Great Deal! Get Instant $25 FREE in Account on First Order + 10% Cashback on Every Order Order Now

Intermediate Quantitative Methods for Accounting Business Report - Semester 1, 2017The International Union of Accountants is a body of many accounting firms across the globe who seeks to improve their...

1 answer below »
Intermediate Quantitative Methods for Accounting Business Report - Semester 1, 2017The International Union of Accountants is a body of many accounting firms across the globe who seeks to improve their reporting of corporate governance. Each year the Board of the International Union of Accountants conducts a review of their compliance with corporate governance. The Accounting Director of the International Union of Accountants was analysing the average environmental accounting compliance (EAC) scores of the accounting firms under her control (the score is out of 100). Accordingly, she took a sample of 60 accounting firms across the globe and, for each, determined the average score of this year, last year and the year before last year, the percentage of accountants in each firm who have at least one university degree in accounting, and the type of country. The data is stored in file ACCT5008_BR_data_2017_s1.xlss with the following variables. Column A: Accounting firm • 60 accounting firms in the sample, referred as Firm 1 to Firm 60Column B: EAC scores this year (at time t) • EAC scores for the accounting firm this yearColumn C: EAC scores last year (at time t-1) • EAC scores for the accounting firm last yearColumn D: EAC scores the year before last year (at time t-2) • EAC scores for the accounting firm in the year before last yearColumn E: Percentage of accountants in each firm who have at least one university degree in accounting, recorded as at time t (this year) 1 = less than 50%, 2 = at least 50%Column F: Country classification 1 = first world countries, 2 = second world countries, ACCT5008 – Business Report Semester 1, 2017Page 2 of 53 = third world countriesPresent a report of your findings (by answering the questions below) as the Accounting Director to the International Union of Accountants. 1. Is the percentage of accountants in each firm who has at least one university degree in accounting related to country type? 2. Is there evidence of different environmental compliance scores (EAC) over the three-year period?3. Is there evidence to suggest that the environmental compliance scores (EAC) for this year (time t) is greater than that two years ago (time t-2) among the 60 selected accounting firms?4. Is there evidence to suggest that this year environmental compliance scores (EAC) of accounting firms which has less than 50% accountants with at least one university degree in accounting is lower than this year environmental compliance scores (EAC) of accounting firms which has at least 50% accountants with at least one university degree in accounting?DUE DATE Your business report is due on Monday 15th May 2017 at 10am (Perth time). • You should submit your report in the unit Blackboard website. It is located in Assessments \ Business report. The link is open for submission from 8th May 2017.• This is the Turnitin assignment, designed to prevent plagiarism. Further information on Turnitin can be found on the university website: https://academicintegrity.curtin.edu.au/students/Turnitin_student.cfmIf assignments are not submitted by the due date, a penalty of 10% per calendar day will be deducted from the assessment mark and after seven (7) days a zero mark will be recorded.ACCT5008 – Business Report Semester 1, 2017Page 3 of 5FUTHER INSTRUCTIONS• The report covers hypothesis tests in Topic 5 to 8. However, topic 4 which contains data collection and sampling should be discussed in your report.• The report should have the following structure: Introduction, Statistical Analyses (where you perform hypothesis tests for each of the four questions) and Conclusions (where you summarize the findings and discuss the limitations)• Your report should also include technique identification and any underlying assumptions required (with checking for the required assumptions). o Why do you use a particular technique? Consider the types of data – quantitative, qualitative or ranked? How many samples? Are these samples independent? o What are the underlying assumptions? Have you checked the assumptions? ? If checking for normal distribution, consider to put up the histogram and discuss the shape. ? If you found it is not normally distributed, keep doing the test with the underlying assumption, but need to discuss this as one of your limitations in the overall conclusion.• The parameter of interests and populations must be clearly defined.• For each of the tests, you need to have a discussion about the significance level of the test (only consider significance level at 1%, 5% and 10%1) o If the null hypothesis is rejected, what should be the lowest significance level to reject the null? o If the null hypothesis is not rejected, what should be the highest significance level to accept the null?• Show all the necessary steps and calculations for your tests. o This is not a computing assignment, manual calculations must be presented for all of the above tests 1 For the F-test, only need to consider 2 significance levels: 1% and 5%ACCT5008 – Business Report Semester 1, 2017Page 4 of 5? Formula and manual calculation should be presented in the report ? The critical values of the tests should be obtained from the Appendix B of the textbook. ? With ANOVA test, you can have SST and SSE figures from Excel (ANOVA test can be obtained from Data\Data Analysis. An example of how to perform ANOVA test in Excel will be discussed in the class). • The rest of ANOVA calculation (MST, MSE, F-stat, rejection region) should be done manually.o For descriptive statistics (e.g. mean and standard deviation), Excel calculation is acceptable, no need to show the formula, just state the calculated figure. • Please type your report. o Formulae can be copied from the lecture powerpoint slides. • Consider Appendices for data and other information to support your calculation.• The report (including tables, calculations and histograms) must not exceed 16 pages; marks will be deducted for exceeding the limit. Pages must be correctly numbered throughout.• For each question above, perform separate statistical tests to answer the questions. This assignment should be presented in a professional manner and you need to demonstrate that considerable thought has gone into the analysis of data. • The marking criteria for each of the question should be as follows: ? Technique identification: why should you use a certain technique? ? Define the population of interest ? Checking the conditions of the chosen technique: If a certain condition is not met, you keep doing the test as usual but need to discuss the limitation in the Conclusions part ? Following 6 steps in the hypothesis testing procedure ? Decision to reject or accept the null hypothesis must be referred to all 3 significance levels, that is, 1%, 5% and 10%.ACCT5008 – Business Report Semester 1, 2017Page 5 of 5Mark Allocation: • The total mark for the assignment is 50 (account for 25% of your final mark) • Each question from 1) to 4) is worth 10 marks • 4 marks for presentation o Your report should be clear for reading, presented in a good format with separate sections for (original) Introduction, Statistical Analyses and Conclusions.• 6 marks for an overall summary of your results, interpretations and any limitations. o The summary should be an evaluative response of the results of significant differences found amongst the variables conducted in the tests and any qualifying statements made about the nature of the testing data used. o Limitations of the tests should be discussed.
Accounting firmEAC-Scrs this year (t)EAC-Scrs last year (t-1)EAC-Scrs the year before last year (t-2)Acc-Dgr% at time t
Firm 144.845.640.013
Firm 245.043.042.113
Firm 350.948.045.813
Firm 444.045.048.013
Firm 558.754.050.012
Firm 652.853.050.022
Firm 751.152.050.713
Firm 854.755.050.913
Firm 957.053.451.313
Firm 1061.360.151.322
Firm 1156.053.052.413
Firm 1258.859.052.913
Firm 1358.255.053.713
Firm 1457.355.054.023
Firm 1554.553.054.113
Firm 1659.458.054.313
Firm 1758.257.055.023
Firm 1859.857.855.113
Firm 1964.962.958.012
Firm 2062.561.059.012
Firm 2159.657.259.023
Firm 2261.760.059.113
Firm 2361.962.060.013
Firm 2464.860.961.922
Firm 2565.764.062.423
Firm 2664.663.062.513
Firm 2762.660.764.522
Firm 2868.267.465.722
Firm 2971.870.067.022
Firm 3069.968.067.323
Firm 3169.670.068.113
Firm 3271.772.069.422
Firm 3368.867.770.012
Firm 3471.373.076.022
Firm 3581.680.183.022
Firm 3656.552.350.612
Firm 3762.561.360.421
Firm 3863.764.562.921
Firm 3965.364.163.121
Firm 4066.163.062.721
Firm 4168.566.665.121
Firm 4269.867.066.821
Firm 4370.172.067.821
Firm 4472.671.670.121
Firm 4573.972.070.621
Firm 4674.273.072.111
Firm 4775.370.574.511
Firm 4877.974.374.321
Firm 4980.278.978.021
Firm 5055.254.052.712
Firm 5148.749.550.621
Firm 5254.752.156.612
Firm 5359.852.451.813
Firm 5467.265.463.121
Firm 5573.471.451.322
Firm 5649.752.745.213
Firm 5775.777.867.922
Firm 5867.835.661.713
Firm 5957.452.758.222
Firm 6062.457.959.713

Answered Same DayDec 26, 2021

Solution

Robert answered on Dec 26 2021
71 Votes
Introduction
I check for assumptions of parametric test and conduct my analysis. If data follows
normal distribution I can apply parametric test. Else if data is not normally distributed I apply
non-parametric test. There are 60 accounting firms in the sample refe
ed as Firm 1 to Firm 60.
EAC scores for the accounting firm are given for this year, last year and year before last year. I
am also given Percentage of accountants in each firm who have at least one university degree in
accounting, recorded as 1 depicting less than 50% and 2 depicting at least 50% at time t. country
is classified as 1 depicting first world countries, 2 as second world countries and 3 as third world
countries.
Statistical Analysis
Hypothesis 1
I apply chi square test to test if the percentage of accountants in each firm who has at
least one university degree in accounting is independent of country type.
Null hypothesis: ho: percentage of accountants in each firm who has at least one
university degree in accounting (Acc-Dgr%) and country are independent.
Alternative hypothesis: h1: percentage of accountants in each firm who has at least one
university degree in accounting (Acc-Dgr%) and country are not independent.
Level of significance is alpha. I take 3 alphas here 1%, 5% and 10%.
Test statistic: chi square =
( )


Observed Frequencies
country
Acc-Dgr% at time t 1 2 3 Total
1 2 7 21 30
2 13 12 5 30
Total 15 19 26 60
Expected Frequencies
country
Acc-Dgr% at time t 1 2 3 Total
1 7.5 9.5 13 30
2 7.5 9.5 13 30
Total 15 19 26 60
( )( )

( )

Decision rule: I reject ho at alpha % level of significance if p-value is less than alpha.
Else if p-value is greater than alpha I fail to reject ho at alpha % level of significance.
Conclusion: Since p-value is less than 0.01, I reject ho at 1% level of significance and
conclude that percentage of accountants in each firm who has at least one university degree in
accounting (Acc-Dgr%) and country are not independent.
Similarly I can reject this null hypothesis at 5% as well as 10% level of significance and
conclude that percentage of accountants in each firm who has at least one university degree in
accounting (Acc-Dgr%) and country are not independent. My lowest level of significance to
eject this hypothesis is 1%.
Hypothesis 2

The histogram for environmental compliance scores for three periods is given below.
Data of EAC scores for all time periods this year and before last year is approximately
normally distributed. I apply one way ANOVA to test if there evidence of different
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90
EAC-Scrs the year before last year (t-2)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90
EAC-Scrs last year (t-1)
0
5
10
15
20
25
40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90
EAC-Scrs this year (t)
environmental compliance scores (EAC) over the three-year period. Since I have 3 groups here I
apply one way ANOVA.
Null hypothesis, ho: there is no significant difference in the mean environmental
compliance scores (EAC) over the three-year period.
Alternative hypothesis, h1: at least one of the mean environmental compliance scores
(EAC) over the three-year period differs significantly.
Level of significance is alpha. I take 3 alphas here 1%, 5% and 10%.
Test statistic: I apply one way ANOVA to test this hypothesis with help of F statistic. F =
MSB/MSE.
Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
EAC-Scrs this year (t) 60 3772.3 62.87167 77.61325
EAC-Scrs last year (t-1) 60 3649.4 60.82333 89.21267
EAC-Scrs the year before last year
(t-2) 60 3582.3 59.705 85.3893
ANOVA
Source of...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here