[The measurement of divisional performance is still a subject of some debate. Most accounting researchers appear to favor measures which either include an interest charge on capital employed or relate divisional income to its capital asset base, but some dissenters exist. Various measures are used in practice. The use of particular accounting methods is hypothesized to be influenced by organizational characteristics, such as the extent to which decision making authority has been delegated to divisional managers. An empirical study of associations between 12 variables reflecting accounting methods and the nature of divisional autonomy was undertaken from questionnaire surveys of large companies in the United States (U.S.) and the United Kingdom (U.K.), and the relationship between accounting methods and the nature of divisional autonomy in the two countries is examined. Many similarities were observed in the accounting methods used by the responding companies in the U.S. and the U.K. to evaluate divisional performance, analyze divisional capital expenditure proposals, and control authorized divisional capital expenditures. The major difference between the countries was the use of post-completion audits by more than twice as many U.S. companies (84.2 percent) as U.K. companies (36.3 percent). In both countries, the expected associations between accounting methods and divisional autonomy were not found. Further research is needed to explore the dynamics of accounting systems in divisionalized companies, such as longitudinal studies of individual companies.]

Abstract Reviews the book "Accounting Fundamentals for Non-Accountants," by Stephen A. Moscove.

Abstract Reviews the book "Current Cost Accounting and the Nationalised Industries: An Analysis and a Proposal," by Murray C. Wells.

Abstract Reviews the book "Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting: A Book of Readings," by Leonard Eugene Berry and Gordon B. Harwood.

Abstract Reviews the book "Modern Accounting Research: History, Survey, and Guide," by Richard Mattessich.

Abstract Reviews the book "Management Control Systems," by Robert N. Anthony, John Dearden, and Norton M. Bedford.

Abstract Reviews the book "Audit Problems Encountered in Small Business Engagements," by D.D. Raiborn.

Abstract ABSTRACT: There are currently no definitive guidelines for reporting the current and noncurrent portions of lease obligations. Two possible approaches to this problem of allocation-the change in present value approach and the present value of the next year's payments approach--have been identified by Swieringa [1984]. This article addresses two aspects of this financial reporting issue. First, evidence is presented to show that the change in present value approach appears to be dominant in current financial reporting practice. Second, it is shown that adjustment of the reported financial statement numbers to those that would be obtained by the present value of the next year's payments approach does not affect the ranking of companies by a number of financial measures. These results suggest that the issuing of guidelines for reporting the current and noncurrent portions of lease obligations by the FASB is not warranted.

[A bond exchange is a transaction in which a corporation with an outstanding bond issue offers the current bondholders a new bond in exchange for the outstanding bonds. Bond exchanges affect firms by: (1) altering the cash payments to bondholders, (2) increasing reported earnings, (3) improving financial ratios such as debt/equity, and (4) affecting tax obligations. Although bond exchanges are fairly common, especially in the airline industry, these transactions may be difficult to analyze. This paper reviews the sequence of public disclosures involving an exchange offer, illustrates a present value method for evaluating bond exchanges, and compares the reported results with the "economic" results obtained from this method. Eastern Airlines' 1980 bond exchange is used for illustrative purposes.]