Since the development of contemporary research of accounting in 1992, when numerous HK scholars started to conduct the empirical researches under the Chinese stock market, a discussion between the traditional (We call Narrative Accounting Theory) and the contemporary (We call it as Positive Accounting Theory, PAT) theory has been started for decades until recent years. Now the empirical research has been a popular trend in China, which can be easily observed from the conference proceedings, working papers and published papers, especially those from young scholars.
But apparently the research nowadays in China is losing its way. Grounded on the accounting research framework that is introduced by the William R. Scott (2006) and Watts and Zimmerman (1986), two popular textbooks for contemporary accounting research, the directions has been lost. You can easily find the similarity of the papers from the scholar of accounting and those from other fields like banking, finance and economics. Taking the recent hot topics like political connection, lend contracts for example, which are both based on the corporate finance, has little connection to the fundamental understandings of the field of accounting, for both the accounting professors and accountants who are working as role of practitioners. For a brief introduction on books of accounting theory, refer to a post published previously.
The reason for this bias may come from the development process itself. For most researchers, they are in fact quite familiar with the traditional theories and thus can write good papers with such stuff. But the transition of methodology changed their way. A preliminary assumption for empirical research is its good competence on computer programming and sufficient understanding on econometrics and statistics. Frankly, it is a disaster for most scholars who seldom receive strict training on quantitative analysis when they were graduate students. Such problem even exists for the new generation students like us. The lack of training on fundamental instruments can cause great problems on research design, that can partially explain why so many errors on modeling of accounting papers. And, besides the fundamental theory, some new theories in finance and economics are introduced, like asset pricing, market efficiency, etc.
The transition on both supporting theory and instruments cost too much time and energy for both scholars and researchers in this field. Given the publication as a key standard of promotion, an easy way for publication but without deep thinking on its fundamentals are needed. Admittedly, this is a necessary step that can hardly be avoided. In fact, I did such foolish things in the past two years. Comparing to the papers discussing accounting policy and methods, such as recognition on loss and revenue, the topics on corporate finance can be much easier to understand for both researchers and readers. That’s why we can see many corporate finance papers in the journal of accounting these years, but few papers on financial accounting can be found. What’s more, quite a lot of scholars are not from the major of accounting as their undergraduate major, and they may have missed essential courses to help them understand the core accounting questions.
In fact, by doing accounting research on accounting itself, rather than the corporate finance, though it may be more attractive to most scholars, a scholar may face the coherence on the PAT and narrative accounting theory. The narrative accounting theory help us understand how an optimized accounting plan would be, and the PAT showed us the incentives from multi-parties that can affect this optimization. In fact, William R. Scott is just trying his best to build up this link, providing us the understanding of the fundamental theory that is not presented in a published paper, whose work is of significance to the graduate students like us.
Many discussion on the conflicts between these two types of theory, presented on both blogs and academic journals, even in quite a lot of books, are quite superficial. Only when linking both these theories can the high quality research be produced. Though, I am also still thinking about how to. Just like a previous post that I wrote in this blog, we need to think real questions and do real research. The link on these theories, in fact, provides its preliminary step.
NOTE; THIS ARTICLE ONLY REPRESENTS MY OWN OPINION AND CAN BEAR NUMEROUS FAULTS. FOR ANY DISAGREEMENT OR FURTHER DISCUSSION, YOU ARE WELCOMED!
It is of great difficulty sometimes to anticipate what would happen, even in quite a near future as one or two days. I am just suffering from this unexpected experience with my laptop. This story was started in a cliff morning of a Thursday when I suddenly found my laptop did not work. After an in-depth explore of the whole morning, I gave up all the attempts. Because what I have done is of no significance to the resolution but only the damage of some components, like the switch for the battery, and a plug-in on board. Fortunately, they are of little importance to my usage of computer.
让我大感诧异的是，在小镇的一个广场上，我看到了一位酷似张三丰的老者。他鹤发童颜，在那里悠然自得的拉着二胡。尽管他的衣服明确告诉我们他是景区的工作人员。但是老人的敬业精神还是让我心中为之一振。毕竟如此的天气在外面拉二胡还是非常冷的。老者拉二胡的水平本人在此就不评论了。一者此处是同里景区，并非国家大剧院等专业场所；二者，本人对音乐也实在是个二把刀。我不知道为什么景区的管理方要把老人安排在这里。靠老人来创收恐怕不现实，毕竟老人赚不了多少钱。如果说是为了突出景区的特色，那似乎也不对，毕竟拉二胡的老者和同里古镇之间我实在是无法领悟其中奥秘。如果说是一种文化的象征，那也不至于请一个老者啊？此望知情人给予解答。
