The contemporary gender agenda of the US public accounting profession: embracing feminism or maintaining empire?

Professional service firms, globalisation and the new imperialism

“…Externally, the Big Four have, in association with UK/US professional associations, worked to internationalise the Anglo-American accounting model at the level of the profession and, in so doing, gradually displaced, or inhibited the development of, indigenous accounting firms and professions in many countries whilst also shaping them in ways that have excluded segments of the local populations based on ethnic and cultural criteria and in line with AngloAmerican interests (Annisette, 2003;Cooper and Robson, 2006;Dwyer and Roberts, 2004).…”

Reasons women chartered accountants leave public accounting firms prior to achieving partnership status: A qualitative analysis

“…Personal choice covers a broad spectrum of factors such as (a) lack of promotional opportunities (Barcelona et al, 1975;Cheramy & Hooks,1988;McKeen & Bujaki, 1994;Pillsbury et al, 1989); (b) confl icts between work and nonwork obligations (Barcelona et al;Cheramy & Hooks;Dalton, Hill, & Ramsay, 1997;Dwyer and Roberts, 2004;Greenhaus et al, 1997;Kinard et al, 1998); (c) compensation issues (Barcelona et al; Cheramy & Hooks; McKeen & Bujaki); (d) and offers of new career opportunities outside of public accounting (Barcelona et al; Cheramy & Hooks; McKeen & Bujaki; Pillsbury et al). These broad categories provide us with limited insights into the women's decision processes and the timing of their decisions.…”

“…Non-work obligations (often referred to as workfamily confl icts) are frequently cited as a key factor contributing to the departure of women accountants from public accounting fi rms (Barcelona et al, 1975;Barker and Monks, 1998;Cheramy and Hooks, 1988;Dalton, Hill and Ramsay, 1997;Dwyer and Roberts, 2004;Greenhaus et al, 1997;Kinard et al, 1998, Padgett, Paulson, Hughes, Hughes & Born, 2005Whiting and Wright, 2001). Wooten (2002) argued that public accounting fi rms adopted women-friendly policies due to institutional pressures (including pressure exerted by AICPA) and the fi rms' motivation to optimize available economic resources.…”

“…Public accounting fi rms devoted signifi cant resources to developing and implementing programs (AICPA, 2004(AICPA, , 2005Christie, 1997;Flynn, 1996;Kinard et al, 1998;McCracken, 2000;Toner, 1996;Wooten, 2002) that included mentoring, female professional development networks, gender-awareness training and work-life balance programs such as fl exible work arrangements (Dwyer and Roberts, 2004). Particular attention was given to work-family issues on the premise that a longhours culture, prevalent in public accounting fi rms, interferes with women's family obligations (AICPA, 2004(AICPA, , 2005Barcelona et al, 1975;Cheramy and Hooks, 1988;Dalton, Hill & Ramsay, 1997;Greenhaus, Collins, Singh & Parasuraman, 1997;Johnson, Lowe and Reckers, 2008;Johnston and Kyriacou, 2006;Kinard, Little and Little, 1998;Pillsbury et al, 1989).…”

“…Particular attention was given to work-family issues on the premise that a longhours culture, prevalent in public accounting fi rms, interferes with women's family obligations (AICPA, 2004(AICPA, , 2005Barcelona et al, 1975;Cheramy and Hooks, 1988;Dalton, Hill & Ramsay, 1997;Greenhaus, Collins, Singh & Parasuraman, 1997;Johnson, Lowe and Reckers, 2008;Johnston and Kyriacou, 2006;Kinard, Little and Little, 1998;Pillsbury et al, 1989). Following AICPA's identifi cation of the retention and upward mobility of women in public accounting fi rms as a key issue in 1984 (Dwyer and Roberts, 2004;Pillsbury et al, 1989) all of the large international fi rms took some action with regard to high turnover rates. Over a ten-year period beginning in 1984 the fi rms implemented formal "work-family programs that were supposed to improve retention rates" (Trimberger, 1998, as cited in Dwyer and Roberts, 2004, p.167).…”