In the study, three selected personality traits were tested for their impact on Slovenian accountants’ attitudes toward accounts manipulation behavior. The main objective was to investigate if personality plays a role in how Slovenian accountants think and feel about this ethically problematic business practice. Responses from 310 chief accounting officers of Slovenian medium- and largesize companies were gathered via electronic survey, and correlational and regression analyses were performed to investigate relationships between selected personality traits and participants responses to the scenario, thus depicting accounts manipulation behavior in violation of generally accepted accounting principles. Only two of the observed personality traits (Machiavellianism and agreeableness) were found to be statistically significantly related to accountants’ attitudes, while the third one (locus of control) shows no such relationship. For both, Machiavellianism and agreeableness, the direction of the relationship with accountants’ attitudes is the same. The higher the levels of accountants’ Machiavellianism and agreeableness, the more positive their attitude toward observed accounts manipulation behavior.
The contribution juxtaposes the traditional neutralistic view on the role of accounting in a society as an activity of independent and unbiased measurement and presentation of real economic phenomena with the extended view on accounting as a socio-political practice and ideology. It also shows how the latter view impacts the understanding of the role of accounting and its reactions in light of the recent global financial crisis.
This paper presents the results of the first empirical study of household accounting in Slovenia, which was conducted on a sample of households of subsidised self-employed entrepreneurs. Based on an original measurement of the levels of household accounting, this study presents the scope of different accounting components in these households. Further, it gives the results of the comparison between those subsidised self-employed entrepreneurs who managed to keep their business and those who failed to do so. The comparison of the results showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups of entrepreneurs only in terms of the scope of monitoring of household costs and expenditures.