strengthen the integration and competitiveness of capital markets (Zeghal and Mhedhbi, 2006). Though the country has adopted IFRS, it has come across a few problems. Callao et al (2007) notes that the adoption of IFRS in Spain has not improved comparability of accounts, it has worsened it. They also find out relevance of financial information has not improved. This invalidates Grays theory in that the cultural differences in accounting systems as identified by his framework, though logical, it seems to have been ignored by the International be Standards Board. An application of Grays hypotheses is tabulated for Spain to check its overall validity and practicableness.Societal/ Accounting ValuesMedium IndividualismMedium Power DistanceLow MasculinityHigh Uncertainty AvoidanceStrength of the HypothesesProfessionalismnsnsPos.WeakUniformitynsnsPos.WeakConservatismnsPosPosSemi- strongSecrecynsnsPosPosSemi-strongWhere ns no relationship and pos. positive relationshipFrom this table, the practicability of Grays theory is not strong. Hofstedes values make room for moderating along the continuum as can be seen from Spain been a medium individualist culture. Gray did make provision for countries like Spain who fall in the middle of the continuum. Splitting Grays hypotheses into bits shows the weaknesses of his framework and implies an impracticability of the framework. This also implies that Grays theory is country specific and as noted by Heidhues and Patel (2011), the values were constructed using the US and the UK as a base.ConclusionThe practicability of Grays hypotheses has been argued above the problems ha ve been highlighted alongside the impact of the framework for the applicability of IFRS. As noted above, there is room for improvement if the theory is to be valid. In addition to this, Heidhues and Patel (2011) note that Grays framework was accepted in the academic world without criticism and they point to the fact that this might be as a result of his beingness seen as one of the leading international accounting researchers. The impact of changes was not incorporated into the framework and this is very important considering that societal dynamism is constant. This alone reduces the reasonability behind Grays framework.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment