{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032133676092544985, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04627249357326478, 'mean_word_length': 5.381147540983607, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Internal lobbying at the IASB

This study adds to prior work on the production of accounting rules (Francis, 1987; Nobes, 1992; Brown and Feroz, 1992; Saemann, 1995; Pong and Whittington, 1996; Kwok and Sharp, 2005; Bhimani, 2008; Ramanna, 2008; Stenka and Taylor, 2010; Giner and Arce, 2012; Jorissen et al., 2012, 2013) by analysing the social psychology of standard setters. It complements work analysing the impact of psychological factors on standard setting (Hirschleifer and Teoh, 2009; Allen and Ramanna, 2013), finding that group effects (Bartel and Wiesenfeld, 2013; Haslam et al., 2006; Hogg and Abrams, 1988; Hogg et al., 1986) combined with existing project management structures at the IASB to undermine the IASB Liabilities Project. The paper uses interviews and analyses of IASB documents and board meetings to open up the black box of the standard setting organisation to reveal the existence of ‘internal lobbying’ within the standard setting organisation that rendered the project vulnerable to external lobbying activities. Such findings contribute to the existing literature on lobbying and standard setting by demonstrating the importance of understanding the connection between lobbying activities and the social processes taking place within the standard setting organisation when trying to explain regulatory outcomes. Furthermore, the study addresses the role of technical staff at the IASB in the process of standard setting through interviews with almost all the staff who worked on the project as well as several board members.