Search

This paper examines whether the use of algorithms in accounting education provides effective professional training for students. Based on empirical research findings, the paper argues that algorithmic methods may be appropriate only for selected topics. The paper identifies the characteristics of such topics and points out that though substantial benefits are associated with proper use of algorithms, accounting instructors should be aware of some significant risks posed by algorithmic approaches. Finally, the paper offers some suggestions to minimize the risks and improve the effectiveness of algorithm-based pedagogies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a brief review of the salient economic, behavioral and quantitative literature in accounting and transfer pricing. Further, it relates this review to a relatively new programming formulation, suggesting the greater descriptive implications potential inherent in the new technique generalized goal decomposition programming. The paper does not develop new ideas, but attempts to relate existing material in a manner that will bring the reader's attention to the potential of the mathematical programming models in hierarchical organizations. The expanding literature in this area clearly is deserving of attention as it provides a means by which the behavioral and algorithmic approaches to resource transfer problems may be integrated. It is a step in the direction of models integration and thus, a step toward more realistic mathematical formulation of the decision-making environment. One rely on the scholar T. Ruefli model in this presentation as it provided a relatively easily explained formulation. Interested readers will find on pursuing this literature, that certain of the Ruefli limitations have been overcome in alternative algorithms.

In their recently published intermediate accounting text, Danos and Imhoff show how one can capitalize R&D expenditures and (after a period of convergence) still show the same R&D expense as occurs now under FASB Statement No. 2, which requires immediate expensing of R&D. This paper develops an analytical tool to present and analyze this capitalization scheme: a coordinate grid model. This coordinate model enables one to see relationships between expenditures and expenses visually. As an indication of the power of this visual representation of pattern, an algorithm is presented that was derived from the coordinate grid. The algorithm calculates the net asset value of R&D under the conditions of the capitalization model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among many things accountants deal with in their daily work, there is one item that has had the largest growth rate in volume over the last ten years. It is not the volume of pronouncements by the Financial Accounting Standards Board nor that of regulations by the Internal Revenue Service of the U.S., but calculators. Prices have plunged as the volume exploded. Almost exactly ten years ago, as of 1983, the first hand-held scientific calculator was marketed by Hewlett-Packard at the price of $395 a unit. Such calculators are now available for under $20 and are owned by millions of students. Experts seem to agree that the next wave of computer technology coming into the business and consumer product markets is personal computers. If the past trend is any indication of the learning curve applicable to computer products, those units currently selling for $300 to $3000 will come down in price to the $30 to $300 range in several years. Dozens of accounting software packages have been developed for personal computers, dealing with general ledgers, accounts receivable and payable, payrolls, and inventories, along with general-purpose report generators.

ABSTRACT: Although many firms now prepare a cash-based statement of changes in financial position, reported "funds from operations" is typically a measurement of working capital. The statement reader wishing to determine cash flow from operations must use a series of indirect adjustments to do so. Our purpose in this paper is to identify the inherent difficulties the reader encounters when using this indirect method to convert reported funds from operations to a cash flow amount. We demonstrate how the indirect method will in fact not equal actual cash flow from operations because of numerous conceptual and practical problems encountered when applying the necessary adjustments. We develop illustrations of these problems, and we show how cash flow from operations calculated by the indirect method is, at best, an estimate of actual cash provided by operations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]