Paradoxes of Specialist Recognition in Accounting: An Exploratory Debate

This study explores the complexity of recognising specialisations in accounting by articulating the paradox of the knowledge–specialisation conundrum when claims of higher levels of expertise among specialists threaten the general warrant of competence of the non‐specialist. Embedded in the notions of professionalisation in which professional status is sought and achieved, this study provides a discursive analysis exploring the elements of formal specialist recognition within a large and established accounting profession. The analysis in this study suggests that institutionalising the recognition of specialisations poses two significant risks to the unity of the profession: the risk that the general warrant of competence linked to non‐specialists could be seen as accountants of a lesser quality and the risk created to the profession from intra‐professional boundary ambiguity and conflict. Overall, this study brings to the fore the underexplored issues linked to understanding and recognising specialisations in accounting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Australian Accounting Review
Published
2024-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12441
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Accounting and Organizational Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.53
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Paradoxes of Specialist Recognition in Accounting: An Exploratory Debate

Steven Dellaportas, Xiang Chen, Dudu Luo, Yunxiao Yang
1 citations
Australian Accounting Review
Accounting and Organizational Management
0.53
article

Paradoxes of Specialist Recognition in Accounting: An Exploratory Debate

Steven Dellaportas, Xiang Chen, Dudu Luo, Yunxiao Yang
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study explores the complexity of recognising specialisations in accounting by articulating the paradox of the knowledge–specialisation conundrum when claims of higher levels of expertise among specialists threaten the general warrant of competence of the non‐specialist. Embedded in the notions of professionalisation in which professional status is sought and achieved, this study provides a discursive analysis exploring the elements of formal specialist recognition within a large and established accounting profession. The analysis in this study suggests that institutionalising the recognition of specialisations poses two significant risks to the unity of the profession: the risk that the general warrant of competence linked to non‐specialists could be seen as accountants of a lesser quality and the risk created to the profession from intra‐professional boundary ambiguity and conflict. Overall, this study brings to the fore the underexplored issues linked to understanding and recognising specialisations in accounting.

Australian Accounting ReviewVol. 35(1)
Ningbo University (CN), University of Nottingham Ningbo China (CN), Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Accounting and Organizational Management
0.53
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Paradoxes of Specialist Recognition in Accounting: An Exploratory Debate — Steven Dellaportas, Xiang Chen, et al. · Australian Accounting Review (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS