| Abstract: | We are honoured to contribute our ideas to the tribute to Ross Skinner, stimulated by his 1995 CA Magazine article “Judgment in Jeopardy". Our effort is titled “An Essay” because we want to suggest an approach to the problem of judging fairness in financial reporting that Skinner raised and to explore some consequences of that approach. We include no literature references other than to “Judgment in Jeopardy", and occasionally to Homer, because we have developed the ideas in this essay specifically for this tribute and have not relied on others in doing so. There has been an enormous amount of writing about accounting standards, professional judgment, fairness, and other related topics, but rather than exploring all that, we have focused directly on Skinner's concerns and have tried to develop some consequences of those concerns. One of the issues Skinner's article raised is the possibility that a solution to the judgment problem will forever be elusive. Another is the enormous challenge that “fairness” presents in an increasingly complex world. To explore the implications of Skinner's call for judgment, we use a framework based on the relevance, reliability, and validity of accounting information as a means of addressing this challenge and the demands on social consensus that result. Since Skinner was concerned about the application of judgment to real problems, we illustrate our analysis by considering four contemporary accounting debates: principles versus rules, global convergence of accounting standards, the need for a stand‐alone Canadian standard‐setter, and accounting for stock options. We argue that ideological choices, competition among parties in society, and fundamental measurement problems support Skinner's prediction that a solution will remain elusive. |
