Search results

As faculty, we often hear conversations and perceptions on student performance from our colleagues. The topic of student success, or lack of it, is generally framed with the assumptions that students today are too entitled (wanting high grades for substandard work), are looking for shortcuts (and not interested in learning), cannot be trusted (and must be monitored), and are not well positioned to provide reliable and valid evaluations of faculty teaching (as they are not our customers). It is a common set of assumptions about students that we have heard too often in our interactions with colleagues. But what if the problem is not our students, but us? What if it is our own lack of self-awareness, consideration of others, relationship building, and influence orientation that results in an increase in dysfunctional conflicts, and a reduction of meaningful communication with our students? This chapter leverages the model of personal–interpersonal capacity to provide a constructive lens to unpack our assumptions about our students and shift our focus to what we can control, us.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effect of knowledge complexity, absorptive capacity and weak ties between franchisor and franchisee on standards compliance related to quality and operative procedures.

A franchisee outlets survey was carried out to investigate the effect of knowledge, franchisee and relationships characteristics on franchise systems uniformity. A linear regression analysis was conducted on a sample of franchisees from different franchise chains and sectors of activity operating in Spain. The authors also controlled for transformation type, which represents the kind of activities carried out in the franchisee units, whether just commercial or both transformative and commercial activities.

Partial support was found for the hypothesis. Knowledge complexity and absorptive capacity do not affect uniformity, although weak ties do affect it: the fewer weak ties, the greater franchise system uniformity. These results allow the authors to identify differences between outlets that carry out commercial and physical transformation activities and those in which only commercial activities are carried out. Specifically, uniformity is greater in outlets that perform both commercial and productive activities, and lower in outlets that only carry out commercial activities.

The paper shows that uniformity can be regarded as a source of competitive advantage in the context of franchise operations with multiple centres dispersed geographically.

This study aims to identify the intellectual structure of expanded audit reporting (EAR), offers a quantitative summation of prominent themes, contributors and knowledge gaps and provides suggestions for further research.

This research uses various bibliometric techniques, including co-word and co-citation analysis for EAR science mapping, based on 123 papers from Scopus Database between 1991 and 2022.

The results show EAR research is focused on Audit Quality; Auditor Liability and Litigation; Communicative Value and Readability; Audit Fees; and Disclosure. Regarding EAR research, Brasel et al. (2016), article is the most cited paper, Bédard J. is the most cited author, Laval University is the most influential university, The Accounting Review is the most cited journal and USA is the leading country. Furthermore, the results show that in common law countries, in which shareholder rights and litigation risk is high, topics such as disclosure quality and audit litigation have been addressed more; and in civil legal system countries, which usually favor stakeholders’ rights, topics of gender diversity or corporate governance have been more studied.

This research has practical implications for standard setters and regulators, who can identify important, overlooked and emerging issues and consider them in future policies and standards.

This paper contributes to the literature by providing a more objective and comprehensive status of the accounting research on EAR, identifying the gaps in the literature and proposing a direction for future research to continue the discussion on the value-relevance of EAR to achieve more transparency and less audit expectation gap.