Explaining JB Hi-Fi's Reporting Decisions and Profit Downgrade using Institutional and Managerial Branch of Stakeholder Theory

This article discusses the application of Institutional and Managerial Branch of Stakeholder Theory in explaining JB Hi-Fi's reporting decisions and profit downgrade. It also explores the relationship between current share prices and future earnings announcements.

ACCT20074 Final Assignment
Term 1, 2018
Student ID:………………………………. Student name……………………………………………………..
Marker’s overall comments: The markers may include any
final comments here.
Overall Mark (Total) out of 50:
0

Question 1: Use Classical Political Economy Theory to explain JB Hi-Fi’s decision to release its profit downgrade
in the way it did. Make sure you explain what Institutional Theory is, and support your observations with evidence
from the case study.
As discussed by Fuenfschilling & Truffer (2014), the conceptualisation of Institutional theory deals with various
aspects of social structure. The main consideration under this theory incorporates processes by which routines,
structures, authoritative guidelines, and schemes are established as an authoritative guideline for social
behaviour. Several components in the institutional theory is conducive in stating how these components are
diffused, created and adopted over time. Some of the other theorists have stated that institutional theory can be
considered as a widely accepted theoretical posture which lays an augmented focus on “rational myths, legitimacy
and isomorphism”. There are two main trends which are associated to this theory namely institutionalism and
new institutionalism. Some of the emerging roles of organisations in the new institutionalism is seen as a rejecting
rationale for the characteristic models included in the classical economies (Cook & Hodges, 2015).
Based on the new institutionalism theory that organisations must conform to the prevailing belief system and
rules in a particular business environment. For instance, the multinational corporations in different countries face
various pressures. Some of these are based on home while other relate to international pressures. The particular
consideration of the decision taken by JB hi-fi for downgrading its profit can be related with classical political
economy theory which is based on a resource-based view and argues that creating value strategies need to be
based on profit potential. Instead, the resource and capabilities include tangible inputs like property, capital,
people and know how. The company was seen to be unapologetic for downgrading its profits as the company
acted in favour of the present market situation.
The main rational for lowering the annual profit forecast can be also depicted with the Good Guys driving shares
down by almost 10% low since late November. Moreover, the electronics retailer reduced its overall profit outlook
to $ 230 which was previously expected to be ranging between $ 235-$240 (Forecast, 2018). According to the
institutional theory, in several instances business corporations tackle the decreasing earnings by avoiding

additional payment of tax. In this particular situation, the statutory reports clearly showed that the company
earned more amount of profit after tax however in the consolidated report it reduced down by $ 5 to $ 10 million
so that it can survive in the challenging competitive environment by paying less amount of taxes in compared to
other companies. Some of the other evidence of challenges to the company can be depicted with performance of
Good Guys whose profit will be sent to be impacted by unfavourable price competition. Therefore, as the overall
market for the experiencing a drop-in sale it was more feasible for companies like JB hi-fi to release its profit to
downgrade so that it did not have to pay the additional amount of tax in a legitimate manner and still stay in the
competition (Cornelissen et al., 2015).
References:
Cook, S. C., & Hodges, N. (2015). Exploring non-ownership apparel consumption through online fashion product rental services: An application of institutional
theory.
Cornelissen, J. P., Durand, R., Fiss, P. C., Lammers, J. C., & Vaara, E. (2015). Putting communication front and center in institutional theory and analysis.
Forecast, J. (2018). JB Hi-Fi cuts profit forecast. [online] ARN. Available at: https://www.arnnet.com.au/article/640719/jb-hi-fi-cuts-profit-forecast/ [Accessed 30 May
2018].
Fuenfschilling, L., & Truffer, B. (2014). The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory. Research Policy, 43(4), 772-
791.
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (10):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Question 2: Use the Managerial branch of Stakeholder Theory to explain JB Hi-Fi’s reporting decisions. Make sure
you support your observations with evidence from the case study.
As stated by Fernando & Lawrence (2014), the managerial branch of stakeholder theory attempts to explain the
situation when the corporate management is likely to be attended to the expectation of particular stakeholders.
This theory is organisation centred and identifies the stakeholders as per the company. As per this theory, the
organisation believes that relationships need to be managed as per the interests of the organisations. Various
theories under this can be tested with empirical observations unlike the normative ethical branch. It specifically
relates to those views of the stakeholders who can be best managed with self-independency rather than as a
society in case of legitimacy theory. In addition to this, the expectations of the stakeholders are taken into
account based on the operating and disclosure policies (Pérez, López & García-De los Salmones, 2017). The several
types of other considerations of managerial branch states that organisation shall not necessarily respond to all the
stakeholders in an equal manner rather it will respond to only the powerful stakeholders. In addition to this, the
stakeholder power is identified as a function of the stakeholder’s degree for taking control over the existing
resource of a company. This is identified with resources such as Finance, Labour and the ability to legislate. The
important role of the management is depicted in assessing the stakeholders demand in achieving strategic
objectives of the firms (Omran & Ramdhony, 2015).
Based on the particular consideration in the case of JB hi-fi it can be clearly seen that the company revised
its net profit after tax as per various guidance which has been observed with the managerial branch of
stakeholders. It needs to be observed that based on the guidance in the section 7.3 of the guidance note 8
published by the ASX, a company is expected to treat its variation in earnings as per the guidance equal to 5% less
than being material and presume the guidance therefore does not need updating. However, JB hi-fi overlooked
this consideration of optional updating and looked on the positive side of bringing into consideration that makes
real effect of price or value into the entity’s security. Therefore, the application of managerial branch of

stakeholder theory is evident in this case as JB hi-fi attempted to meet the expectation of expectation of particular
stakeholders by taking into account the maturity aspects stated in the section 7.3 of guidance note 8 issued by
ASX. In addition to this, the overall application of managerial branch of stakeholder theory is evident with several
types of other considerations of managerial branch states that organisation shall not necessarily respond to all the
stakeholders in an equal manner rather it will respond to only the powerful stakeholders (Lu, Abeysekera &
Cortese, 2015). In this particular situation, JB hi-fi decided to act in favour of the materiality guidelines which were
issued by the ASX.
References:
Fernando, S., & Lawrence, S. (2014). A theoretical framework for CSR practices: integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory. Journal
of Theoretical Accounting Research, 10(1), 149-178.
Lu, Y., Abeysekera, I., & Cortese, C. (2015). Corporate social responsibility reporting quality, board characteristics and corporate social reputation: evidence from
China. Pacific Accounting Review, 27(1), 95-118.
Omran, M. A., & Ramdhony, D. (2015). Theoretical perspectives on corporate social responsibility disclosure: a critical review. International Journal of Accounting
and Financial Reporting, 5(2), 38-55.
Pérez, A., López, C., & García-De los Salmones, M. D. M. (2017). An empirical exploration of the link between reporting to stakeholders and corporate social
responsibility reputation in the Spanish context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(3), 668-698.
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (10):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Question 3: To what extent do current share prices anticipate future earnings announcements? Use the case
study to support your answer.
As discussed by Al-Qenae Li & Wearing (2015), some of the main tools of anticipating future earnings with current
share prices needs to be considered with concepts such as plough back and reserve, book value per share,
earnings per share, price-earnings ratio and dividend yield ratio. The main assessment from the dividend yield
ratio is able to depict that several investors who involved in buying the shares have the objective of earning
regular income from investment. The primary concern is based on the dividends which is given by the company
and capital appreciation is only the secondary consideration. Based on the anticipation of dividend yield ratio
companies with high dividend is not only have a poor growth record but often show for future growth. On the
contrary, high-growth companies generally have records of bleak dividend pay-out. Investors are interested in the
relationship of dividend during as per the market price of the company’s share rather than that they are more
interested in the relation of dividends which beer to the market’s price of company’s share (Li & Sloan, 2017).
Earnings per share is another ratio which is well identified in the anticipation of company’s performance
and future earnings. This particular ratio provides the earnings of the company as per share basis. For getting a
clear idea of significance of this ratio, the total profit after tax obtained by the company is divided with total
number of equity shares issued.
With particular consideration for JB hi-fi, the earnings per share increased from 153.8 cents per share to
154.3 cents per share. This shows an underlying growth of 22.4% in compared to the previous year. Similarly, if we
compare the net profit after tax obtained by the company in 2016 it can be clearly seen as $ 152.2 million in 2016
which increased to $ 172.4 million in 2017. This suggests an underlying growth of 36.5% in the NPAT value.
Therefore, EPS cannot predict on future earnings of the company. Similarly, if we compare the dividend pay-out
ratio, it can be clearly depicted that the dividend payout ratio of JB hi-fi in 2016 was 88.27% which increased to
101.4% in 2017. Therefore, it does not necessarily suggest that the increasing nature of dividend pay-out ratio and

EPS have been depicted with some increasing earnings for the company (Jbhifi.com.au, 2018).
However, certain indications about the share price at the end of 2017 can predict certain aspects of the
declining profit after tax. Based on the annual statement of JB hi-fi it can be clearly discern that the company’s
share price at the end of reporting period in financial year 2015 was $ 19.4 a dollar with significantly increased to
$ 24.10 per share. This increase in the share price of the company was evident with an increasing NPAT. Likewise,
when we compare share price at the end of financial year 2016 it can be clearly seen as $ 24.10 which increased
to $ 23.37 in 2017. This decrease in share price by 3% can indicate that company lost some of its earnings during
the course of previous year’s activity. This decrease in the share prices of the company has further anticipated the
rational for declining future earnings (Berge, Consigli & Ziemba, 2016).
References:
Al-Qenae, R., Li, C. A., & Wearing, B. (2015). The information content of earnings on stock prices: The Kuwait Stock Exchange.
Berge, K., Consigli, G., & Ziemba, W. T. (2016). The predictive ability of the bond stock earnings yield differential model. World
Scientific Book Chapters, 93-123.
Jbhifi.com.au. (2018). [online] Available at: https://www.jbhifi.com.au/Documents/2017%20Annual%20Report.pdf [Accessed 30 May
2018].
Li, K. K., & Sloan, R. G. (2017). Has goodwill accounting gone bad?. Review of Accounting Studies, 22(2), 964-1003.
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (10):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
and punctuation mistakes. Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Question 4: Show how the Brunswik Lens Model might be used to explain an investor's decision about whether
to buy or sell shares in JB Hi-Fi following their downgrade “announcement”.
The Lens model is identified as a way of thinking which describes the various relationships among the
environment and behaviour of companies in that particular environment. The fundamentals to this theory was
designed by Egon Brunswik and the concept was later on popularised by Kenneth Hammond by including various
components of social judgements. It is known as lens model because it looks like the framework of this model is
passing through a convex lens including the attributes of cues, judgement, achievement and criterion. This model
helps in clarifying the scope of items with a greater understanding (Orquin, 2014).
Based on the theory, there are certain things in the environment which relates to dependent variable. The
cues are identified as independent variable as per the lens model terminology. The main decision-making criteria
helps in determination of human decision process as an involvement of various mathematical indexes. Majority of
the research studies have applied this theory to indicate many realistic settings which relates to the basic
information of division situation, actual decision which is identified by the decision maker and in a particular
situation (Laukka et al., 2016)
The application of the lens model in the particular case of JB hi-fi needs to be identified with investor
psychology and relating the same with behavioural decision theory. The investors need to identify the investment
criteria based on three level analysis which includes input level, information processing level and output decision
level. Therefore, the investors need to first prefer the historical cost consideration of JB hi-fi and form a graphical
presentation of the financial performance. Based on the significant analysis of financial performance as per annual
report published by the company in 2015, 2016 and 2017, it can be clearly depicted the company performed
moderately well in terms of generating more revenue and stock market performance (Bristow, Mowen & Krieger,
2015).
The next step of the investors should be viewing the investment decision based on two sides of the lens
model. Firstly, the investors need to make the decisions as per the cues used in the model and then compare the

same with the actual outcomes. Based on the significant level of comparison of statistic modelling provided in the
lens model it will be ideal for the shareholders to hold the shares of JB hi-fi and wait for future market indications
to take the final decision of buying or selling of shares. The present decision taken by the company to downgrade
its profit has been done in a very competitive and volatile market environment and therefore it is not suggested
for the investors to buy or sell shares in such a volatile situation. In addition to this, the various depiction on the
improving performance of financial aspects that investors need to wait for future market performance which may
imply a completely different scenario and then the decision to sell the shares can prove to be profitable in nature
(Hamm & Yang, 2017).
References:
Bristow, D. N., Mowen, J. C., & Krieger, R. H. (2015). The quality lens model: A marketing tool for improving channel relationships.
In Proceedings of the 1994 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 397-401). Springer, Cham.
Hamm, R. M., & Yang, H. (2017). Alternative lens model equations for dichotomous judgments about dichotomous criteria. Journal of
behavioral decision making, 30(2), 527-532.
Laukka, P., Elfenbein, H. A., Thingujam, N. S., Rockstuhl, T., Iraki, F. K., Chui, W., & Althoff, J. (2016). The expression and recognition of
emotions in the voice across five nations: A lens model analysis based on acoustic features. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 111(5), 686.
Orquin, J. L. (2014). A Brunswik lens model of consumer health judgments of packaged foods. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(4),
270-281.
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (10):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.

Question 5: Some academics have criticised the accounting profession for acting to legitimise the capitalist
system (supposedly by supporting the “haves” against the “have nots”. Indicate whether the case study
supports the critical view of accounting, or whether it doesn’t. Use the case study to support your answer.
As discussed by Bakre & Lauwo (2016), there are several studies which argues or intends to find out whether the
accounting profession is working in favour of public interest or capital interest. Based on several academic
literature it has been identified that as an integral face it to the society, the accounting profession has a part to
play in both state and corporate sector and is also expected to serve the public interest. It has been seen that in
general the capacity for Australian accounting profession to serve for the public interest is taken into context with
accounting standards setting process. In previous literatures, there have been certain relevance made with “CLERP
Act 1999 and ASIC Act 2001”. In many instances, it is argued that the combination of these acts is to legitimise the
accounting standards in favour of the holders of capital or capital interest. The significant as a nation of capital
markets are further surrogate for public interest is contested (Artiach et al., 2016).
In terms of serving the public the various domains of the accounting profession have demonstrated
systematic knowledge. Over the past 50 years the importance of systematic knowledge has been considered to
remain axiomatic for defining various constraints of accounting profession. In addition to this, based on various
events it can be argued that state has accommodated multinational corporate interests instead of public interest
as per the section of CLERP Act 1999 and ASIC Act 2001. At present, these acts are reflected in the Accounting
Professional and Ethics Standards Board which can be compromised in a considerable manner for serving the
public (Morales & Sponem, 2017).
The case study cannot be regarded to support the critical view of this notion as that based on the guidance
in the section 7.3 of the guidance note 8 published by the ASX, a company is expected to treat its variation in
earnings as per the guidance equal to 5% less than being material and presume the guidance therefore does not
need updating. However, JB hi-fi overlooked this consideration of optional updating and looked on the positive
side of bringing into consideration that makes real effect of price or value into the entity’s security. Moreover, the

company took into consideration several aspects of safeguarding its materiality disclosures by even downgrading
its profit. Some of the significant discussions of the study have been further conducive in stating that JB hi-fi has
continued to work in favour of the public since its initiation in 1974. With more than 44 years of formation of the
company, there has been no instance that the company has depicted capitalist interest. Therefore, based on the
significant consideration of the excerpts of information given in the case study it cannot be stated that JB hi-fi
accompanies with the statement of accounting profession legitimising the capitalist system (Faulconbridge &
Muzio, 2017).
References:
Artiach, T., Irvine, H., Mack, J., & Ryan, C. (2016). The legitimising processes of a new regulator: The case of the Australian Charities
and Not-for-profits Commission. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(5), 802-827.
Bakre, O. M., & Lauwo, S. (2016). Privatisation and accountability in a “crony capitalist” Nigerian state. Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, 39, 45-58.
Faulconbridge, J., & Muzio, D. (2017). 14 Global Professional Service Firms and Institutionalization. Professional Networks in
Transnational Governance, 219.
Morales, J., & Sponem, S. (2017). You too can have a critical perspective! 25 years of Critical Perspectives on Accounting. Critical
Perspectives on Accounting, 43, 149-166.
Marker’s Comments: The marker will provide feedback here. Mark (10):
0
Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Demonstrates a balanced and very
high level of detailed knowledge of
core concepts by providing a very
high level of analysis. Utilises
current, appropriate and credible
sources.
Demonstrates a balanced and high
level of knowledge of core
concepts by providing a high level
of analysis. Utilises mostly current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates a good level of
knowledge of some of the core
concepts by providing some level
of analysis. Utilises some current,
appropriate and credible sources.
Demonstrates limited knowledge of
core concepts by providing a
limited level of analysis. Utilises
few current, appropriate and
credible sources.
Demonstrates little, if any,
knowledge of the core concepts
with extremely limited, if any,
analysis. Utilises little, if any,
current, appropriate and credible
sources.

Exceeds Expectations
(High Distinction) 85-100%
Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction) 75 - 84%
Meets Expectations
(Credit) 65 – 74%
Meets Expectations
(Pass) 50 – 64%
Below Expectations
(Fail) below 50%
Quality of writing at a very high
standard. Paragraphs are
coherently connected to each
other. Correct grammar, spelling
and punctuation.
Quality of writing is of a high
standard. Paragraphs are mostly
well structured. Few grammar,
spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Quality of writing is of a good
standard. Few grammar, spelling
and punctuation mistakes.
Some problems with sentence
structure and presentation
Frequent grammar, punctuation
and spelling mistakes. Use of
inappropriate language.
Quality of writing is at a very poor
standard so barely
understandable. Many spelling
mistakes. Little or no evidence of
proof reading.
The assessment presents a
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing clear
and well thought-out conclusions.
The assessment presents a fairly
detailed and focused summary of
the ideas presented; drawing fairly
clear and well thought-out
conclusions.
The assessment presents a
somewhat detailed and focused
summary of the ideas presented;
providing some evidence of
conclusions.
The assessment provides limited
detail with no clear summary of the
ideas presented; drawing limited
conclusions.
The assessment fails to provide
any clear evidence of the ideas
presented; drawing no clear
conclusions.