Mary F. Mobley and Harry Kuniansky Financial Practice and Education, Spring/Summer, 1992, pg. 67-71

1. Mary F. Mobley and Harry Kuniansky
Financial Practice and Education, Spring/Summer, 1992, pg. 67-
71
A synopsis on
Presented to
Prof. Dr. Dilli Raj Sharma, Dean,
Prof. Dr. Rajan Bahadur Paudel,
Dr. Jeetendra Dangol,
Faculty of Management, Tribhuwan University
Presented by
Raju Basnet Chhetri, Scholar,
12th Batch M.Phil. in Management, TUSOM
23rd April 2020
Seminar in Finance

2.  Businesses are extremely dynamic with regards to environmental and global
changes. However, academia is criticized to be unresponsive to the myriad of
complex problems faced in business arena.

3.  To determine finance executives’ opinions of academicians on the seven facets of
professionalism.
 To determine finance executives’ opinions of finance practitioners on the seven
facets of professionalism.
 To compare finance executives’ opinions of academicians and practitioners on the
seven facets of professionalism.
 To determine which and to what extent finance academic journals and selected
general periodicals are ready by finance executives.

4. Approach
 Quantitative approach
Research Design
 Descriptive research design (survey)
Data Collection
 A mail survey was distributed to 500 chief financial officers (CFOs) from Fortune 1000
firms out of which usable responses were obtained from 110 CFOs (22% response rate).
Tools
 Likert scale and T-test of significance.

5.  Based on demographic data, it was found that majority of respondents had finance
careers of 16 years or more (72%) and majority held advanced degrees (60%).
 Significant difference was found for various facets of professionalism except for
ethical standards rating.
 Majority of the finance practitioners do not read academic literature based on
finance research.
 Finance executives’ opinions of finance academicians and finance practitioners on
the seven facets of professionalism could be summarized as follows:

6. Finance
Practitioners'
rating
Towards Finance Practitioners Towards Finance Academicians
High
 Knowledge of business in general (76%)
 Knowledge of research methodologies
(89%)
 Knowledge of problems facing business
(72%)
 Knowledge of current research (89%)
 Ability to generate creative ideas (63%)
 Ability to develop applicable finance
theories (54%)
 Ability to solve practical finance problems
(74%)
 Ethical Standards (76%)
 Ethical Standards (79%)
Low
 Knowledge of research methodologies
(81%)
 Knowledge of business in general (77%)
 Knowledge of current research (81%)
 Knowledge of problems facing business
(79%)
 Ability to develop applicable finance
theories (64%)
 Ability to generate creative ideas (60%)
 Ability to solve practical finance
problems (79%)

7.  The survey received low response rate (22%). Hence, it might not be wise enough
to make generalizations to the population as a whole.
 Finance executives’ demographic distinctions has not been made.
 The study follows the research format set forth by previous study in the field of
marketing and management information systems. Hence, the chances of
exploration of the additional methods related to field of finance might have been
limited.

8.  Finance practitioners believe themselves to have better knowledge of business and
their problems, ability to solve such problems and to generate creative ideas
related to business but regard academicians as highly knowledgeable of research
methodologies, current research findings, and ability to develop finance theories.
Similarly, they also do not appear to avail themselves of available academic
publications.
 The findings of the study seems to align with previous research findings that
practitioners view research methodology and journal publication as basically
academic domains.

9.  Collaborative interchanges between academicians and professionals should be
made so that academicians can better understand the current business problems
faced by the professionals and direct research activities towards such problems.