[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ausman/v36y2011i3p349-370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of capital proposal guidelines and perceived preparer biases on reviewers’ investment evaluation decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Mandy M Cheng
  • Habib Mahama
Abstract
Past literature has highlighted the importance of using reviewers in the evaluation of investment proposals. This study examines whether and how the decisions of these reviewers are influenced by a proposal’s conformance with company guidelines and practices, and the incentives facing the proposal preparer. Our experiment shows that, holding the proposal’s content constant, the reviewers’ evaluation decision is less favourable if the proposal does not follow the company guidelines. Further, we find that the preparer’s incentive to persist in a project negatively affects the proposal reviewers’ decisions only when the proposal deviates from company guidelines but not when it is compliant. This result suggests that company guidelines may lower the willingness of reviewers to make independent decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Mandy M Cheng & Habib Mahama, 2011. "The impact of capital proposal guidelines and perceived preparer biases on reviewers’ investment evaluation decisions," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 36(3), pages 349-370, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ausman:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:349-370
    DOI: 10.1177/0312896211416135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0312896211416135
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0312896211416135?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kathryn Kadous & Lisa Koonce & Kristy L. Towry, 2005. "Quantification and Persuasion in Managerial Judgement," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 643-686, September.
    2. Haniffa, R.M. & Cooke, T.E., 2005. "The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 391-430.
    3. Bicchieri, Cristina & Erte, Xiao, 2007. "Do the right thing: But only if others do so," MPRA Paper 4609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Covaleski, Mark A. & Dirsmith, Mark W. & Michelman, Jeffrey E., 1993. "An institutional theory perspective on the DRG framework, case-mix accounting systems and health-care organizations," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 65-80, January.
    5. Boyle, Glenn & Guthrie, Graeme, 2006. "Payback Without Apology," Working Paper Series 18957, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    6. Thomas Ahrens & Christopher S. Chapman, 2004. "Accounting for Flexibility and Efficiency: A Field Study of Management Control Systems in a Restaurant Chain," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 271-301, June.
    7. Kirchler, Erich & Niemirowski, Apolonia & Wearing, Alexander, 2006. "Shared subjective views, intent to cooperate and tax compliance: Similarities between Australian taxpayers and tax officers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 502-517, August.
    8. Booth, Peter & Schulz, Axel K. -D., 2004. "The impact of an ethical environment on managers' project evaluation judgments under agency problem conditions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(5-6), pages 473-488.
    9. Bromiley, Philip, 1986. "Corporate planning and capital investment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 147-170, June.
    10. F. Todd Dezoort & Richard W. Houston & Michael F. Peters, 2001. "The Impact of Internal Auditor Compensation and Role on External Auditors' Planning Judgments and Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 257-281, June.
    11. Thomas E. Kida & Kimberly K. Moreno & James F. Smith, 2001. "The Influence of Affect on Managers' Capital†Budgeting Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 477-494, September.
    12. Axel K‐D. Schulz & Mandy M. Cheng, 2002. "Persistence in capital budgeting reinvestment decisions – personal responsibility antecedent and information asymmetry moderator: A note," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 42(1), pages 73-86, March.
    13. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2003. "Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 287-318.
    14. William B. Tayler & Robert J. Bloomfield, 2011. "Norms, Conformity, and Controls," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 753-790, June.
    15. Richard Z. Gooding & Angelo J. Kinicki, 1995. "Interpreting Event Causes: The Complementary Role Of Categorization And Attribution Processes," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 1-22, January.
    16. Kathryn Kadous & Lisa M. Sedor, 2004. "The Efficacy of Third†Party Consultation in Preventing Managerial Escalation of Commitment: The Role of Mental Representations," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 55-82, March.
    17. Kimberly M. Sawers, 2005. "Evidence of Choice Avoidance in Capital†Investment Judgements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 1063-1092, December.
    18. de Villiers, Charl & van Staden, Chris J., 2006. "Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimising effect? Evidence from Africa," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 763-781, November.
    19. J. A. Wagner Iii & R. Z. Gooding, 1997. "Equivocal Information And Attribution: An Investigation Of Patterns Of Managerial Sensemaking," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 275-286, April.
    20. Power, Michael K., 2003. "Auditing and the production of legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 379-394, May.
    21. Glenn Boyle & Graeme Guthrie, 2006. "Payback without apology," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(1), pages 1-10, March.
    22. Rutledge, Robert W. & Karim, Khondkar E., 1999. "The influence of self-interest and ethical considerations on managers' evaluation judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 173-184, April.
    23. Kimberly Moreno & Thomas Kida & James F. Smith, 2002. "The Impact of Affective Reactions on Risky Decision Making in Accounting Contexts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 1331-1349, December.
    24. Glenn Boyle & Graeme Guthrie, 2006. "Payback without apology," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(1), pages 1-10, March.
    25. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18957 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karen Benson & Peter M Clarkson & Tom Smith & Irene Tutticci, 2015. "A review of accounting research in the Asia Pacific region," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 40(1), pages 36-88, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lisa-Marie Wibbeke & Maik Lachmann, 2020. "Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 275-328, September.
    2. Shujun Ding & Philip Beaulieu, 2011. "The Role of Financial Incentives in Balanced Scorecard‐Based Performance Evaluations: Correcting Mood Congruency Biases," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(5), pages 1223-1247, December.
    3. Mandy M. Cheng & Axel K‐D Schulz & Peter Booth, 2009. "Knowledge transfer in project reviews: the effect of self‐justification bias and moral hazard," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 49(1), pages 75-93, March.
    4. Guthrie, Graeme, 2023. "Optimal adaptation to uncertain climate change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Chenhall, Robert H. & Hall, Matthew & Smith, David, 2010. "Social capital and management control systems: A study of a non-government organization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 737-756, November.
    6. Walid Cheffi, 2008. "Etude Des Roles De La Comptabilite De Gestion Pour Les Managers : Le Cas D'Un Grand Groupe Automobile," Post-Print halshs-00522472, HAL.
    7. J. Mahadeo & V. Oogarah-Hanuman & T. Soobaroyen, 2011. "A Longitudinal Study of Corporate Social Disclosures in a Developing Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(4), pages 545-558, December.
    8. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    9. Tzu-Kuan Chiu & Yi-Hsin Wang, 2015. "Determinants of Social Disclosure Quality in Taiwan: An Application of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 379-398, June.
    10. Duxbury, Darren, 2012. "Sunk costs and sunk benefits: A re-examination of re-investment decisions," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 144-156.
    11. Collins Ntim & Teerooven Soobaroyen, 2013. "Black Economic Empowerment Disclosures by South African Listed Corporations: The Influence of Ownership and Board Characteristics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(1), pages 121-138, August.
    12. Muhammad Safdar Sial & Chunmei Zheng & Nguyen Vinh Khuong & Tehmina Khan & Muhammad Usman, 2018. "Does Firm Performance Influence Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting of Chinese Listed Companies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, June.
    13. Waris Ali & Maha Faisal Alsayegh & Zubair Ahmad & Zeeshan Mahmood & Javed Iqbal, 2018. "The Relationship between Social Visibility and CSR Disclosure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-32, March.
    14. Mahadeo, Jyoti Devi & Oogarah-Hanuman, Vanisha & Soobaroyen, Teerooven, 2011. "Changes in social and environmental reporting practices in an emerging economy (2004–2007): Exploring the relevance of stakeholder and legitimacy theories," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 158-175.
    15. Radhakrishnan, Suresh & Tsang, Albert & Liu, Rubing, 2018. "A Corporate Social Responsibility Framework for Accounting Research," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 274-294.
    16. Robert B. Couch, 2016. "A Payback Approach to Generational Inequity," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 94-110, December.
    17. Eddy Cardinaels & Huaxiang Yin, 2015. "Think Twice Before Going for Incentives: Social Norms and the Principal's Decision on Compensation Contracts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 985-1015, December.
    18. Perera, Luckmika & Jubb, Christine & Gopalan, Sandeep, 2019. "A comparison of voluntary and mandated climate change-related disclosure," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 243-266.
    19. Abdullah Alsaadi & M. Shahid Ebrahim & Aziz Jaafar, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Shariah-Compliance, and Earnings Quality," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 51(2), pages 169-194, April.
    20. Maussen, Sophie & Cardinaels, Eddy & Hoozée, Sophie, 2024. "Costing system design and honesty in managerial reporting: An experimental examination of multi-agent budget and capacity reporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ausman:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:349-370. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.agsm.edu.au .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.