代写辅导接单-ABN 12 377 -

欢迎使用51辅导,51作业君孵化低价透明的学长辅导平台,服务保持优质,平均费用压低50%以上! 51fudao.top

RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 ARE FINANCIAL REPORTS

STILL USEFUL TO INVESTORS? DECISION- USEFULNESS

IN FINANCIAL

REPORTS © 2018 Monash University (ABN 12 377 614 012); The University of Melbourne (ABN 84 002 705 224). Used under licence. The reproduction, adaptation, display, communication or sale of these materials (‘the Materials’) is strictly prohibited unless expressly permitted under Division 3

of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). For permission to reproduce any part of the Materials, please contact the copyright owners identified above. These Materials have been created for academic purposes only and are not intended to constitute legal or professional advice. CPA Australia does not warrant or

make representations as to the accuracy, completeness, suitability or fitness for purpose of the Materials and accepts no liability or responsibility for any acts or

omissions made in reliance of the Materials. Where any law prohibits the exclusion of such liability, CPA Australia limits its liability to the resupply of the information. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 2. INTRODUCTION 5 3. UNITED STATES-BASED EVIDENCE 7 4. AUSTRALIAN-BASED EVIDENCE 8 5. WHY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND AUSTRALIA? 14 6. CONCLUSION 15 7. REFERENCES 16 8. GLOSSARY 17 9. AUTHORS 18 DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 4 For decades, financial reports have been

accepted by investors and other external

stakeholders as the primary window into

a company’s financial performance and

position. In addition to being a critical

information source of a company’s financial

health, financial reports are also considered

an important mechanism to maintain the

integrity of capital markets around the world.

Recently, however, questions have been

raised around the continuing usefulness of

financial reports to investors. Some academic

studies point to evidence indicating a decline

in usefulness of financial reports to investors

over time. Other reports seek to explain a loss

of relevance of financial information due to

the increasing number of information sources

available to investors, and others interested

in corporate financial information. The views emerging about financial reports

around the world also resonate within the

Australian financial reporting environment.

With this in mind, a team of academics from

the University of Melbourne and Monash

University have undertaken academic

research, with the support of CPA Australia,

to establish whether financial reports remain

useful to Australian investors. Contrary to

findings elsewhere, the Australian study

establishes that financial reports remain

useful to investors, and remain so over time. This report is the first in a series of reports

commissioned by CPA Australia and provides

a summary of key findings of whether and, if

so, how, financial statements are useful for

equity investors in Australia. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 5 Annual financial reports are still a mainstay

of corporate reporting, with companies

investing considerable time and effort in their

preparation. However, there has been recent

criticism that annual financial reports are

becoming increasingly less decision-useful

and less relevant to users. Various reasons have been given for this

perceived decline in usefulness, including: • inability to capture corporate value

increasingly comprised of knowledge- based intangible assets; • lack of timeliness, as users now have

access to more timely alternative sources

of information; • rise in alternative measures (i.e., non- GAAP measures) that act as potential

substitutes to statutory information

provided in financial reports; and • increasing complexity and length,

particularly in relation to note disclosures. As part of the growing debate about, and

concern over, the usefulness of financial

reporting, academics both in Australia and

overseas are undertaking research to provide

evidence of whether the relevance of financial

reports to investors has declined over time,

with interesting findings. To examine the research question of whether,

and, if so, how financial statements are useful for

equity investors in Australia, a team of Australian

academics adopted a mixed method research

approach comprising two methods. First, the authors examined the value

relevance of primary accounting variables to

determine whether there has been a change

in the relevance of Australian companies’

financial reports for capital market decisions.

Consistent with prior studies, the primary

variables that are examined are net income,

shareholders’ equity and operating cash

flows. These are key accounting amounts

traditionally synonymous with evaluating

company performance and position.

1 Yin (2013), Galletta (2013), Schultze and Avital (2011). The Australian academics follow prior

research and examined time-series trends

in value relevance of annual financial

reports. This was achieved by examining the

association each year between share price

and the two key accounting amounts of

reported net profit and shareholders' equity.

This archival method is based on the annual

financial statements of ASX-listed companies

over a 24-year period, spanning 1992-2015

and resulted in 29,838 observations, which

is, on average, 1,243 listed firms per year.

This method enables the authors to

determine whether, and the extent to which,

annual financial statements are decision- useful for equity investors in Australia. Second, to gain an understanding of how

and why annual financial statements are

decision-useful for investor decision making,

including the types of information relied

upon, the authors conducted a series of

interviews with investors, regulators and

practitioners. A total of 17 interviews were

conducted across investors (7), regulators (5)

and practitioners (5) yielding nearly 70,000

words of transcripts. Commonalities across

the different stakeholder groups provide

strong evidence from which conclusions can

be drawn. The authors developed a semi-structured

interview protocol drawing on prior literature

and consultation with experts in the practice

of financial reporting and regulation.

The interview protocol was pilot-tested

with experienced representatives from

stakeholder groups to reach a stable and

well-functioning protocol. Consistent with

good research practice for interview-based

research1, the authors began with broad

open-ended questions (e.g. “What is the

process you undertake to evaluate a company

for investment purposes? What information

do you use in this process?”). This helped to

ensure that the interviewees were not unduly

prompted or primed to focus on financial

statements. Only later in the protocol did

2.0 INTRODUCTION DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 6 the authors narrow to address specific

questions about the role of financial

statements. Importantly, both in the use

of broad open-ended initial questions,

and in subsequent more specific questions

regarding financial statement, the protocol

was worded so as not to bias responses

either for or against the role of financial

statements in investor decision making. The use of a standard protocol ensured there

was a base set of questions that were asked

of all interviewees. The protocol comprised

seven main questions, with prompts to

ensure elaboration by the interviewee on

issues of particular concern. The conduct of

the interview bore out the appropriateness

of the protocol, as the natural progression

of the interviewees' unprompted discourse

often pre-emptively mirrored the order of

our questions. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 7 In their recent book titled “The end of

accounting and the path forward for investors

and managers”, Baruch Lev and Feng Gu

paint a bleak future for financial reports.

The authors investigate whether there has

been a deterioration in the relevance of

financial reports as an input to the investment

decisions of equity investors. To do this, the

authors undertake regression analysis and

calculate, over time, the extent to which

companies’ share prices incorporate reported

net profit and shareholders’ equity – two

key accounting numbers contained within

financial reports.

As depicted in Figure 1 below, their findings

show a significant decline in the relevance

of these numbers to equity investors, as

their incorporation into share prices (the

R-square) falls over time. For example, in the

1950’s, reported net profit and shareholders’

equity explain over 90 per cent of share price

information (on average), whereas by 2013

reported net profit and shareholders’ equity

only explain approximately 50 per cent of a

company’s share price. The authors attribute

these findings primarily to those reasons

given above, and call for a revamp in the

type of report prepared to communicate

information to users. 3.0 UNITED STATES-BASED EVIDENCE FIGURE 1:

POWER OF NET INCOME AND BOOK VALUE COMBINED IN EXPLAINING

SHARE PRICES (US EVIDENCE) ADJUSTED R² OF REGRESSION OF CORPORATE MARKET VALUE ON REPORTED EARNINGS

AND BOOK VALUE 1950-2013 P E R C E N TA G E

R ² 0% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1950 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 2000 05 10 2013 YEAR DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 8 4.1 DECISION-USEFULNESS OF ANNUAL

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO INVESTOR

DECISION- MAKING 4.1.1 Archival evidence on the combined

relevance of net income and shareholders’

equity The authors follow the research approach

of Lev and Gu, and find that reported net

profit and shareholders’ equity are relevant

for investment decisions, and remain so over

time. As Figure 2 indicates, reported net profit

and shareholders’ equity are consistently

incorporated into companies’ share prices

over the time period examined. The results

show that the mean Adjusted R2 is 64 per cent.

This means that, on average, a company’s

financial performance and position, measured

as reported net income and shareholders’

equity respectively, explain 64 per cent of a

company’s share price. These results contrast

with the US-based research outlined above. As shown in Figure 2, this result for the

combined value relevance of net income and

book value of equity has remained relatively

constant over time in Australia, ranging from

a high of 73.2 per cent in 1994 to a low of

48 per cent in 2001. For 2015, the most recent

year examined, on average, a company’s

financial performance and position explains

61 per cent of a company’s share price, which

is consistent with the long-term average. 4.0 AUSTRALIAN-BASED EVIDENCE FIGURE 2:

POWER OF NET INCOME AND BOOK VALUE COMBINED IN EXPLAINING

SHARE PRICES (AUSTRALIAN EVIDENCE) Overall, the archival results show that financial

reporting has not declined in relevance in

Australia over the period studied. Accordingly, in contrast to much of the prior

literature that finds a decreasing trend in the

combined value relevance of earnings and

book value of equity1, we find no evidence

that value relevance has decreased across

time for net income and book value of

1 See for example Lev and Zarowin (1999), Balachandran and Mohanram (2011) and Lev and Gu (2016).

equity combined. This result is particularly

interesting given the significant increase in

available information for investors over the

time period studied. This result suggests that the limitation of

the timeliness of the release of financial

information is not as important for investor

decision making as has been previously argued. 2 2 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 R-SQUARE OF ANNUAL REGRESSIONS OF CORPORATE MARKET VALUE ON REPORTED

NET INCOME AND BOOK VALUE, 1992-2015 R -S Q U A R E 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 20 11 20 12 20 13 20 14 20 15 DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 9 4.1.2 Interview-based evidence on the

relevance of annual financial statements Interviewees typically viewed the financial

statements as having a confirmatory role in

assessing performance, and that the historical

basis of these statements provided the initial

input to the investment models investors

develop and use for investment purposes.

As comments from investors revealed: Clearly financial information is, by and

large, the thing that you’re going to at

least be primarily concerned about.

(Investor 1) The financials … are the thing that give us

confidence. The audited financials are the

thing that give us confidence that debts

will be repaid, that there are sustainable

earnings that will fund future dividends

and capital growth… It’s the thing that

gives us confidence to invest. So, I think

the entire system is crucial to us forming a

view on the fair value of an investment that

we might make. (Investor 2) Regulators and auditors had views consistent

with those of the investors: If I had to put a percentage on [the role

of the financial statements], it’s three- quarters confirmatory. But… to me that

doesn’t diminish its role because I think if

there were audited financial statements

the users might say they don’t look at

them and they just go to investor briefings,

but that’s where all the numbers come

from. (Regulator 1). It should be the first thing anybody

reads. Well, obviously, I think it provides

a pretty comprehensive track record… of

results, financial position being reported

to the market. So … I’ve always seen

it as confirming a report card. So, it’s

confirming maybe what professional

investors and others are estimating

as [what is] actually happening in the

business. (Auditor 2) While recognising the foundational role of

audited financial statements, investors are

not naïve as to their limitations: Audited financial statements are the go-to

…. It’s the best we have. It’s an imperfect

world … but they’re a critical part of what

we use. (Investor 7) Likewise, issues around the backward-looking

focus and timeliness were echoed by auditors

and regulators, but did not seem to detract

from the critical role played by financial

statements: So, it is a little bit backward looking

because, by definition, it’s the historical

financial statements. It’s not next

year’s financial statements so investors

obviously are looking more at future

cash flows and value. So, I see it mainly

as a confirmation… But it provides a

pretty good way to explain the business.

I think a lot of decisions and professional

investors … are going to be based

on understanding the track record

that companies or management have

demonstrated in the past. So, I think it’s

quite important. (Auditor 2) The financial report is a point in time.

Yes, it’s historical and by the time it comes

out you know it is a bit of a lag … but, in

the end, it’s a true point in time – it’s got

the independent assurance…It’s all about

confident, informed markets and investors.

And the way I look at it is a key component

of that is the financial report. (Regulator 4) The interview evidence supports a consistent

view across the stakeholder groups that the

financial statements are the foundation for

investor decision making – a necessary, but

not sufficient, basis for predicting future

performance of an entity. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 10 4.2 DECISION-USEFULNESS OF THE

BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND

LOSS STATEMENT TO INVESTOR

DECISION-MAKING 4.2.1

Archival evidence on the

separate relevance of net income

and shareholders’

equity Having established that the combined

relevance of net income and shareholders’

equity has not declined in Australia, the

next aspect examined by the research is

whether this finding is driven by net income

or shareholders’ equity (or both) maintaining

value relevance over the sample period. That is,

to examine whether the importance of these

elements has changed over time. Figure 3 shows the results where the effect

on share price of reported net income and

shareholders’ equity are analysed, separately,

on an annual basis. Our results from the archival analysis show that

both shareholders' equity and net income

are decision-useful for equity investors in

making investment decisions in Australia.

The results show that the mean Adjusted

R2 for book value of equity is 60 per cent,

and for net income the mean Adjusted R2 is

52 per cent. In other words, on average, a

company’s financial position alone, measured

as book value of equity, explains 60 per cent

of a company’s share price, while financial

performance alone, measured as net income,

explains 52 per cent of a company’s share price.3

As shown in Figure 3, the association between

a company’s share price and reported

shareholders’ equity has declined over the

sample period, as reflected in its reduced

ability to explain company share prices.

However, the association between a company’s

share price and reported net income has

remained relatively stable over time. Figure 3 also shows that the greater predictive

ability of shareholders’ equity to explain

company share prices is declining over time

to a level comparable with that of net income.

In fact, there is no discernible difference

between these two items in 2015. In 2015,

shareholders’ equity explains 49 per cent

of the share price and net income explains

46 per cent of share price. This indicates that

both elements are similarly important for

investor decision making. FIGURE 3:

POWER OF NET INCOME AND BOOK VALUE INDIVIDUALLY IN EXPLAINING

SHARE PRICES (AUSTRALIAN EVIDENCE)

BVE

NI 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 R-SQUARE OF SEPARATE ANNUAL REGRESSIONS OF CORPORATE MARKET VALUE ON

REPORTED NET INCOME AND BOOK VALUE, 1992-2015 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 20 11 20 12 20 13 20 14 20 15 3

The decision-usefulness of the financial position for equity valuation as measured by explanatory power of 60 percent could be overstated.

Current share prices are a positive function of past earning growth. This past earning growth is included in current retained earnings and therefore

a mechanical relation will arise between current book value of equity and current share price due to the use of earnings in the past to value a share. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 11 Overall, our archival findings indicate that

reported net income and book value of equity

are important inputs in explaining a company’s

share price. Moreover, in more recent times

these accounting numbers are becoming

similarly important, perhaps suggesting that

investors rely equally on these accounting

numbers for decision making purposes. 4.2.2 Interview-based evidence on the

relevance of the balance sheet and profit

and loss statement The evidence from the interviews provide

further insight into the role of net income

(profit and loss) and shareholders' equity

(balance sheet). Consistent with the archival

research the interviews evidenced that,

at least for investors, the profit and loss

statement and the balance sheet were

similarly important for investment decision

making. Most interviewees commented that

investors would use all aspects of financial

statements in combination: a large proportion of investors these

days use the income statement but…a

lot of value investors…use the balance

sheet more heavily. But it’s definitely a

combination of the two. (Investor 5) Indeed, as one investor noted the

interdependencies require consideration

of all the financial statements: I don’t see how people could use any

one statement in isolation of the others.

(Investor 4) Notably, investors used the different financial

statements to inform themselves about

different aspects of a business. For example: The profit and loss gives us a good sense

of a company’s ability to pay its future

debts, … but the balance sheet gives

us a good sense of whether there are

assets that we are a little nervous about

like stranded assets or things like that.

(Investor 2) Furthermore, investors noted that the relative

importance of the balance sheet or profit or

loss would be industry dependent, and driven

by the characteristics of individual companies.

For example: …in the end game, you’re forecasting

cash flows and valuing those, but

generally you’ll do that via the income

statement. This changes when you have

a balance sheet driven business so for

banking, insurance, to a large degree,

firms that generate value from fair value

to equity investments…. you’ll tend to

focus primarily on book value rather than

income statement. (Investor 1) All three stakeholder groups recognised that

the focus in the financial statements was also

moderated by the nature of the investment

decision, e.g., long-term versus short-term: It depends on the investors. So, some

investors are investing for the long- term, obviously, so I think they’ll look

at the quality of the profitability of the

company… whereas others are looking

at the shorter-term results… If it is a yield

investment they’ll focus on the profitability

and things like that but if it’s for the longer

term I think they look at the quality of the

assets and the quality of the profit and loss

… How predictable that is going forward.

(Auditor 4) Overall, evidence from the field interviews

indicates that both the income statement (net

income) and the balance sheet (shareholders'

equity) are seen to have a key role in investor

decision making. This is consistent with the

archival results which indicate that both

statements are becoming similarly important

for investment decision making purposes. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 12 4.3 DECISION-USEFULNESS OF CASH

FLOWS TO INVESTOR DECISION-MAKING 4.3.1 Archival evidence on the relevance

of operating cash flows The results from the archival analysis show the

relevance of operating cash flows for equity

investors in making investment decisions in

Australia. The results show that the mean

Adjusted R2 is 49 per cent. This means that,

on average, a company’s operating cash flows

explain 49 per cent of a company’s share price. As shown in Figure 4 below, this result for

operating cash flows are less stable than

reported net income, ranging from a high

of 62.2 per cent in 2004 to a low of 28.6 per

cent in 2000. For 2015, the most recent year

examined, on average, a company’s operating

cash flows explain 48 per cent of a company’s

share price, which is consistent with the long- term average. As Figure 4 depicts, it seems that since

2004 operating cash flows have increased

in value relevance in Australia. Prior to this

date, however, operating cash flows were,

on average, more volatile in explaining, and

less able to explain, company share prices. FIGURE 4:

POWER OF OPERATING CASH FLOWS IN EXPLAINING SHARE PRICES

(AUSTRALIAN EVIDENCE) 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 R-SQUARE OF SEPARATE ANNUAL REGRESSIONS OF CORPORATE MARKET VALUE ON

OPERATING CASH FLOWS, 1992-2015 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 20 11 20 12 20 13 20 14 20 15 DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 13 4.3.2

Interview-based evidence on the

relevance of cash flows While the interview evidence, unsurprisingly,

concurs that cash flows are important in

investment decision making, it reveals a more

nuanced view. Specifically, while cash flows

are important it does not necessarily mean

that the cash flow statement is as important.

For example: I think cash is always king. You always

have to look at … what the cashflows are,

where they’re coming from. If it’s a cash

producing business, but you always have

to come back to the balance sheet with

respect to valuations because if something

is producing … cash then the question is –

well, what are we paying for that? (Investor 7) While investors did not identify the cash

flow statement as more important than

other financial statements, this was often

not how auditors and regulators thought

investors would view the cash flow statement.

For example: Cash flows would have to be the thing

[investors] look at over and above

everything else because they’re real.

(Regulator 1) The apparent lack of focus on the cash flow

statement was perplexing to one practitioner: I always think it’s funny when in the

financial services, [investors] come up with

a measure called cash earnings, where

there actually is a cash flow statement

which is supposed to show cash earnings.

And, so, the fact that people are trying

to come up with another form of cash

earnings is, to me, a bit of a nonsense… Personally, I think that the profit and loss

needs the context of a cash flow and I

think that the cash flow is under focused

on. And the reason for that is because

people are trying to adjust their profit and

loss to come up with EBITDA. And, when

they’re coming up with measures like

EBITDA, they’re trying to come up with

a proxy for cash flow and I think the cash

flow statement already gives you good

information on the cash flows of a firm.

Whereas an EBITDA, at the end of the day:

taxes – they have to pay them, interest

–well the finding is something that has

to be paid for… (Auditor 1) The cash flow statement, however, is not

without its limitations. As one auditor

succinctly described it: I don’t think enough investors really look

at the cash flow statement. (Auditor 4) In summary, the interviews support the

importance of cash flows in investment

decision making, but not exclusively

cash flow as reported in the cash flow

statement. As a result, there appears to

be a misconceived perception amongst

regulators and practitioners as to the

importance that investors place on the

role of the cash flow statement in investor

decision making, and the role of cash flows

versus the role of the income statement

and balance sheet. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 14 There might be several reasons for the

difference between our findings and those

of Lev and Gu. First, there are differences

between the two countries regarding

the type of accounting standards. In the

United States (US), reported net profit and

shareholders’ equity are calculated using US

GAAP, which are often referred to as ‘rules- based’ standards. In Australia, however, net

profit and shareholders’ equity are calculated

using IFRS-based accounting standards,

which are often referred to as ‘principles- based’ standards and have a primary focus

of capturing a transaction’s substance over

form. Second, differences in the countries’

capital markets could also be a contributing

factor, with the US market being more liquid

than Australia’s with more frequent trading

occurring based on information, some of

which is non-accounting, obtained from

various sources. Third, reported net profit,

shareholders’ equity and operating cash flows

may still be key accounting numbers Australian

investors rely on to make investment

decisions, while US investors consider other

firm fundamentals, including intangibles- related amounts. Finally, differences in the

sample periods between the US (1950 – 2013)

and Australian (1992 – 2015) studies may also

be a contributing factor, as any decline in

decision-usefulness may be more discernible

over a longer sample period. 5.0 WHY THE DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES

AND AUSTRALIA? DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 15 While financial reports have been criticised

for increasingly not meeting the needs of

users, recent Australian evidence indicates

they are still of relevance to investors.

While the results suggest there is room for

improvement, the findings do not mark

the end of accounting as we know it, as

has been the call from some industry and

academic writers. The existing research in

this report is based on the combined and

separate decision-usefulness of net income

(P&L) and shareholders’ equity (B/S) for

valuation, as well as the decision-usefulness

of operating cash flows. In the next phase

of the research project, the authors will

be looking at the decision-usefulness of

alternative performance metrics including

EBIT and EBITDA.

6.0 CONCLUSION DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 16 Balachandran, S., and P. Mohanram. 2011.

Is the decline in value relevance of accounting

driven by increased conservatism? Review of

Accounting Studies 16: 272-301. Galletta, A. 2013. Mastering the semi-structured

interview and beyond: From research design

to analysis and publication. NYU Press. Lev, B. and P. Zarowin. 1999. The boundaries

of financial reporting and how to extend them.

Journal of Accounting Research 37(2): 353-385. Lev, B., and F. Gu. 2016. The End of Accounting

and the Path Forward for Investors and

Managers. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken,

NJ, USA. Schultze, U., and M. Avital. 2011. Designing

interviews to generate rich data for information

systems research. Information and Organization

21 (1):1-16. Yin, R. K. 2013. Case study research: Design and

methods: Sage publications. 7.0 REFERENCES DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 17 8.0 GLOSSARY ASX Australian Stock Exchange B/S Balance Sheet EBIT Earnings Before Interest and Taxation EBITDA Earnings Before Interest, Taxation, Depreciation and Amortisation P&L Profit and Loss R-squared The extent to which variation in the dependent variable is

associated with variation in the explanatory variables. Regression analysis A statistical technique that examines the correlation between

a dependent variable (e.g., share price) and one or more

explanatory variables (e.g., net profit and shareholders’ equity) US GAAP United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 18 9.0 AUTHORS PROFESSOR MICHAEL DAVERN Professor Michael Davern holds the Chair of Accounting and Business

Information Systems in the Faculty of Business and Economics, at the

University of Melbourne where he is a co-founder of the Melbourne

Centre for Corporate Governance and Regulation. The overarching

theme of his research is the role of data and information in business

decision making by both external and internal stakeholders,

including in areas such as investment decision making, enterprise risk

management, and business analytics. He has board level experience

with several privately held investment companies, a superannuation

fund, and a charitable not-for-profit. Michael’s research and executive

education work has included collaboration and support from EY,

Microsoft, NAB, PETRONAS, and CUA, among others. NIKOLE GYLES Nikole Gyles is an Enterprise Fellow in the Department of Accounting,

University of Melbourne. Nikole’s background is as an accounting

standard-setter (2011 – 2016) and Big 4 accounting practice (2004 –

2011). Her current role as Enterprise Fellow has a focus on developing

engagement with the University by contributing to Industry-related

research activities, such as the AASB Research Forum. The role also

involves leading, and contributing to, University-Industry linkages,

partnerships and networks and Executive Education for Industry.

In this role, Nikole aims to help ensure that research undertaken

provides insights into relevant issues faced by standard-setters,

regulators and/or practitioners and to develop high-quality thought

leadership that contributes to the future of financial reporting. DECISION-USEFULNESS IN FINANCIAL REPORTS – RESEARCH REPORT NO.1 | 19 DR DEAN HANLON Dean Hanlon is a senior lecturer in the Department of Accounting,

Monash University. He has been recognised for his pedagogy at the

faculty, university and national level as the recipient of several teaching

excellence awards. Dean’s current research interests are in taxation

and financial reporting. He has presented his research at numerous

international and domestic conferences, having won best paper

awards on several occasions. He has been the recipient of several

competitive industry-based research grants and has published his

research in journals including Accounting and Finance, Australian Tax

Forum, Australian Tax Review, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,

Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, and Pacific-Basin

Finance Journal. PROFESSOR MATTHEW PINNUCK Matthew is Professor of Financial Accounting and Head of Department

of Accounting, University of Melbourne.

Matthew’s research cuts across the areas of financial accounting and

capital markets, asset pricing and the performance of fund managers,

audit markets and the measurement and valuation of greenhouse gas

emissions. This research has been published in premier international

journals including Accounting Review, Accounting Organizations and

Society and Journal of Finance and Quantitative Analysis.

Matthew has a significant amount of past and on-going direct

engagement with industry including, most recently, involvement in the

audit industry with issues associated with fees setting and low-balling

and with CPA Australia in developing models to estimate greenhouse

gas emissions (supported by a large ARC Linkage Grant). Matthew

is also involved in teaching financial accounting across the under- graduate, post-graduate, and research higher degree programs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank CPA Australia and Ram Subramanian,

Policy Advisor - Reporting at CPA Australia for their contribution to the

research project and this report. cpaaustralia.com.au CPAH2933_7.2018 51作业君版权所有

51作业君

Email:51zuoyejun

@gmail.com

添加客服微信: Fudaojun0228