Knowledge economyI've been talking about this for years. Four fundamental assumptions - accounting body, going concern, accounting period, monetary measurement - are built on the soil of the industrial economy. NowIntangible assetsWith the growing share of new things, such as knowledge capital, data assets and human capital, the old framework does not change. But it's not like it's all dead. It's where and how。
Accounting assumptionsDoes it still work
I repeatedly stressed to the students, "don't say accounting assumptions are out of date." the main assumption is that the boundaries are indeed stretched by groupization, platformization, and that an internet platform can be both a businessman, logistics, and financial channels, and the "who counts me" becomes blurred. The going-on assumption is that technology companies may have a product life cycle of only three or five years, and you're logically twisting the price of r & d on an indefinite basis. But..Currency measurement assumptionsIt is true that there have been hard injuries in the valuation of intellectual property — how much a patent is worth — and there is no reliable reference to transactions in the market。
But i also remind students not to think too extreme. The phased assumption remains valid in the quarterly reports, with the main assumption being that there is a bottom line at the level of consolidation of statements, with one or two points at the core that really needs to be changed. It's worth a lot more than saying, "what's left to hold and what's to move?"。
What about the knowledge economy accounting assumptions? Change
My advice is in the direction of "extension" rather than "turn." main assumptions, for example, could introduce the concept of "knowledge subject" — a research and development team, a patent portfolio — as a separate accounting boundary? Currency measurement assumptions can be superimposedNon-monetary supplementary disclosuresThe marginal contribution of r & d inputs and the impact of brain mobility on value are supplemented by narrative indicators. These are not based on fictional concepts, but rather extend beyond the disclosure framework of existing standards。
The most taboo thing about writing such papers is the concept of piles. I've seen too many students sort out the three words "intangible asset" and "human capital" over and over again, with no real judgement. A really good article would take a particular company -- like a biomedicine company -- and take itCapitalization of research and developmentIncentives for personal equity, accounting for data assets are broken down, and the article-by-article examination of the four assumptions is stuck, followed by specific proposals for amendments. The analysis of the cases was sustained before the judges would like to turn to page 3。
So the core task of this paper is clear: not to prove that the old hypothesis is dead, but..Draw a line- on-line. Underline. Draw this line more clearly than say "knowledge economy destroys everything."。
