08832323.2012.727889

Journal of Education for Business

ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20

IFRS Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities: A Follow-Up
Study of Employer Expectations for Undergraduate
Accounting Majors
Sung Wook Yoon , Rishma Vedd & Christopher Gil Jones
To cite this article: Sung Wook Yoon , Rishma Vedd & Christopher Gil Jones (2013)
IFRS Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities: A Follow-Up Study of Employer Expectations for
Undergraduate Accounting Majors, Journal of Education for Business, 88:6, 352-360, DOI:
10.1080/08832323.2012.727889
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2012.727889

Published online: 26 Aug 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 276

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]

Date: 11 January 2016, At: 21:06

JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 88: 352–360, 2013
C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright 
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2012.727889

IFRS Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities: A Follow-Up
Study of Employer Expectations for Undergraduate
Accounting Majors
Sung Wook Yoon, Rishma Vedd, and Christopher Gil Jones
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

California State University–Northridge, Northridge, California, USA

Although the most recent International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) work plan report
from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission no longer includes a timetable for the U.S.
adoption of global financial accounting standards, experts predict that the United States will
transition to some form of convergence later this decade. In anticipation of the likely change,
explicit coverage of IFRS was added to the Uniform Certified Public Accountant Examination
in 2011. To identify what it will take for students to become IFRS-ready, this research continues
a multiyear exploration into key IFRS student learning objectives, their relative importance,
and strategies for incorporating them into the undergraduate accounting curriculum. Survey
results suggest employer expectations have evolved.
Keywords: convergence, employer expectations, IFRS, U.S. GAAP, undergraduate accounting
curriculum

As the global economy becomes increasingly borderless, the
demand for a single international language of business has
accelerated (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants [AICPA], 2011; U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC], 2008). Already more than 12,000 companies
in 120 countries have adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in one form or another (AICPA,
2008). According to the International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB, 2011, p. 4), “all remaining major economies
have established time lines to converge with or adopt IFRSs

in the near future.”
IFRS convergence is under way in the United States, albeit
fitfully. On December 21, 2007, the SEC (2007) eliminated
the reconciliation requirement for non-U.S. filers effective
March 2008. Then in August 2008 the SEC (2008) proposed
a roadmap for potential use of IFRS for U.S. financial reporting. The original roadmap called for a phase in from 2014 to

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for
their valuable input, and the staff of the Los Angeles Chapter of the California
Society of CPAs for their cooperation and assistance in administering the
survey.
Correspondence should be addressed to Christopher Gil Jones, California State University–Northridge, Department of Accounting and Information Systems, 18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge, CA 91330-8372, USA.
E-mail: Christopher.Jones@csun.edu

2016, with early adoption for selected registrants as early as
2010. But with the financial markets in disarray at the end of
2008 and a change in the U.S. presidency at the beginning
of 2009 that resulted in a shift in the political landscape, the
pace of transition to IFRS has slowed. The SEC (2012) final
staff report on the Work Plan for the Consideration of Incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards into

the Financial Reporting System for U.S. Issuers no longer
mentions a timetable. Experts predict the U.S. will eventually support some form of global financial standard but the
timeline for convergence will be much longer than originally
thought (Tysiac, 2012).
A slowing of the pace of IFRS convergence in the United
States may be advantageous for academia. While much of
the IFRS curricular research has focused on the educator
perspective (Barth, 2008; Connolly & Llanes, 2008; Hor &
Juchau, 2004), to date little research, other than our first study
(Jones, Vedd, & Yoon, 2009), has examined the IFRS knowledge and skill set expectations from an employer’s view. In
an effort to identify what those expectations might be and
whether they have evolved, this research presents a follow-up
study to our 2008 survey on key IFRS student learning
objectives, their relative importance, and strategies for incorporating them into the undergraduate accounting curriculum.
Following the brief literature review, we describe our research methodology and respondent profile. Then we report

IFRS KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES

findings and offer a short discussion of each research question enumerated in the literature review section. We conclude
with implications for the undergraduate accounting curriculum in the United States. Major contributions of this research

include (a) an updated summary of employer priorities regarding key IFRS learning objectives, (b) an analysis of how
employers expectations vary by demographic variable, and
(c) recommended strategies for incorporating IFRS into the
accounting curriculum.

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

LITERATURE REVIEW
Projected preparation levels of U.S. accounting graduates
contrast sharply with employer expectations. With less than
a quarter of new grads predicted to be IFRS-ready by 2012
(Connolly & Llanes, 2008), public accounting and industry
face a shortage of skilled entry-level accountants. According
to D. J. Gannon, director of Deloitte and Touche’s IFRS Center of Excellence, an estimated 40% of the Fortune Global
500 already use IFRS and that percentage will significantly
increase in the next couple of years. A 2008 Deloitte survey of
over 200 senior finance professionals underscored the need
for additional IFRS education in the United States. Sixtyfour percent of respondents indicated they lacked enough
adequately trained IFRS professionals for U.S. operations.
For non-U.S. operations, the skill shortage was not as pronounced; just 34% of respondents felt global accounting

skills were inadequate (Deloitte & Touche, 2008). Mary
Barth, a Stanford University professor of accounting and former member of the IASB, asserted regarding the transition to
IFRS, “The question is how, not whether, it will happen, and
how, not whether, U.S. academics will participate” (Barth,
2008, p. 1176).
According to the SEC roadmap, adequate training in IFRS
knowledge and skills is an essential precondition for final
adoption of a global standard by the United States (SEC,
2008). Unfortunately, as the education and training section
of the roadmap points out, existing education and training is
“limited to or predominantly focused on current provisions
of U.S. GAAP” (SEC, p. 29). The Commission suggests that
“colleges and universities would need to include IFRS in
their curricula” (SEC, p. 29).
While academia is still debating whether IFRS should be
adopted (Albrecht, 2008; Bahnson & Miller, 2008; Fay, Brozovsky, Edmonds, Lobingier, & Hicks, 2008; Taub, 2007;
Zeff, 2007), three external forces seem to be shaping the
IFRS curricular integration dialog at the undergraduate level.
First, the Big Four firms have all launched IFRS curricular initiatives (Deloitte & Touche, 2009; Harris, 2008;
WebCPA, 2008). PricewaterhouseCoopers went so far as

to specify IFRS-awareness levels for new recruits (Nilsen,
2008).
Accounting textbook publishers are the second external
force molding the IFRS integration effort. Wiley, for in-

353

stance, has offered an online IFRS boot camp designed to
“help instructors get up to speed on international convergence” since 2009 (Wiley, 2009, para. 1). The third external (and probably most significant) outside influence on the
IFRS curricular integration is the public accounting licensing
exam itself. In May 2008, the AICPA expressed its intent to
incorporate global accounting standards into the CPA exam
requiring candidates to become bilingual in both U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and IFRS.
Beginning in 2011, the Uniform CPA Examination was revamped with a new structure, format, and comparative content between IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Under the new Content and Skill Specification Outlines, CPA exam candidates
are expected to identify and understand the differences between financial statements prepared on the basis of U.S.
GAAP and IFRS. Candidates are also required to demonstrate proficiency in first-time adoption of IFRS (AICPA,
2009).
This new reality puts significant pressure on academic
units providing accounting education. A recent survey of
accounting departments at 200 universities throughout the

United States indicated significant change in the intermediate accounting course sequence is underway in response
to information overload from IFRS integration (Davidson &
Francisco, 2009). Additionally, as part of the undergraduate accounting curriculum redesign effort, many institutions
have begun to introduce comprehensive research cases requiring comparative analysis of U.S. GAAP and IFRS (Johnson & Halabi, 2011).
Based on our literature review and results from our previous study, we developed the following research questions
for further inquiry:
Research Question 1 (RQ1): How important is integrating
IFRS in the undergraduate accounting curriculum?
RQ2:What strategy should be used to incorporate IFRS into
the undergraduate accounting curriculum?
RQ3: What relative weight should IFRS and U.S. GAAP
content be given in undergraduate accounting classes
until the U.S. converges with (or adopts) IFRS?
RQ4: How important is it for entry-level accounting job candidates to have a suite of IFRS knowledge and skills (see
Table 1)?
RQ5: Do public accounting firms have higher expectations regarding IFRS competencies than nonaccounting
firms? What about large organizations versus small- or
medium-sized organizations? Or companies with foreign operations versus companies that only operate domestically?
RQ6: Do large organizations have more interest in Extensible
Business Reporting Language (XBRL) for IFRS than

small- or medium-sized organizations?
RQ7: Do small- and medium-sized organizations expect
graduates to know more about IFRS for “small- or
medium-sized entities” than do large organizations?

354

S. W. YOON ET AL.
TABLE 1
IFRS Student Learning Objectives Categorized by Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

Student learning objective
Define the term “International Financial Reporting Standards” (IFRS)
Compare and contrast IFRS and U.S. GAAP
Describe the difference between principles-based and rules-based standards
Describe the role of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)
Discuss the current status of IFRS adoption
Explain the standard setting process for IFRS

Read and comprehend IFRS-based financial statements
Apply IFRS 1 (first-time adoption of IFRS) to an entity
Apply IFRS in recording business transactions
Apply IFRS for small- and medium-sized entities
Prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS
Use XBRL markup language for IFRS
Analyze IFRS-based financial statements
Reconcile IFRS with U.S. GAAP–based financial statements
Use professional judgment in resolving alternatives under IFRS

Revised Bloom’s learning category

Taxonomic level

Remember
Understand
Understand
Understand
Understand
Understand

Understand
Apply
Apply
Apply
Apply
Apply
Analyze
Analyze
Evaluate

1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5

Note. In the original taxonomy, Bloom used noun descriptors for the learning levels (Bloom, Englehart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956); these have been
replaced with action verbs. Bloom’s learning categories, as revised by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), are now (a) remember (formerly knowledge), (b)
understand (formerly comprehension), (c) apply (formerly application), (d) analyze (formerly analysis), (e) evaluate (formerly evaluation), and (f) create
(formerly synthesis). Levels 5 and 6 were swapped. Evaluate, originally Level 6, is now considered Level 5 and create is now Level 6.

METHOD
Survey Instrument and Sample Selection
To address the specific research questions posed by this
study, we updated the questionnaire from our initial survey
(Jones et al., 2009). The 2008 survey instrument was developed using previous IFRS surveys (Deloitte & Touche,
2008; PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2006) and relevant literature
(Barth, 2008; Nilsen, 2008) as a guide. The updated questionnaire (available from the first author) was pilot tested
with the department accounting faculty at California State
University, Northridge, and any suggestions incorporated in
the final instrument. During summer 2010, the questionnaire
was administered to members of the California Society of
Certified Public Accountants (CalCPA) in the Southern California region. The Los Angeles Chapter of CalCPA emailed
approximately 10,000 survey requests and collected the survey results. Due to the size of the mailing, CalCPA did not
collect data on returned emails or blocked delivery due to
spam filtering. A total of 166 members responded to the survey via web. Frequencies may tally to less than 166 as not
every participant answered every question.
RESULTS
Respondent Profile
Table 2 summarizes demographic information regarding position title, experience, specialization, employment sector,
and geographic scope for the 166 useable responses. The
typical respondent was a senior manager in a local public
accounting firm with 20+ years of experience. Primary areas

of specialization were either tax (34.3%), audit (24.1%), or
financial accounting (19.3%).
Compared to the previous survey, respondents in this study
may have been more familiar with international accounting
due to the proportionately higher affiliation levels with national or multinational firms (national: 17.4% in 2010 vs.
9.1% in 2008; multinational: 56.5% in 2010 vs. 18.2% in
2008).
Research Question 1: Employer Perspective
on IFRS Coverage
Most survey participants (90.9%) believed that IFRS coverage is important enough that it should already be part of
the existing undergraduate accounting curriculum (Table 3).
About a third of respondents reported that IFRS integration
was very important (18.9%) or extremely important (14.6%).
A little more than a third (34.8%) responded that IFRS coverage was important, with 22.6% of respondents indicating that
curricular integration was somewhat important. Only 9.1%
of survey participants did not feel IFRS should be integrated
into the curriculum at all. Findings are consistent with our
previous research.
Research Question 2: Preferred Integration
Strategies
Table 4 presents recommended strategies for incorporating
IFRS into the accounting curriculum. Opinion was divided.
A little more than a quarter (27.3%) of respondents would
integrate IFRS into all financial accounting coursework, starting with the principles course. A slightly lower percentage
(25.5%) took a broader view, preferring to integrate IFRS into

IFRS KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES
TABLE 4
Recommended Strategies for Incorporating IFRS
into the Curriculum

TABLE 2
Descriptive Statistics (N = 166)
f

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

Demographic category
Current position
Senior management
Middle management
Early professional
Other
Years of business experience
Less than 5 years
5–10 years
11–20 years
More than 20 years
Specialization
Audit
Business management
Education
Finance
Financial accounting
General management
Information systems
Managerial accounting
Tax
Other
Organizational sector
Public accounting
Industry—SEC registrant
Industry—Non-SEC registrant
Government
Not-for-profit
Education
Other
Public accounting by geographic scope
International—Big Four
International—Other than Big Four
National
Regional
Local—General practice
Local—Specialized
Industry by geographic scope
International
National (domestic)
Regional
Local

355

%

84
38
21
23

50.6
22.9
12.7
13.9

8
15
34
109

4.8
9.1
20.6
66.1

40
3
3
6
32
4
2
6
57
13

24.1
1.8
1.8
3.6
19.3
2.4
1.2
3.6
34.3
7.8

97
23
24
4
7
7
4

58.4
13.9
14.5
2.4
4.2
4.2
2.4

1
3
3
5
64
20

1.0
3.1
3.1
5.2
66.7
20.8

26
8
6
6

56.5
17.4
13.0
13.0

Note. SEC = U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Curricular strategy

f

%

Integrate IFRS into all financial accounting courses
Integrate IFRS into all accounting program coursework
Stand-alone IFRS course
Integrate IFRS into only the intermediate accounting series
Integrate IFRS into just the international accounting course
Other

44
41
33
22
14
7

27.3
25.5
20.5
13.7
8.7
4.3

Note. Table shows responses to survey question, “What strategy
would you recommend for incorporating IFRS into the undergraduate accounting curriculum?” IFRS = International Financial Reporting
Standards.

all accounting coursework. This would mean IFRS coverage
in auditing, tax, managerial accounting, and accounting information systems, in addition to the financial accounting series.
About 20% of employers prefer a stand-alone IFRS course,
while 13.7% recommend an intermediate-accounting-series
only approach. The lack of consensus for a preferred integration strategy parallels our prior survey results.
Research Question 3: Relative Coverage
of IFRS Versus U.S. GAAP
Until the United States actually converges with IFRS, the majority (57.1%) of respondents believe more emphasis should
be placed on U.S. GAAP in the classroom than on IFRS.
Table 5 presents respondent preferences for relative weights
of IFRS/U.S. GAAP coverage in 10% increments. Of those
respondents favoring more U.S. GAAP coverage than IFRS,
the mode was 70% U.S. GAAP–30% IFRS (f = 29). A little
less than one third (31.6%) of respondents would give equal
treatment to IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Only 10.1% of respondents felt that more weight should be given to IFRS. Two
respondents (1.3%) felt that IFRS should be covered exclusively. In contrast, two respondents (1.3%) felt that only U.S.
GAAP should be covered until the United States converges
with IFRS.

TABLE 3
Importance of IASB Curricular Integration
Somewhat
important

Not important

Important

Extremely
important

Very important

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

M

SD

15

9.1

37

22.6

57

34.8

31

18.9

24

14.6

3.07

1.64

Note. Table shows responses to survey question, “How important is integrating IFRS into the undergraduate accounting curriculum?” Responses were
rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale with responses ranging from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important). IFRS = International Financial Reporting
Standards.

356

S. W. YOON ET AL.

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

TABLE 5
Relative Weight for U.S. GAAP Versus IFRS
Coverage
Relative weight

f

%

100% U.S. GAAP
10% IFRS–90% U.S. GAAP
20% IFRS–80% U.S. GAAP
30% IFRS–70% U.S. GAAP
40% IFRS–60% U.S. GAAP
50% IFRS–50% U.S. GAAP
60% IFRS–40% U.S. GAAP
70% IFRS–30% U.S. GAAP
80% IFRS–20% U.S. GAAP
90% IFRS–10% U.S. GAAP
100% IFRS

2
18
24
29
17
50
5
6
4
1
2

1.3
11.4
15.2
18.4
10.8
31.6
3.2
3.8
2.5
0.6
1.3

the items in the 2011 Uniform CPA Exam (AICPA, 2009).
These two additional learning objectives are “Describe the
role of the IASB” and “Apply IFRS 1 to an entity” (IFRS 1
addresses first-time adoption of IFRS by an entity).
Table 6 summarizes employer expectations concerning
the 15 IFRS competencies. Learning objectives are listed in
descending order by importance mean and given a simulated
rank order. Mean ratings for each learning objective are compared side by side with our 2008 study. Results of pairwise
t-tests of the differences in the means indicate importance ratings of the 13 IFRS knowledge objectives are not statistically
different from the earlier study.
Respondents rated 12 of the IFRS competencies as somewhat important (range = 2.00–2.99). Of the 12 learning objectives, two clustered above the midpoint between anchors
on the Likert-type scale (2.5); these were (a) describe the difference between principles-based and rules-based standards
(M = 2.60, SD = 1.19) and (b) define the term IFRS (M =
2.59, SD = 1.30; Table 6). Three of the 15 IFRS competencies were rated as not important (range = 1.00–1.99)—apply
IFRS for SMEs, explain the standard setting process for IFRS
and use XBRL markup language for IFRS.
For the most part, simulated importance rankings for IFRS
learning objectives were comparable with those found in our
2008 study. Top-rated IFRS competencies such as (a) describe the difference between principles-based and rulesbased standards, (b) define the term “international financial reporting standards,” (c) compare and contrast IFRS
and U.S. GAAP, and (d) read and comprehend IFRS-based
financial statements were ranked second through fifth in

Note. GAAP = Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; IFRS =
International Financial Reporting Standards.

Research Question 4: IFRS Knowledge
and Skills
Survey participants were presented with a list of 15 IFRS
learning objectives (see Table 1) and asked to rate the
importance of each competency for new-hires using a
5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not important) to
5 (extremely important). Thirteen of the 15 IFRS learning
objectives were derived from our previous survey research
and were largely based on employer expectations for new
hires (Nilsen, 2008). Two new learning objectives were
added to the questionnaire in response to recent inclusion of

TABLE 6
Importance of IFRS Knowledge and Skills
2010 study
IFRS competency
Describe difference between principles- and rules-based.
Define the term IFRS.
Compare and contrast IFRS and U.S. GAAP.
Read and comprehend IFRS-based financials.
Reconcile IFRS with U.S. GAAP–based financials.
Analyze IFRS-based financial statements.
Discuss the current status of IFRS adoption.
Use professional judgment in resolving alternatives under IFRS.
Apply IFRS in recording business transactions.
Prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS.
Describe the role of IASB.
Apply IFRS 1 to an entity.
Apply IFRS for SMEs.
Explain the standard setting process for IFRS.
Use XBRL markup language for IFRS.

2008 study

Rank

M

SD

Rank

M

SD

t

df

Bloom’s learning level

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

2.60
2.59
2.44
2.42
2.38
2.30
2.28
2.23
2.20
2.19
2.16
2.09
1.96
1.96
1.84

1.19
1.30
1.19
1.18
1.15
1.17
1.16
1.21
1.18
1.19
1.10
1.12
1.05
0.99
0.97

2
3
4
5
9
7
1
8
6
11
N/A
N/A
12
10
13

2.55
2.52
2.48
2.33
2.23
2.25
2.56
2.23
2.27
2.08
N/A
N/A
2.06
2.21
2.02

1.27
1.26
1.31
1.24
1.29
1.31
1.20
1.26
1.22
1.32
N/A
N/A
1.17
1.18
1.16

0.28
0.40
−0.18
0.53
0.83
0.26
−1.59
−0.03
−0.40
0.62
N/A
N/A
−0.63
−1.57
−1.11

211
212
208
211
208
210
210
210
208
210
N/A
N/A
212
208
199

2
1
2
2
4
4
2
5
3
3
2
3
3
2
3

Note. Sample size (n) ranged from 143 to 150 because several respondents did not answer the questionnaire completely, leaving blank one or more
importance rating questions. Values for calculation of rating average were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely
important). For the two items added to the 2010 questionnaire (IASB Role and IFRS 1), t-tests were infeasible; rank, rating average, standard deviation, and
t values are labeled N/A for these items. IFRS = International Financial Reporting Standards; IASB = International Accounting Standards Board; SME =
small- and medium-sized enterprise; XBRL = Extensible Business Reporting Language.

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

IFRS KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES

our first survey and first through fourth in this research.
Low importance–rated IFRS learning objectives apply IFRS
for SMEs and use XBRL markup language for IFRS were
bottom-ranked at thirteenth and fifteenth, respectively, consistent with bottom-rankings from our previous survey. The
only major shift in rankings was the learning objective “Discuss the current status of IFRS adoption,” which ranked first
in our first survey, but ranked seventh in this research. Perhaps the clarification from the SEC in 2010 regarding the
SEC convergence work plan made adoption seem more like
a nonissue than it was in 2008.
The results of the 2010 survey confirm the 2008 survey findings that employers already expect undergraduate
accounting majors to have a conceptual-level awareness of
IFRS. Where the 2010 survey differs is in the cognitive progression from simple awareness (Bloom’s Level 1) to application (Bloom’s Level 3; Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
Employers now expect entry-level accountants to have a rudimentary working knowledge of IFRS–U.S. GAAP differences. Based on the results of the 2010 survey, accounting
students, at a minimum, are expected to be able to (a) define
the acronym IFRS, (b) compare and contrast principles-based
and rules-based approaches to accounting standards, and (c)
understand IFRS financial statements well enough to reconcile to U.S. GAAP. At this time, employers do not expect
accounting undergraduates to account for business transactions using IFRS, nor prepare financial statements solely
in accordance with IFRS. Employers have little interest in
whether accounting majors know how to apply a subset of
IFRS to small- to medium-sized entities, work with XBRL
for IFRS, or understand IASB standard setting.
Research Question 5: IFRS Coverage
Importance by Employer Type
To answer RQ5 regarding the importance of IFRS coverage by employer demographic variable, pairwise t-tests were
used to compare mean differences. Results of the inferential
analyses are presented in Table 7.

Public accounting versus nonaccounting firms. We
hypothesized that public accounting firms (with their focus

357

on the application of financial reporting standards) would
place greater importance on integrating IFRS into the accounting curriculum than other accounting employers. As
Table 7 Panel A depicts, the data did not support our hypothesis. Public accounting firms assign significantly lower
importance, t(162) = −2.62, p < .0095, to IFRS coverage
in the curriculum (M = 2.8850, SD = 1.1899) than nonaccounting employers (M = 3.3529, SD = 1.0895). One possible explanation is that the majority of public accounting
respondents (87.5%) in the sample were affiliated with local practices rather than regional, national, or international
public accounting firms. Local firms rarely serve SEC registrants. In contrast, about half of the industry respondents
were from companies required to file under SEC regulations
and guidelines.

Audit specialized versus non–audit-specialized
firms. With a task focus tied to financial reporting standards, we conjectured that respondents specializing in audit
would place greater emphasis on IFRS competence than do
other accounting and business specializations. As Table 7
Panel B indicates, auditors do report a significantly higher
importance, t(94) = 2.62, p < .0102, for IFRS coverage in
the curriculum (M = 3.3226, SD = 1.0766) than nonauditors
(M = 2.6615, SD = 1.1895).
Large accounting firms versus small accounting
firms. By virtue of their current role in the global economy, we hypothesized that large accounting firms would rate
IFRS coverage more important than would small accounting
firms. Respondents from large accounting firms (see Table 7
Panel C) did, indeed, report a higher importance rating for
IFRS coverage (M = 4.1667, SD = 1.0299) than did small
accounting firms (M = 2.6627, SD = 1.0738), and t-tests
revealed a significant difference, t(93) = 4.56, p < .0001
between importance means for these two groups, lending
support to the hypothesis that large accounting firms place
greater emphasis on IFRS that do smaller firms.
International companies versus domestic companies. We also hypothesized that international companies
would have more interest in IFRS coverage than domestic

TABLE 7
Comparison of International Financial Reporting Standards Curricular Importance, by Employer Characteristic
M

SD

A. Public accounting firms
2.8850
1.1899
B. Audit specialized
3.3226
1.0766
C. Large accounting firms
4.1667
1.0299
D. International companies
3.9231
1.0766

f

M

SD

f

M Difference

t

p

68

−0.4779

−2.62

.0095

31

Nonaccounting firms
1.0895
Non–audit-specialized
2.6615
1.1895

65

0.6611

2.62

.0102

12

2.6627

Small accounting firms
1.0738

83

1.5040

4.56

< .0001

2.6667

Domestic companies
0.8563

21

1.2564

5.20

< .0001

96

26

3.3529

358

S. W. YOON ET AL.
TABLE 8
Importance of XBRL for International Financial
Reporting Standards, by Employer Size

Large organizations

TABLE 9
Importance of International Financial Reporting
Standards for Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises,
by Employer Size

Small organizations
Large organizations

M

SD

f

M

SD

f

M Difference

t

M
2.1842 1.0096 38 1.7143 0.9283 105

0.4699

SD

f

M

SD

f

M Diff.

t

p

1.0935

39

1.8559

1.0167

111

0.4005

2.08

.0397

2.61 .0099
2.2564

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

Small organizations

p

businesses. As expected, international companies did report
a higher importance for IFRS coverage (M = 3.9231, SD
= 1.0766) than their domestic counterparts (M = 2.6667,
SD = 0.8563; see Table 7 Panel D). Mean differences in importance ratings were significant, t(45) = 5.20, p < .0001.
As with large public accounting firms, it would appear international companies do place a higher importance on IFRS
curricular integration.

reported a significantly higher, t(148) = 2.08, p < .0397,
importance rating for IFRS for SMEs coverage (M = 2.2564,
SD = 1.0935) than did small organizations (M = 1.8559,
SD = 1.0167). Perhaps smaller organizations, lacking
the resources of larger entities, are less aware of recent
developments in accounting standards targeted to the needs
of SMEs. Additional research is needed to confirm this.

Research Question 6: Importance of XBRL
for IFRS by Employer Size
In 2009, the SEC initiated mandatory XBRL tagging of financial statements for large capitalization accelerated filers
(i.e., common equity float > $5 billion). All other large filers
were required to implement XBRL tagging in 2010; smaller
firms were required to phase in what the SEC calls interactive
data to improve financial reporting in 2011 (SEC, 2009). An
XBRL tag set specific to IFRS is already in use. Given the
order of the XBRL phase-in timetable, we hypothesized that
large organizations would have more interest in education
on XBRL for IFRS than small organizations. Table 8 shows
that large organizations (M = 2.1842, SD = 1.0096), did rate
XBRL for IFRS coverage more important than small organizations (M = 1.7143, SD = 0.9283). Results of a pair-wise
t-test of the difference between these two means was significant, t(141) = 2.61, p < .0099, providing support for the
hypothesis.
Research Question 7: Importance of IFRS
for SMEs by Employer Size
Both the FASB and IASB are involved in initiatives to provide scaled-back versions of GAAP, dubbed little GAAP. On
July 9, 2009, the IASB (2009) published a subset of IFRS designed for use by small- and medium-sized entities (SMEs).
According to the IASB, SMEs are estimated to represent
more than 95% of all companies. Because IFRS for SMEs
is designed to serve this constituency, we speculated that
small- and medium-sized organizations would place more
importance on the IFRS for SMEs learning objective than
would large organizations.
Table 9 presents results from the statistical analysis
comparing the mean importance rating for IFRS for SMEs
between small organizations and large organizations.
Contrary to our expectation, large organizations, in fact,

DISCUSSION
Limitations
Although the 1.66% useable response rate (N = 166) was typical for a web survey with only a single email request for participation, external validity of survey results may suffer from
a nonresponse bias. A follow-up email to members would
have allowed a comparison of first responders to late responders, providing a surrogate for determining whether nonresponders would have self-reported differently. Although the
sponsoring organization was gracious enough to support the
study by initiating the emails and hosting the web questionnaire, to avoid list fatigue it was understandably reluctant to
send a second email. Nonetheless, this study’s findings are,
on the whole, consistent with our 2008 study, both in terms
of skill importance ratings and respondent demographics. In
the 2008 study, the web survey response rate was 23.6%
(N = 66). Given that for the most part survey results parallel our previous survey (albeit with two additional learning
objectives), we believe the sample was fairly representative
of a cross-section of employers in large U.S. urban areas that
hire accounting undergraduates.

CONCLUSIONS
This research presents a follow-up study to an earlier survey on key IFRS student learning objectives, their relative
importance, and strategies for incorporating them into the
undergraduate accounting curriculum. In the 2008 study, the
survey frame was narrowly defined as employers who have
hired or intended to hire four-year accounting undergraduates
from a large urban public university located in the greater
Los Angeles metropolitan area for full-time employment

IFRS KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES

and internships. In the follow-on study, the survey frame
was expanded; respondents were drawn from the 10,000 plus
membership of the Los Angeles Chapter of the CalCPA. Descriptive and inferential analyses of the survey data yielded
the following conclusions summarized subsequently.
IFRS Coverage Prior to Full Convergence
Although the SEC has not yet formally adopted IFRS for
domestic filers, most practicing accountants (90.9%) believe
coverage of IFRS is important enough to be included in the
curriculum now.

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

Curricular Integration Strategies
Opinions on how to incorporate IFRS in the accounting undergraduate curriculum are divided. A little over a fourth of
respondents would embed IFRS in the financial accounting
coursework; another fourth would integrate IFRS into all the
accounting coursework. Still others prefer a stand-alone IFRS
course (20.5%). Somewhat less favored is integrating IFRS
into just the intermediate accounting series (13.7%). The least
favored integration strategy was incorporating IFRS into an
international accounting course (8.7%).
Standards Weighting: U.S. GAAP Versus IFRS
With regard to the relative topic weight for the two standards,
at this time the majority of employers (57.1%) prefer more
emphasis be given to U.S. GAAP in the classroom than IFRS.
Of those respondents favoring more U.S GAAP coverage
than IFRS, the preference is for a 70% U.S. GAAP–30%
IFRS split. A little less than one third (31.6%) of respondents
would give equal treatment to IFRS and U.S. GAAP.
Core IFRS Knowledge and Skills
Based on the results of this follow-up survey, it appears
employers already expect undergraduate accounting majors
to have some conceptual-level awareness of IFRS and a
rudimentary working knowledge of IFRS–U.S.GAAP differences. Not unexpectedly, required IFRS competencies are
viewed from a U.S. GAAP perspective (GAAP-centric) with
IFRS defined in relationship to the U.S. GAAP.
IFRS Importance by Employer Type
As expected, respondents specializing in audit do, in fact, attach higher importance to IFRS coverage than nonauditors.
Large accounting firms place greater emphasis on IFRS than
do smaller firms; likewise, international firms consider IFRS
more important than do domestic companies. At the learning
objective level, large accounting firms consider XBRL for
IFRS to be more important than do small firms. Contrary
to our expectations, public accounting firms place less importance on IFRS coverage than does industry; small firms
place less importance on IFRS for SMEs than do large
firms.

359

Implications for the Undergraduate
Accounting Curriculum
This study examined the curricular impact of IFRS on undergraduate accounting education. Several recommendations
emerge from the findings.

Integrate IFRS at a deeper level. The survey results
are clear that employers expect today’s undergraduates to
have more than a general awareness of global financial reporting standards. Graduating seniors should be able to define and describe IFRS, compare and contrast principles- and
rules-based approaches to accounting standards, and understand IFRS financial statements well enough to reconcile to
U.S. GAAP. This exceeds PricewaterhouseCoopers’s somewhat progressive recruiting expectation that (a) sophomores
be able to explain the uses of IFRS and discuss its future
importance; and (b) juniors and seniors be able to discuss
the current status of IFRS adoption, articulate the sources
of U.S. GAAP and IFRS, describe an example of IFRS financial statements, and identify and example of a difference
between U.S. GAAP and IFRS (Nilsen, 2008). Resources
for including IFRS coverage at the deeper level suggested
by this study are currently available from the large public
accounting firms and have recently been incorporated into
financial accounting textbooks from major publishers.
Employers are ambivalent about which curricular integration strategy to use. Making room in the undergraduate
curriculum for an additional specialized accounting course
may be difficult given college–university limitations on the
maximum number of semester–quarter units allowed in a degree program (Davidson & Francisco, 2009). The solution
adopted at our institution was to expand the required intermediate series from seven semester units to nine semester
units and eliminate the stand-alone IFRS elective.
With regard to relative weight given to the two accounting standards, we recommend devoting 70% of class time in
the undergraduate curriculum to U.S. GAAP, leaving 30%
for IFRS. Recent intermediate accounting textbook offerings (with their increased IFRS coverage) should facilitate
the move to a higher proportionate coverage of international
standards.
Focus on key IFRS exit competencies. The simulated rankings of the IFRS knowledge objectives provide a
good starting point for curricular emphasis. In the near term,
we recommend the top-10 learning objectives be emphasized with additional attention to the first five: (a) describe
the difference between principles- and rules-based standards,
(b) define IFRS, (c) compare U.S. GAAP to IFRS, (d) read
and comprehend IFRS financials, (e) reconcile IFRS to U.S.
GAAP, (f) analyze IFRS financials, (g) discuss IFRS adoption
status, (h) develop professional judgment needed to apply
principle-based standards, (i) record business transactions
using IFRS, and (j) prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS.

360

S. W. YOON ET AL.

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 21:06 11 January 2016

At or about the time U.S. GAAP and IFRS do converge, students should be taught how to apply IFRS 1 (Firsttime Adoption of IFRS; International Accounting Standards
Board, 2003). Students would also then be expected to
demonstrate an understanding of the international accounting standards setting process and the role of the IASB. Little,
if any, class coverage should be devoted to IFRS for SMEs
or XBRL for IFRS.

Help faculty retool for IFRS. Deep integration of IFRS
content is no small undertaking. Big Four firms have taken the
initiative to provide course support material for the massive
re-education campaign of existing faculty. Textbook publishers have increased IFRS coverage. What is needed now is
more institutional support in the form of release time, faculty
development funds, and course redevelopment stipends to
update existing courses and curriculum. Such support would
help to insure that the growing momentum in academia to integrate IFRS into the curriculum continues as the profession
evolves toward a single set of high-quality global standards.
REFERENCES
Albrecht, D. (2008). Why IFRS won’t work in the United States.
Retrieved from http://profalbrecht.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/why-ifrswont-work-in-united-states/
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2008). International financial reporting standards: Questions and answers. Retrieved
from http://www.ifrs.com/updates/aicpa/ifrs faq.html
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2009). Content and skill specifications for the uniform CPA examination. Ewing, NJ:
Author.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2011). International financial reporting standards (IFRS): An AICPA backgrounder.
Retrieved from http://www.ifrs.com/pdf/IFRSUpdate V8.pdf
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. A. (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching
and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.
New York, NY: Longman.
Bahnson, P. R., & Miller, P. B. W. (2008). The spirit of accounting: What
good are principles without principles? Accounting Today, 22(18), 16–17.
Barth, M. E. (2008). Gloxbal financial reporting: Implications for U.S. academics. The Accounting Review, 83, 1159–1179.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl,
D. R. (Eds.) (1956). Taxonomy of education objectives: Handbook I:
Cognivitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay.
Connolly, T., & Llanes, S. (2008). University professors weigh in on building
IFRS into curricula: Small number of universities will be ready for 2008–
2009 academic year, according to KPMG-AAA survey. KPMG News.
Retrieved from http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=
104&STORY=/www/story/09-04-2008/0004878725&EDATE=;.
Davidson, L. H., & Francisco, W. H. (2009). Changes to the intermediate
accounting course sequence. American Journal of Business Education,
2(7), 55–59.
Deloitte & Touche. (2008). 2008 IFRS survey: Where are we today? Retrieved from http://www.iasplus.com/en/binary/dttpubs/2008ifrssurvey.
pdf/view
Deloitte & Touche. (2009). Deloitte’s IFRS university consortium. Retrieved
from http://www.deloitte.com/us/ifrs/consortium
Fay, R., Brozovsky, J., Edmonds, J., Lobingier, P., & Hicks, S. (2008).
Incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) into
intermediate accounting. Retrieved from http://www.deloitte.com/assets/

Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/us assurance Incorpor
ating%20IFRS%20into%20Intermediate%20Accounting.pdf
Harris, R. (2008, May 22). Big Four make big plans for IFRS. CFO.com.
Retrieved from http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/11434822
Hor, J., & Juchau, R. (2004, July). Internationalising the financial accounting curriculum: A survey of course content and coverage. Paper presented
at the Fourth Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference, Singapore.
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). (2003). First-time adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards. International Financial Accounting Standard No. 1. London, England: Author.
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). (2009). IFRS for SMEs.
Work plan for IFRSs. Retrieved from http://www.ifrs.org/Current+
Projects/IASB+Projects/Small+and+Medium-sized+Entities/Small+
and+Medium-sized+Entities.htm
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). (2011). International
Accounting Standards Board (IASB), IASC Foundation (IASCF): Who
we are and what we do. Retrieved from http://www.ifrs.org/NR/rdonlyres/
1D35BB5F-6E59-446F-9861-A84F9288CBB4/0/Who we areJuly11.pdf
Johnson, G. R., & Halabi, A.K. (2011). The accounting undergraduate
capstone: Promoting sysnthesis, refelction, transition, and competencies.
Journal of Education for Business, 86, 266–273.
Jones, C., Vedd, R., & Yoon, S. (2009). Employer expectations of accounting undergraduates’ entry-level knowledge and skills in global financial
reporting. American Journal of Business Education, 2(6), 85–101.
Nilsen, K. (2008). On the verge of an academic revolution: How IFRS is
affecting accounting education. Journal of Accountancy, 206(6), 82–85.
PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2006). IFRS: Embracing change. Retrieved from
http://www.soxfirst.com/50226711/IFRS%20company%20survey%5B1
%5D.pdf
Taub, S. (2007, September 25). IFRS and GAAP: The good and the bad.
Compliance Week. Retrieved from http://www.complianceweek.com.
Tysiac, K. (2012, July 13). SEC report offers detailed look at IFRS. Journal of Accountancy. Retrieved from http://www.journalofaccountancy.
com/News/20125815.htm
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2007). Acceptance from
foreign private issuers of financial statements prepared in accordance
with International Financial Reporting Standards without reconciling
to U.S. GAAP [Release Nos. 33–8879; 34–57026; International Series
Release No. 1306; File No. S7-13-07]. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2008). Roadmap for
the potential use of financial statements prepared in accordance with
international financial report standards by U.S. issuers [Release Nos.
33–8982; 34–58960; File No. S7-27-08]. 17 CFR Parts 210, 229, 230,
240, 244 and 249. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2009). Interactive
data to improve financial reporting [Release Nos. 33–9002; 34–59324;
39–2461; IC-28609; File No. S7-11-08] 17 CFR Parts 229, 230,
232, 239, 240 and 249. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2009/33-9002.pdf
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2010). Work plan for the
consideration of incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards into the financial reporting system for U.S. issuers. Washington,
DC: Author.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (2012). Work plan for
the consideration of incorporating international financial reporting standards into the financial reporting system for U.S. issuers: Final staff
report. Washington, DC: Author.
WebCPA. (2008, May 19). Ernst & Young to develop IFRS curriculum. Accounting Today for the WebCPA. Retrieved from http://www.
accountingtoday.com/news/27792-1.html
Wiley. (2009). IFRS boot camp. Retrieved from http://www.wileyauthor
teamforsuccess.com/news.php
Zeff, S. A. (2007). Some obstacles to global financial reporting
comparability and convergence. The British Accounting Review, 4,
290–302.