Elizabeth Dreike Almer

Is it the Kids or the Schedule?: The Incremental Effect of Families and Flexible Scheduling on Perceived Career Success

Flexible work arrangements (FWAs) are widely offered in public accounting as a tool to retain valued professional staff. Previous research has shown that participants in FWAs are perceived to be less likely to succeed in their careers in public accounting than individuals in public accounting who do not participate in FWAs (Cohen and Single, 2001). Research has also documented an increasing backlash against family–friendly policies in the workplace as placing unfair burdens on individuals without children. Building directly on a previous study in this journal (Cohen and Single, 2001), this study addresses the issue of whether the documented perceptions toward FWA participants are the result of electing to take part in the FWA or the result of bias against employees with children. The research questions are addressed in a 3 × 2 experimental setting in which we manipulate FWA participation, along with family status and gender of a hypothetical manager in a public accounting firm. Our findings indicate that FWA participants are viewed as less likely to advance and as less committed than individuals without children or individuals who had children but who were not taking part in a FWA. Male FWA participants are viewed as less likely to succeed than female FWA participants. This effect appears to arise from a perception that FWA participants are willing to make sacrifices in their careers to accommodate family needs and thus may not be as committed to making the sacrifices perceived as necessary to meet the rigorous demands of the public accounting environment. This raises the ethical question of what could be done to change the culture in public accounting to foster a substantive support system for individuals who want to balance a family and a career.

Successful promotion or segregation from partnership? An examination of the “post-senior manager” position in public accounting and the implications for women's careers

Abstract Historically public accounting careers have been “up or out” with progression from staff though senior, manager, senior manager, and ultimately, partner. Recent AICPA data suggests senior managers are increasingly promoted to non-equity “director/principal” positions rather than to partner (AICPA, 2006). Further, this career path appears to be disproportionately occurring for women. This survey of the membership of the American Women’s Society of Certified Public Accountants (AWSCPA) provides the first descriptive data on the nature and impact of the post-senior manager position from the perspective of senior women accountants and reflects on the gender implications of these findings. Of concern is the early indication that firms may be using such positions to create a ‘reserve force of [partnership-level] labour’. If women are disproportionately appointed to such positions, they may be forming a new source of vertical segregation for women accountants.

An empirical investigation of context‐dependent communications between auditors and bankers

Despite attempts to close the expectation gap, researchers in the USA and other countries continue to demonstrate the existence of differences between auditors’ beliefs about their responsibilities and the public’s understanding of the audit function. This study considers how ambiguous language in auditor communications, and the context in which it occurs, contribute to the expectation gap. An experiment examined auditors’ and bankers’ understandings of the phrase “substantial doubt” used in a going concern audit report. It was predicted and found that auditors and bankers had different general understandings of the meaning of “substantial doubt” and their understandings were conditioned on ownership structure, a contextual variable. The results demonstrate the potentially crucial role of context in ambiguous communications with users. Implications of these results are discussed, as are suggested areas for future research.

Tenure-Track Opt-Outs: Leakages from the Academic Pipeline

Abstract Purpose To understand the reasons that accounting academics leave the tenure-track academic pipeline. Design/methodology/approach Survey study was conducted of PhD graduates who left the tenure-track accounting pipeline over a 22-year period. Findings We located and surveyed accounting PhD graduates who have opted out of the tenure-track. These opt-outs included those who have left academia entirely and those who have moved into non-tenure-track positions. Survey results indicate that dissatisfaction with research expectations is the most significant factor for faculty now employed in non-tenure-track positions. Although there were no gender-related differences in the number of faculty who left the tenure-track but stayed in academia, there were some gender differences in the importance of family-related factors in motivating the move off of the tenure-track. Research limitations/implications The study examines the importance of the “push” and “pull” factors associated with changing career paths in academia that have been identified in the literature. The study finds some differences in influential factors between accounting academia and other fields. Sample size is a potential limitation. Practical implications The study provides recommendations for PhD program directors and for hiring institutions to help reduce the number of opt-outs. Social implications Retention of qualified faculty who are dedicated teachers improves students’ educational outcomes. Originality/value This is the first study to examine factors that drive accounting academics to opt-out of the tenure-track.