Facing the smoke screen: an epistemological analysis on the use of the term “creative accounting”

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the perception of students and accounting professionals regarding the concepts and uses of terms associated with the expression “creative accounting”. The theoretical concepts of the study are based on the understanding that epistemologically understanding the methods, systematization and concepts used in the accounting area contributes to improving existing concepts.

Methodology: To address the research question, four concepts associated with the expression “creative accounting” – fraud, error, management, and improvement of results - – were identified and case studies known in the literature were used. Subsequently, interviews were conducted with two specialists (one from the public sector and one from the private sector), who apply these concepts on a daily basis in their profession, using the open interview technique, and a structured questionnaire was applied to 158 students and 36 professionals to capture their perceptions on the topic.

Results: The study's findings show that there is still a subjectivity inherent in the use of the term “creative accounting” and its measurement, recognition and disclosure. And that both among students and professionals, the concepts and application of the terms "fraud" and "error" are better internalized than the terms "result management" and "result improvement", showing the same difficulties and contradictions observed in the literature and revealing that there is still a “smoke screen” when it comes to the term “creative accounting”. The concern is that this difficulty exposes professionals and to question the reliability of accounting information.

Contributions of the Study: It faces the discussion about the inappropriate use of the term “creative accounting”. Explains the use of alternative accounting practices and techniques has a negative connotation only insofar as it is associated with the bad faith of the person who uses it.