The world of capital markets is constantly evolving, driven by technological advancements and changing global economies, presenting challenges for accounting practitioners. Amid current dynamic capital markets, this paper proposes a pathway for generating innovative accounting research that addresses practitioners’ needs by focusing on three critical financial reporting areas: contingent claim securities, sustainability/ESG metrics, and cryptocurrencies/digital assets. Secondly, to address the complex research challenges before us, I propose that we, as accounting scholars, embrace educational changes that may enhance the early research career success of our doctoral students and junior scholars, given that the accounting industry is on the brink of a profound technological transformation. Finally, I urge us to foster academic change by leveraging our strengths within and across disciplines to meet the accounting challenges and opportunities ahead.

The Big 4 auditors are inspected annually by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), with the summarized findings (labeled “audit deficiencies”) being publicly available on its website. Although the PCAOB claims that its inspection findings and process are designed to increase audit quality, there is limited empirical evidence to support this claim. We examine whether changes in revenue-deficient audit engagements are associated with subsequent year changes in client revenue quality. A revenue-deficient audit engagement is an inspected engagement that has at least one revenue-related audit deficiency. To infer audit quality, we link year-over-year changes in revenue-deficient audit engagements to the subsequent year’s change in engagement-level revenue quality—a common financial reporting quality proxy. We predict that audit firms will react asymmetrically to changes in revenue-deficient audit engagements: increases will prompt audit quality improving actions, but decreases will not. Our results support our prediction.

Local-thinking bias, wherein agents overweight information that comes readily to mind, is a prominent finding in cognitive psychology. In this study, we investigate local-thinking bias in the context of sell-side analysts and measure each analyst’s “local” information as news stemming from their individual coverage portfolio. Tests examining multiple analysts forecasting on the same focal firm at the same time find that individual analysts overweight idiosyncratic local news and underweight news from economically linked firms that are not in their coverage portfolios. Market prices track the analyst bias from local news, leading to predictable and economically significant return reversal patterns in the future. A trading strategy that adjusts for analysts’ biases earns meaningful abnormal returns. We discuss the implications of these findings for three literatures: (1) cognitive psychology, (2) analyst behavior, and (3) behavioral asset pricing.

This research evaluates whether reporting incentives and consequences change under the new lease accounting standard. Under prior guidance (SFAS 13), we predict and find firms with high financing cost sensitivities to leverage have greater incentive to finance investments with operating leases. Under the new lease accounting standard (ASU 2016-02), we predict and find this leverage incentive remains but is reduced, consistent with the FASB’s objective to limit opportunities to structure lease contracts for balance sheet purposes. Under ASU 2016-02, we also predict and find that the leverage incentive encourages firms to reduce operating lease liabilities by decreasing the duration of minimum lease payments. Lastly, we predict and find that firms use fewer operating leases under both SFAS 13 and ASU 2016-02 when managers’ income objectives exclude depreciation and/or interest expense. These findings suggest reporting incentives remain post ASU 2016-02 that encourage firms to structure leases to achieve accounting outcomes. Data Availability: This study uses licensed data from a variety of sources (see Appendix A for a detailed list of providers).

Although q2 measures how well a pattern of means fits a custom contrast, there is no guidance for what values are “good.” We survey experimental accounting researchers who assess the fit between plots of means and contrast weights as poor, acceptable, good, or excellent. We find that graphical presentation effects and researchers’ individual attributes influence their assessments. This suggests that research needs an ex ante method for evaluating q2, grounded empirically in the wisdom of the crowd across many different presentations, rather than relying solely on the idiosyncratic assessments of individual researchers. Using fuzzy set theory, we develop such a method that researchers can use to characterize q2 = 0.100, for example, as mostly good fit, leaning toward acceptable. Our approach has significant advantages over bright-line cutoffs commonly used for other statistical indices. Overall, our study can improve our discipline’s assessments of fit between experimental results and custom contrast weights. Data Availability: Data are available from the authors upon request.

Global markets are moving toward requiring firms to track and report greenhouse gas emissions across their value chain. This includes self-generated emissions (i.e., Scope 1), emissions from power providers (i.e., Scope 2), and emissions from upstream suppliers and downstream parties (i.e., Scope 3). Yet, obtaining reliable emissions data is a complex task that often relies on cumbersome legacy processes and becomes especially challenging with upstream and downstream emissions. Using the Design Science Research Methodology, we propose and prototype (early-stage) a technological solution that uses blockchain, non-fungible tokens, and smart contracts to track and report greenhouse gas emissions across a firm’s value chain. The proposed model demonstrates how these tools can create a reliable classification and provenance of emissions that all value chain members can access for reporting purposes. Experts in the field evaluate the proposed model, find it technologically feasible, and call attention to some of its challenges.

Oversight responsibilities for many audit committees (ACs) are evolving to include some of the hottest topics in the boardroom: enterprise risk management, cybersecurity, and environmental, social, and governance reporting. However, certain ACs avoid overseeing these evolving areas, creating significant variation across boards in the assignment of responsibilities. In this study, we seek to understand how ACs respond when environmental changes create new evolving risks that may extend the boundary of their traditional domain. To do so, we interview a diverse set of 29 AC members from U.S. publicly traded companies. We analyze our data through the theoretical lens of collaborative boundary work to identify how ACs respond by extending, blurring, or maintaining their perceived oversight boundaries, the related implications of these decisions, and their key tactics employed to manage AC workload. Our findings should be of interest to boards, investors, and regulators tasked with monitoring AC effectiveness.

The concept of materiality has acquired great significance in sustainability reporting. Through the theoretical bricolage of boundary objects and boundary work and drawing upon 91 interviews, we trace materiality’s evolving role across four interconnected episodes. Our findings show that materiality begins as a multivisionary object that draws the attention of largely unconnected groups. As different actors become more aware of each other, materiality becomes a meeting point object, and then a discursive and bridge-like object for them to talk about their relationships. However, the subsequent escalation of competitive boundary work turns materiality into a divisive institutional object that inhibits cooperation. Moving beyond a view of materiality as a way to distinguish significant information within corporate reports, our analysis fleshes out the visionary and relational roles that materiality has performed in sustainability reporting for a broad range of field-level actors to see themselves and their relationships to others in new lights.