Monopoly versus Competition in Setting Accounting Standards

Financial accounting standards are set by organizations granted a significant degree of monopoly power by various governments. While there has been considerable debate on the merits of national (e.g., US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)) versus international (International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)) monopolies, little attention has been paid to the merits of using competing standard‐setting organizations (SSOs) for setting accounting standards. We compare the standard‐setting processes of the FASB/IASB to the processes of four technology‐oriented SSOs to assess the role of competition. We also provide a case study of monopoly and competitive standards in telephony. Both telephony and accounting yield some gains from coordination, and similar arguments are used (under the labels of comparability and consistency of accounting) in debates about granting a monopoly to their respective SSOs. Our results show that a group of volunteers competing with the government‐sanctioned monopoly of International Telecommunications Union transformed the telephone industry. Thanks to this standards competition, we enjoy free video internet calling and massive cost savings. Implications for accounting standard setting are discussed.     

Was the Internet the Only Option? Which Way Should Business and Information Systems Engineering Go?

In global competition, the Internet turned out to be the single and hegemonial infrastructure for communication. It has become the “nervous system” of today’s networked economy. While the first phase provided communication services, like e-mail, the WWW has established an interactive platform to allow easy access to advanced services. Now, in its “third” or cooperative phase, the Internet will finally lead to a ubiquitous informatization where business processes and applications become interleaved beyond the boundaries of enterprises. For this phase, many analogies to the emergence of the Internet can be observed.     

Divergent patterns of engagement in Internet standardization: Japan,Korea and China

This article analyzes the engagement of Japanese, Korean and Chinese participants in the development of Internet standards at IETF on the basis of four quantitative metrics: attendance, patenting, authorship and leadership. The results are strikingly divergent. Japanese involvement in Internet standardization began early and Japan was, for many years, second only to the U.S. in terms of IETF participation. Though Japanese participation has declined since the early 2000s, Japan remains a major contributor to IETF standardization. Korean involvement in IETF has always been significant, but below the levels of Japan and major European countries. Korean participation in IETF has also declined over the past decade, and has been dominated by one firm, Samsung. Though meaningful Chinese involvement in IETF did not begin until the mid-2000s, it has rapidly expanded in recent years. Today, China is a major player in numerous areas of Internet standardization in terms of three metrics (participation, patenting and leadership), and is rapidly gaining in terms of document authorship as well. Most of China׳s recent IETF involvement can be attributed to Huawei, though other Chinese firms have recently begun to increase their participation in the organization. Thus, contrary to some views that China׳s engagement with standardization is primarily one of indigenous innovation and “catching up”, China׳s experience with IETF demonstrates deliberate and effective engagement with a major Western standards-development organization on its own terms.