The absence of any absolute meaning to the term profit in accountancy, however, does not absolve the accountant from explaining what the word purports to mean in relation to the statement which he produces. On the contrary, the acknowledged empiricism of accountancy makes it absurd for accountants to talk of profit without definition.
Moreover the very flexibility of the term profit as used in accountancy makes it essential for the accountant to have some personal [emphasis added] conception of how the success or failure of any particular business should be measured, some simple guide by reference to which it can be seen whether the chosen conventions are operating satisfactorily.
The test which accountants apply for this purpose, I suggest, is simply that of commercial common sense, the test of considering whether the pattern of profits thrown up over a period of years by the chosen conventions in fact reflects how the business ‘is doing’ during that period. The choice of conventions is subordinate to that test and no convention can over-rule it… (Robert Morison)
I have just given you two quotes from the Institute’s Summer School (of happy memories) in 1970. These were the words of the Morison brothers, Arthur and Robert, partners of Thomson McLintock and giants of the profession.
The criticism to which Arthur referred was the threat to the independence of the reporting accountant—the threat of the introduction of accounting standards. Robert believed in a personal conceptual framework in deriving his conception of how profit should be calculated.
[Read the entire speech by downloading the PDF.]
|