Management-accounting

Messrs. DiPiazza and Eccles present a compelling blueprint for wholesale restructuring of corporate reporting and the concomitant rebuilding of public trust in the capital markets. The foundation for their model is built on the values of transparency, accountability and integrity. Their model -- development of a global GAAP, development and application of industry-specific standards, and establishment of guidelines for disclosure of company specific information -- makes sense given the expansion of capital markets across country-specific boundaries, but also is timely given the wide-availability of enabling technology (i.e., the Internet and XBRL).

Meaningful reform cannot be had solely through governmental reform, the lobbying of special interest groups, self-regulation or lawsuits by regulators and disgruntled investors. The end results will likely be half-baked attempts to address the symptoms of the breakdown in corporate reporting and the capital markets, rather than development of a cure. Accordingly, DiPiazza and Eccles stress that meaningful reform through development of their three-tiered model must be had through open dialogue and lines of communication with all members of what they term as the "Corporate Reporting Supply Chain" which, in a nutshell, includes all stakeholders in the capital markets.

"Building Public Trust: The Future of Corporate Reporting" provides, in plain English, a detailed description of the problems plaguing corporate reporting and roadmap to a meaningful solution. The road to reform, however, is long and, as DiPiazza and Eccles suggest, requires that the journey (read: participation) be undertaken by ALL members of the Corporate Reporting Supply Chain. The book is a must read for corporate directors and officers, regulators, lawyers, accountants, analysts, the investing public and all other persons who (or whose clients) have a stake in the smooth functioning of the capital markets.

The time for open debate on reform is now. It is up to members of the "Corporate Reporting Supply Chain" whether they want such reform to take the form of a lecture leading to mandates by the few, or an open dialogue leading to a consensus by the majority. This book provides its readers with a grounding for developing the tools to accomplish the latter...

This book is destined to become a classic in its field. therefore, buy it, read it, but don't loan it - because you ought to keep it on your bookshelf and refer to it. If you ahve any interest in investing, this is the best [amount of money] you will ever spend.

Instead I found something that missed the mark in terms of Access -- Access 97 Power Programming, Access Bible, and the VBA books by Getz et al. hit this mark much better -- and missed the mark in terms of accounting -- no discussion of how to integrate a chart of accounts, the authors dismissed the need for double-entry bookings and never developed it, and then the book only addressed a couple of the accounting cycles.

I awarded two stars because the book would have been a good book if I were just learning what a table was in a relational database and I had an avid interest in accounting and only wanted to get a feel for what the other book written by these two authors by almost the same title was like.

However, I do applaud the attempt for someone with an accounting background to write a book that might help others better understand accounting and apply it using an application that is so readily avaliable.

You will be a good quarter through its slim 500 pages before accounting topics are even addressed. This book is remedial in both its understanding of Microsoft Access and Accounting Systems. Do not expect to actually build a real-world accounting application based on the limited information presented in this paperback.

If you are a serious developer or even just a power-user of Access do not waste your time even looking at this book. It is a complete waste of time and [money].

The authors try to make it the most complete, practical and readable book about budgeting.

I think, that the result is very good. The only things I miss is more emphasis on the subject of making the budgetassumptions and the difficulties in educating people in the company in the budgetprocess.