Log in
In the wake of the Enron Scandal in 2002, the global landscape of auditing practices radically changed, significantly transforming the UK regulatory system. University of Glasgow research into the high-level financial reporting interactions between UK companies and external auditors has influenced public debate in the House of Lords and prompted several recommendations of the Select Committee on Economic Affairs. It has also contributed to an ongoing Competition Commission investigation into the market concentration of audit companies, and shaped the working practices at Deloitte, one of the Big Four international audit firms, influencing the industry at a global level.
Aberdeen public sector accounting research into adopting accruals accounting, the application of international accounting principles and standards, the treatment of privately financed public assets and the basis of Whole of Government Accounts was used extensively by the principal researcher in advisory work for UK and devolved governments, international agencies, professional bodies and regulators. It contributed directly to changes in the way governments budget, manage and report the performance of resource use, to increased stakeholder awareness of public accounting issues nationally and internationally, and to improved public understanding of these complex issues. It mainstreamed accounting research into the public policy process.
The financial crisis has prompted a public policy debate about the appropriate regulatory framework for financial reporting and audit. Evidence produced by this research on the current regulatory system has informed and influenced this debate in the House of Lords, particularly regarding the respective roles of auditors and audit committees. Furthermore, findings have had a significant impact on the audit procedures of Deloitte, one of the Big Four global audit firms. Their National Audit Technical Partner stated that it had prompted a reconsideration of the timing of their audit processes and the nature of interaction with their audit clients.
Research conducted at the UoE (2005-13) on private sector involvement in health care has:
This impact has been achieved as a result of the distinctive methodology employed in the underlying research and, relatedly, the degree to which it has authority among policy stakeholders at the national and global levels.
Research on International Financial Reporting Standard 8 `Operating segments' (IFRS8), undertaken by academics in the University of Dundee's School of Business, has been used to frame the international debate concerning listed company reporting of disaggregated (segmental) information about business unit and geographic activities. Three bodies involved in regulation and compliance, have drawn on the research to inform their positions and strategies in relation to the standard. Firstly, the IASB's review of IFRS8 was informed by the research. Secondly, the key findings were fed into the Financial Reporting Council's proposals to amend IFRS8. Thirdly, the research underpinned the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland's (ICAS) response to the IASB's request for information on how the standard was being applied, what challenges were encountered and associated costs.
This case study focuses on the impact of research studies and their influence on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) carried out by Manchester Business School (MBS). International accounting harmonisation is currently the most topical issue debated in the accountancy world. These studies have attracted the attention of practitioners, e.g. Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), and policy makers, e.g. the UK Accounting Standards Board (ASB). The research has informed the policy debate of whether IFRS should be mandated further, and been taken up in the negotiating position of several key bodies. It has been used to justify the continued application of IFRS among UK quoted companies.
Impact: Improved awareness and development of professional practice related to the financial accounting of carbon, including: its addition to the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) work programme and its designation by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) as a priority research project (both during 2012).
Significance and reach: The CDSB is a consortium of eight business/environmental organisations (including the World Economic Forum and the World Resources Institute). The IASB is the independent standard-setting body of the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation.
Underpinned by: Research into corporate carbon accounting practices, undertaken at the University of Edinburgh (2008 onwards).
The perceptions of key user and auditor constituencies on contemporary issues in audit and assurance may differ radically. The research carried out in this critically important area impacted directly on proposals put forward by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) on The Future of Assurance (henceforth FoA). Ian Fraser was a member of the ICAS working party which developed FoA. Several research findings impacted on the FoA proposals; key examples include the proposals that assurance should be provided on annual corporate report content other than the financial statements and that audit reports should contain judgemental and entity-specific information. Subsequent to the publication of FoA, ICAS has published a further discussion paper, Balanced and Reasonable (henceforth BaR), which further progresses the public discourse on a key element (namely the provision of positive assurance by the external auditor on management commentary and on the general narrative information in the annual report) both of FoA and of the underlying research.
Research on the effects of organizational autonomy in the NHS was conducted at Royal Holloway between 2006 and 2009, and has informed debates that have contributed to policy and practitioner decision-making. Through qualitative methods, it examined the impact of autonomy (from central government) upon local decision-making in NHS organisations. The work explained why the number of Foundation Trusts (FTs) established had not risen in line with the Department of Health's expectations, which originally sought to make all NHS Trusts become FTs. It also explained why FTs were not willing to exercise their autonomy despite being able to do so. The research has influenced policy debate and decision-making within the Department of Health, Monitor (the FT regulator), and the wider NHS.
Unique research at the University of Manchester highlights the shortcomings of public accountability and the high cost, to the public purse, of PPPs and the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) using critical financial analysis. Lead researchers have been invited to engage in dialogue with national audit regulators, give evidence to parliamentary committees and contribute to policy debate through international roundtables. The work has been used to challenge government policy and has significantly influenced the national and international public debate about the costs, affordability and value for money of PPPs. The UK government has now renegotiated existing PFI projects to achieve cost savings, and we have given evidence by invitation to international committees concerned with public accountability and policy development.