اثر قرار گرفتن در معرض استانداردهای بین المللی آموزش بر اهمیت درک شده از هماهنگ سازی جهانی آموزش حسابداری در میان دانشگاهیان حسابداری ژاپنی

This exploratory study empirically examines the degree to which the Japanese accounting academics is exposed to the IESs and explores their perception of the importance of global harmonization in accounting education in terms of ensuring quality global control of the accounting profession. Responses from 76 questionnaires found that accounting staff, particularly in the post graduate Accounting Schools, have a basic understanding of the IESs and view this global harmonization as favorable whereas staff who teach at undergraduate level or at ordinal postgraduate level in tertiary schools have a much lower understanding and perception. This is of concern to the accounting profession as it is in these undergraduate schools and ordinal postgraduate schools from where the majority of successful CPA examinees graduate each year. The findings also indicated that the IESs can be effectively used as a benchmarking tool within the Japanese accounting academics.

In December 2009, the International Accounting Education Standards Board (IAESB) publicly released the amended “Framework for International Education Standards for Professional Accountants” (Framework). The primary purpose of this revised Framework was to update the International Education Standards (IESs) for Professional Accountants. These standards were originally prepared and released by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) in 2003 and they were taken over by the IAESB in 2008. The desired IESs outcomes of this new Framework were to (1) increase the global mobility for accountants and (2) reduce international differences in the requirements of becoming a professional accountant together with his/her ongoing professional development (IAESB, 2009). Against this latest IESs exposure it has been noted that significant gaps exist between the IESs and the actual development of education programs across a number of countries. To address this concern, Karreman, Ahern, Kuijl, Marrian (2007) investigated the outcomes of accounting education programs that 32 professional accounting and auditing bodies from around the world had instigated in the previous five years and their perceptions for the ensuing five years. The collected data was analyzed in terms of initial education, training and assessment procedures, and the mandatory continuing professional development for each country's members. With the survey results based on educational standards and other issues from each country, the authors found limited influence of the IESs with regard to the development of pre-and post-qualification programs. According to the results, direct linkages only appeared, on average, in four out of the eight standards. The vexing question arises as to why these gaps exist. One possible reason may be that IESs have failed to involve a wider range of important stakeholders who would normally be expected to have a strong influence on the development of global accounting education. That is, the 2003 IESs and the 2009 Framework limited its target audience to IFAC bodies and their respective members (International Accounting Education Standards Board (IAESB), 2009 and International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), 2003). In such circumstances the IESs and Framework will only become effective, if, at the pre-qualification stage of accounting education, the accounting professional body/ies have a strong association and engagement with the actual accounting curriculum in tertiary institutions. This is the case in Australia for instance where accounting courses in selected universities and colleges receive accreditation by professional accounting bodies such as CPA Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (Mathews, 2004). Under this scheme, potential entrants to the accounting profession are required to complete an accredited bachelor's degree, which has been endorsed by the relevant professional body. Compared to Australia, professional bodies in some other countries have little direct influence in this process of assisting curriculum development in tertiary accounting education. In the USA, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), as a member body of IFAC is the enforcement agency that promotes the IESs, but has little or no control in curriculum design or examination certification in tertiary institutions (Needles, 2008). Similar to the situation in the USA, the Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants (JICPA), which is the domestic professional body of IFAC in Japan, has weak links with the educational community. Of particular concern in Japan is at the pre-qualification stage, when the CPA Law allows any school leaver or other non-graduate to apply for CPA membership. It is here that potential CPA candidates are allowed to sit for a CPA examination regardless of any prior accounting education. Accordingly neither the JICPA nor its members have little opportunity to incorporate the essential elements of the IESs into the pre-qualification stage of accounting education in Japan. In 2003, new professional postgraduate schools, commonly known as Accounting Schools, were established in Japan in order to attract potential CPA candidates. These institutions, originating from the Certified Public Accountant Law (CPA Law) Amendment in 2003, were designed to integrate IESs with the domestic accounting educational structures (Financial System Council, 2002 and Financial System Council, 2003). They were intended to reflect and incorporate IESs into the country's national education structure. However, statistical data in 2008 has indicated that potential CPA examinees studying within these postgraduate Accounting Schools consisted of only 155 current students or graduates (4.27%) from a total of 3,625 students. This data also reflected the fact that the majority of successful CPA examinees were either current undergraduate students or recent graduates from an undergraduate degree only (3,133; 86.42%) (CPAAOB, 2008). The latter were mainly holders of a business or accounting related undergraduate degree. It should also be pointed out that individual lecturers and/or curriculum designers in these tertiary schools have certain autonomous discretion on whether or not they wish to reflect the spirit of IESs into their curriculum and specific course content. In theory, the Framework prescribes that the primary target audience should be IFAC bodies and its members, but technically it encourages a wider range of other stakeholders including consumers, regulators and providers of accounting education to get involved in the IESs (IAESB, 2009). With the results of an online survey administered by the IAESB in 2008 (IAESB, 2008a), the Framework avoids directly targeting these other stakeholders but rather only encourages them to understand the workings of the IAESB (IAESB, 2009). As stated above, a strong call has been made for the accounting academics to be included as a primary interest group to enable the successful introduction of the IESs but in reality this has not occurred. Increasingly there has been a strong public interest in adopting the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Japan. Simultaneously, accounting academics have openly discussed the importance of, and the necessity for, the global harmonization of accounting education. In support of this trend, the Japanese Association of Accounting Education and Research (JAAER) was established in February 2009 to address accounting education issues including the global convergence relating to the IESs. However, it is not clear if Japanese accounting academics are familiar with the IESs, or whether they have a favorable perception of the international harmonization of accounting education that has been introduced through the IESs. Given the above background, the main purpose of this study is twofold. Firstly it investigates to what degree the Japanese accounting academics are exposed to the IESs and secondly it explores their perceptions of the importance of global harmonization in accounting education to ensure quality global control of the accounting profession. In addition, this study also attempts to identify the role that certain attributes may have in contributing to the academics' perception of the global harmonization of accounting education. Following this introduction the next section reviews previous studies in order to develop the research hypotheses. This is then followed by the questionnaire development and data collection in the research methodology section. The results of the empirical research are then analyzed and interpreted. The paper concludes with discussions of the findings, together with implications and limitations.

The primary aims of this present study were to investigate to what degree the Japanese accounting academics are exposed to the IESs and to explore their perceptions on the importance of global harmonization of accounting education. The outcomes indicated that 52.2% of respondents had previously heard about IESs and of these 25.4% of respondents had previously read about and so were more knowledgeable about the IESs. However it was concluded that such exposures to the IESs do not contribute in any way to develop a academic's clear view on the global convergence of accounting education. In contrast, the findings did indicate that IESs can be used effectively as a benchmarking tool among the academics as long as staff have a good understanding of the specific details that constitute the IESs and its resulting obligations. Of concern here is the fact that only 17.9% of academics understand the contents of the IESs and only 37.3% of academics understand members' obligations of the IESs. Further efforts should be instigated by the IAESB and the JICPA in order to promote IESs for academics to achieve a deeper understanding of the standards and to assist the IESs in becoming a more effective for benchmarking. This study also attempted to identify how particular attributes may affect the academics' perception on the global harmonization of accounting education. Firstly, it was revealed that Japanese accounting academics whose research are IFAC-oriented are inclined to be more sensitive to this global harmonization. In particular, the skewed impact that Japanese “Auditing” researchers have on this issue is interpreted as being due to the incorporation of the IFAC Code of Ethics into the domestic context. This implies that a academic's exposure to the global convergence issue would enhance their favorable acceptance of it. In contrast, “Management Accounting” academics tend to have less IESs exposure and therefore hold more neutral perception of global convergence. This may be caused by “Management Accounting” being perceived a non-IFRS subject, just like “Environmental Accounting” and “Public Accounting” in the “Others” category. Given these interpretations, it cannot be denied that the latest strong call for IFRSs adoption is intended to promote IESs exposure and so enhance a positive perception of the global harmonization issue among academics. This should occur despite the academics' research interest because all academic staff have the important role of educating tomorrow's leaders. Secondly, the present study has provided empirical evidence of the impact that the 2003 CPA Law reform attempted to integrate the IESs' conception with the domestic accounting education structure in Japan (Financial System Council, 2002 and Financial System Council, 2003). The findings indicate that the accounting academics in Accounting Schools are more likely to be exposed to the IESs and therefore appreciate the importance of international harmonization of accounting education compared to staff who teach accounting at the undergraduate level or at ordinal postgraduate level in tertiary schools. This high recognition rate of IESs and favorable view of harmonization issues by academics in Accounting Schools is considered very important as they provide a high quality accounting education through the formal tertiary education stage. Contrary to this favorable outcome, this finding conversely shows a lower perception of global harmonization among academics in undergraduate schools and ordinal postgraduate schools from where the majority of successful CPA examinees graduate each year (CPAAOB, 2008). In such circumstances, these students may not be provided with high quality education across the IESs, because their lecturers are less likely to understand the concepts surrounding the IESs and also possess a relatively neutral perception of the global harmonization movement. Urgent treatment is needed to rectify this discrepancy. Finally, this study failed to find any connection between CPA Work Experience and a staff member's perception of the global harmonization of accounting education. Our research hypothesis initially investigated whether academics with JICPA membership would be notified and thus exposed to IESs and its obligations through IFAC's SMO2, but this was found not to be the case in that such membership had little or no effect on one's perception of the global harmonization issue. This result however must be kept in context with the proposed criteria in the Framework, which does not target a very wide range of interest groups such as consumers, regulators and providers of accounting education, but only encourages these groups to have a basic understanding of the IESs (IAESB, 2009). This is especially applicable in Japan where the accounting professional body does not influence or has any control over curriculum development of accounting education at the pre-qualification stage. Nevertheless the range of target groups should be extended to enable the effective application of the IESs. Although this extension of target groups may produce a jurisdiction issue in terms of compulsory education of the IESs across various countries, future research should support the discussions regarding this issue. Some limitations in this research should be acknowledged. Firstly, this study addressed the function of the IESs at the educational pre-qualification stage only. The accounting academics that participated in the analysis were only engaged with the process of accounting education at this pre-qualification stage. On the other hand, professional bodies such as the JICPA and its members have a particular discretion to participate and develop the process of accounting education at the post-qualification stage. These special education programs are provided by JICPA under the auspices of the Continuous Professional Education (CPE) scheme which is beyond the scope of the present study. Secondly, this study successfully captured the significant role of several attributes regarding accounting academics. However, this analysis has failed to comprehensively distinguish the impact between the main effects and interactive effects among these attributes. This limitation is caused by the small data set used in this research, which has prevented the authors from undertaking the Univariate Analysis of Variance technique that would provide more credible results. Further studies are envisaged which will use more data to solve this problem. More advanced questioning techniques should be included in this further research to help determine academics' perception. Regardless of these limitations, this exploratory study was the first experiment in Japan that will assist and contribute to a better understanding of the IESs' exposure and resulting perceived importance of the global harmonization of accounting education among the Japanese accounting academics.