We develop a theory of the association between earnings management and voluntary management forecasts in an agency setting. Earnings management is modeled as a “window dressing” action that can increase the firm’s reported accounting earnings but has no impact on the firm’s real cash flows. Earnings forecasts are modeled as the manager’s communication of the firm’s future cash flows. We show that it is easier to prevent the manager from managing earnings if he is asked to forecast earnings. We also show that earnings management is more likely to follow high earnings forecasts than low earnings forecasts. Finally, our analysis shows that shareholders may not find it optimal to prohibit earnings management. Earlier results rationalize earnings management by violating some assumption underlying the Revelation Principle. By contrast, in our model the principal can make full commitments and communication is unrestricted. Nonetheless, earnings management can be beneficial as it reduces the cost of eliciting truthful forecasts.

This paper examines how various revenue recognition rules affect the incentive properties of accounting information in a stewardship setting. Our analysis demonstrates that if revenues are recognized according to the realization principle, a single performance measure based on aggregated accounting information can be used to provide desirable production and effort incentives to the manager. In contrast, mark‐to‐market accounting does not provide efficient aggregation of raw information to solve the stewardship problem. Mark‐to‐market accounting, though sensible from a valuation perspective, fails to provide desirable incentives because it relies on the anticipated, rather than the actual, performance of the manager. We also consider a setting in which the manager can control the timing of the firm’s sales. It then becomes desirable to modify the realization principle and apply the lower‐of‐cost‐or‐market valuation rule. The desirable accounting thus exhibits a conservative bias.