Search

Accounting programmes are being challenged (e.g. Albrecht and Sack, 2000) to make accounting curricula more relevant and to present assessment data regarding the efficacy of course and curricular offerings. In addition, assessment is embedded in current accreditation standards in the USA by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International as fundamentally important to motivating continuous improvement (AACSB 2005). However, survey results in this area (viz., Kimmel et al., 1998, Issues in Accounting Education, 13(4), pp. 851–868 and Calderon et al., 2003, Best Practices in Accounting Program Assessment, Sarasota, FL: Teaching and Curriculum Section, American Accounting Association) indicate that assessment is not as widespread as might be expected. Further, Akers et al. (1997 Issues in Accounting Education, 12(2), pp. 259–280) note that the accounting education literature is limited with respect to descriptive accounts of assessment programme design and implementati...

Abstract The exclusive use of discounted cash flow (DCF) capital budgeting models is being criticized because of the inability of these models to handle qualitative/intangible benefits and tie the capital budgeting decision formally to organizational strategy. In response, several authors have recently proposed the use of Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for capital investment analysis. This paper extends that line of research by focusing on the fundamental problem of structuring the decision hierarchy appropriately so that the AHP can be implemented successfully in a capital budgeting context. Three approaches are presented for structuring AHP hierarchies, including the Mission, Objectives, and Strategy (MOS) framework for strategic planning. An example based on three actual companies in the petrochemical industry is developed using the MOS approach.