A CRITIQUE OF CONCEPTUAL

FRAMEWORK PROJECTS
Faqih Rahmat
Rio Xaverius
Jhoice Noor Syahid A
Saoqi Kamil
  The development of conceptual frameworks
met with criticsm in the United States,
Australia and elsewhere.

A CRITIQUE OF
CONCEPTUAL  An Analysis of the criticsm will help explain
FRAMEWORK reasons for the previous slow development of
PROJECTS the frameworks and highlight issues relevant to
achieving progress in the current IASB/FASB
project
 1. Scientific approach : Based on methods used
Two approaches in other areas of scientific inquiry.

we can use in 2. Professional Approach : Concentrates on

our analysis : prescribing the ‘best’ course of action by
recourse to ‘professional values’
  The conceptual framework is intended as a
fundamentally prescriptive project.

A CRITIQUE OF
CONCEPTUAL  The aim is to provide guidance prescritions to
FRAMEWORK practicing accountants on how to account for
PROJECTS information which is relevant for economic
decision making.
  The SFAC No.5 on measurement and
recognition problems, released in 1984, was
basically a descritopn of the elements of
accounting reports based on the observation of
A CRITIQUE OF current practice.
CONCEPTUAL  By the time SFAC No. 5 was issued the Board’s
FRAMEWORK approach had become almost totally
PROJECTS descriptive. Indeed that SFAC shows that the
aims and philosophy of the conceptual
framework has been lost by the time it was
issued.
 Dopuch and Sunder argue that nothing in the
FASB’s conceptual frameowerk seems to be of
much help in resolving contemporary
measurement and disclosure issues. They
support this assertion by selecting three issues:
deffered tax credits, treatment of cost of
exploration in the oil and gas industry, and
current value accounting.
 1. The definition of liabilities is so general that we are unable to
predict the Board’s position on deffered taxes.

2. The framework supports two opposing principles of

Dopuch and accounting and is preliminary evidence that the framework in

unlikely to be a useful guide in resolving the
Sunder measurement issue.

conclude : 3. It does not address the problem of estimation, on which past

efforts to encourage publication of current costs have
foundered.
A CRITIQUE OF  A contrary argument is that the conceptual framework is
CONCEPTUAL necessary and a commong understanding of definitions is
crucial to consistent preparation and interpretation of financial
FRAMEWORK statements.
PROJECTS
  Ontological = Filsafat Yunani. Membahas sesuatu yang bersifat
Ontological and Konkret/Realitas
Epistemologi  Epistemologi = Filsafat Yunani. Membahas sesuatu yang
Assumptions bersifat asal/hakikat suatu ilmu
  ...Provide information to users of financial reports in an
unbiased and objective manner...
Ontological and  Unbiased:
Epistemologi  Free from bias

Assumptions  Neutrality
 Independent
 Argument (Ruth Dianna Hines):

“a conceptual framework cannot provide a completely objective

means of measuring economic reality since such a reality does not
exist independent of accounting practics.”

 Financial Accountants play a critical role in deciding a picture

of reality.
 Circularity of Reasoning
 Kesalahpahaman dalam menerapkan
kerangka kerja konseptual.

An Unscientific Discipline
 Apakah akuntansi adalah ilmu
sains atau sosial?