View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Probability Evaluation Game: An Instrument to Highlight the Skill of Reflexive Listening

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Probability Evaluation Game: An Instrument to Highlight the Skill of Reflexive Listening
Language: English
Authors: Butler, Clare
Source: Accounting Education. 2016 25(2):107-123.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 2016
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: Accounting, Probability, Educational Games, Listening Skills, Reflection, Evaluation, Interpersonal Communication, Employment Potential, Job Skills, Cooperative Learning, Experiential Learning, Instructional Effectiveness, Qualitative Research
DOI: 10.1080/09639284.2015.1089178
ISSN: 0963-9284
Abstract: This paper describes the development of the Probability Evaluation Game (PEG): an innovative teaching instrument that emphasises the sophistication of listening and highlights listening as a key skill for accounting practitioners. Whilst in a roundtable format, playing PEG involves participants individually evaluating a series of probability terms and then calling out their evaluations amongst fellow players who have done the same. When listening to peers' responses, any difference in evaluation of the same term confronts players with the knowledge that without skilled, reflexive listening conversations are dangerous playgrounds of miscommunication. The PEG presents a valuable learning opportunity where the potential impact of this issue for accounting and business world can be discussed. This paper details how PEG was developed, its format and how it has been used with students and accounting practitioners. Furthermore emergent, and often intriguing, learning points are discussed and related to accounting and the workplace more generally.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 74
Entry Date: 2016
Accession Number: EJ1107190
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFVkXqzr6hDqtYjgfdk5B1WAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCi59V5_eM1xmPnxagIBEICBmy2oTsDOeQ0eXFyQ-vwezSq-Z61lqXfnOg78HLUgVJ52HjRCGOKaZATTuB_zEDWl8XLi14inmlTNb5U0fEfkys9iDTh6rDNqZBilh5sZDvmGkJ5m57eK2vzHMqHRGI-uUojCfBYiz628-ZWvJsdBWB7OFU3jZ0MttWeqUt8-kdI0i0HjEAGojLCe3SrI9rmVD_T1DQo9hY8zQfXK
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0114515450;5cb01apr.16;2019Feb12.15:58;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0114515450-1">The probability evaluation game: an instrument to highlight the skill of reflexive listening. </title> <p>This paper describes the development of the Probability Evaluation Game (PEG): an innovative teaching instrument that emphasises the sophistication of listening and highlights listening as a key skill for accounting practitioners. Whilst in a roundtable format, playing PEG involves participants individually evaluating a series of probability terms and then calling out their evaluations amongst fellow players who have done the same. When listening to peers' responses, any difference in evaluation of the same term confronts players with the knowledge that without skilled, reflexive listening conversations are dangerous playgrounds of miscommunication. The PEG presents a valuable learning opportunity where the potential impact of this issue for accounting and business world can be discussed. This paper details how PEG was developed, its format and how it has been used with students and accounting practitioners. Furthermore emergent, and often intriguing, learning points are discussed and related to accounting and the workplace more generally.</p> <p>Keywords: Accounting; accounting education; communication; employability; listening; reflexive listening; reflexivity</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-2">Introduction</hd> <p>As a result of the changing role of accountants – moving from beancounters (Friedmen & Lyne, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref1">28</reflink>]) to business partners (Carnegie & Napier, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref2">16</reflink>]) – there is a drive to broaden accounting graduates' skills to match employers' needs (Corson & Miyagawa, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref3">21</reflink>]; Wells, Gerbic, Kranenburg, & Bygrave, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref4">70</reflink>]). This drive aligns with the wider call for universities to develop their students' employability (Stoner & Milner, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref5">68</reflink>]). What makes an individual employable is subject to much debate (Cranmer, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref6">22</reflink>]; Wilton, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref7">72</reflink>]); still, despite the term's ambiguity, politicians, educationalists and employers commonly cite the possession of good communication skills as a vital part of being employable. Communication skills are often regarded as an area of weakness for accounting graduates, over and above graduates of other education programmes (Daff, de Lange, & Jackling, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref8">24</reflink>]; Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref9">62</reflink>]). This view may be a passé stereotype (Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref10">62</reflink>]); yet, accounting programmes continue to be dominated by the development of technical skills (Gracia, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref11">34</reflink>]; Jackling & De Lange, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref12">39</reflink>]; Kavanagh & Drennan, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref13">41</reflink>]) and, given finite resources, this neglects the development of accounting students' communication skills (Jones, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref14">40</reflink>]; Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref15">62</reflink>]).</p> <p>Undoubtedly, during workday speech encounters being a good communicator requires an understanding of the relevant vocabulary (Loewenstein, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref16">47</reflink>]) and this includes having knowledge of what specific words mean, but it also involves knowing what words (might) mean in a particular context, when spoken by different parties, in diverse settings and in light of certain events. For that reason, understanding the intricacies of communication requires us to engage with the conversation in a range of ways: beyond the surface and apparent, and amongst other things, it calls for skilful listening.</p> <p>Skilful listening demands purposive thinking: pausing and suspending judgement (Dewey, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref17">26</reflink>]). Pausing offers us mental space to consider the framing of the message, by both the speaker and ourselves. Considering the framing of the message involves being cognitive of the remarks of others, but significantly it also requires us to recognise that when we listen we co-construct the message (Goffman, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref18">32</reflink>]). Consequently, the crucial lesson to be gained from skilled listening is that the message that we 'hear' is an amalgam: it is co-authored and therefore changed (Burleson, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref19">15</reflink>]). This co-constructed message may go onto inform our decisions and, in the organisational context, has the potential to affect how business is conducted and, by extension, what is or is not accounted for. Hence, it is vital that accounting students are aware of listening as a co-construction; and appreciate the significance of skilful listening for accounting practice.</p> <p>Listening attentively and responsively are vital components of the listening process; however, Stone and Lightbody ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref20">67</reflink>]) found that these behaviours are rarely exercised or integrated within teaching sessions. Furthermore, their study identified that students do not appreciate, or value, the skill involved in effective listening. Drawing on Stone and Lightbody's ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref21">67</reflink>]) study, this paper contributes to current scholarship in two main ways. First, the paper highlights the intricacies and challenge of skilful listening. Second, through explicating the development and deployment of a teaching instrument called the Probability Evaluation Game (PEG), the paper offers an approach that engages players with the above concerns; and underscores the consequence of listening skills for accounting practice. In addition, whilst the paper is largely set within the context of accounting, given the centrality of effective communication to organisational success, its themes offer valuable learning points for students and/or practitioners in other occupations, fields or workplaces.</p> <p>The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. The next section considers the changing role of the accountant and outlines the issue of accounting graduates' employability. In the third section, the importance of listening skills is explored. The fourth section reports how PEG was developed and describes the format of the game. The fifth section reflects on the instrument in use. The paper closes by noting the value of PEG for accounting educators, students and practitioners; and for workers in the wider business environment, for example, those engaged in collaborative work, project management or team management roles. Finally, the paper's limitations and future research opportunities are discussed.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-3">Employability and skills</hd> <p>Accountants are no longer score keepers; they are strategists (Ratnatunga & Alam, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref22">57</reflink>]; Yi & Tayles, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref23">73</reflink>]) and networked professionals (Kennedy & Dull, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref24">43</reflink>]) who need to meet the demands of an increasingly complex and constantly changing business environment (Sin & McGuigan, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref25">61</reflink>]). This is not news to those in the profession. Yet, employers report that accounting graduates are often not equipped with the necessary skills to thrive in this setting (Arquero Montanö, Jimenez Cardoso, & Joyce, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref26">8</reflink>]; Gammie, Gammie, & Cargill, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref27">30</reflink>]; Keneley & Jackling, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref28">42</reflink>]). This raises the question of whether accounting education programmes deliver an integrated offering informed by employers' needs (Willcoxson, Wynder, & Laing, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref29">71</reflink>]) and thus produce employable graduates (Jackling & De Lange, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref30">39</reflink>]; Stoner & Milner, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref31">68</reflink>]).</p> <p>Employability is 'a set of attributes, skills and knowledge that all labour market participants should possess to ensure they have the capability of being effective in the workplace – to the benefit of themselves, their employer and the wider economy' (CBI/NUS, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref32">18</reflink>], p. 12). As a reflection of this emerging employability landscape, accounting bodies worldwide updated their requirements. For instance, to ensure students' smooth transition into the accounting community, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants advocated a skills-based over a knowledge-based curriculum (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref33">6</reflink>]). They recommended accounting students receive training in three categories: broad business perspectives, functional/technical expertise and personal skills. Yet, accounting degree programmes continue to focus on the advancement of technical expertise (Gracia, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref34">34</reflink>]; Jackling & De Lange, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]; Kavanagh & Drennan, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref36">41</reflink>]) whilst neglecting personal (or 'soft') skills (Jones, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref37">40</reflink>]; Stoner & Milner, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref38">68</reflink>]).</p> <p>Soft skills include matters such as professional demeanour, interpersonal interaction and communication (Department for Education and Employment, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref39">25</reflink>]). Communication skills have long been considered an area of weakness for accounting graduates (Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref40">62</reflink>]). Whether this view is outdated or not (Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref41">62</reflink>]), aspiring accountants still regard technical skills as the key to gaining employment and believe that weak communication skills will not have a negative impact on their career progression (Ameen, Bruns, & Jackson, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref42">4</reflink>]). With the aim of matching students' abilities to employers' needs, accounting programmes incorporate lessons to advance a range of communication skills: coaching in written, computer-mediated, oral and interpersonal skills are delivered in a range of modules. Yet, one vital communication skill is often neglected: the skill of listening (see Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref43">67</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-4">Listening</hd> <p>Listening is regarded as a key communication skill by accounting bodies, educators (Golen & Lynch, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref44">33</reflink>]; Morgan, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref45">49</reflink>]; Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref46">62</reflink>]), practitioners (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref47">67</reflink>]) and employers (Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref48">20</reflink>]; Flynn, Valikoski, & Grau, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref49">27</reflink>]; Lin, Grace, Krishnan, & Gilsdorf, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref50">46</reflink>]; PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref51">56</reflink>]). As a result, it has been argued that the teaching of listening skills should be better embedded within accounting education programmes (Gray, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref52">35</reflink>]). Listening is typically equated with the absorption and storage of data: passive (Gabriel & Hirsch, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref53">29</reflink>]) and mundane (Alvesson & Sveningsson, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref54">3</reflink>]). The (not insignificant) challenge for educators then is how to (a) develop accounting students' appreciation of listening as a skill to be honed (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref55">67</reflink>]) and (b) highlight its relevance for accounting practice (Carr, Chua, & Perera, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref56">17</reflink>]; Lin et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref57">46</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-5">Listening in theory and in practice</hd> <p>Individuals become members of a practice – including accounting practice – through learning what masters know and how they communicate and engage with others (Lave & Wenger, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref58">45</reflink>]). Hence, learning the communication practices of a professional community is intimately related with the development of knowledge and knowing (Nicolini, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref59">52</reflink>]). Viewing communication within a broader community of practice, blending knowledge and knowing, is helpful. It accentuates that knowledge of the formal vocabulary of a profession (Loewenstein, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref60">47</reflink>]) must be accompanied by knowing the wider vocabulary and interconnectedness of practices; the improvisation involved in individuals' agency and the dynamics of the social; and the problems of shared understanding (Rouse, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref61">60</reflink>]). Therefore, developing an appreciation of the intricacies of language use and applying that insight through, amongst other things, skilful listening is vital.</p> <p>The medical profession has long recognised the importance of listening (Daff, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref62">23</reflink>]). Listening enables the medical practitioner to consider patients' unique biographies and viewpoints (Zandbelt, Smets, Oort, Godfried, & deHays, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref63">74</reflink>]): improving his or her understanding of the issues that might underpin the conversation (Arora, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref64">7</reflink>]). Undoubtedly, a successful conversation requires the interactants to try to assess each other's remarks in a way that matches the intended meaning (Hardy, Lawrence, & Grant, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref65">37</reflink>]; Moyers & Miller, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref66">50</reflink>]; Rautalinko & Lisper, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref67">58</reflink>]). Indeed, good listening is supported by reflecting back and paraphrasing (Gray & Murray, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref68">36</reflink>]). Yet, considered in this way good listening delivers understanding to the hearer by focusing on the other: the speaker.</p> <p>However, listening is more than an act of putting oneself in others' shoes (Stewart, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref69">66</reflink>]). Central to skilful listening is the recognition that the hearer, in his or her role as interactant, acts upon the message: decoding and representing the message according to his or her own filter (Lundsteen, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref70">48</reflink>]). This unavoidable practice is integral to each and every speech event. As a result of this process of representation, the hearer necessarily attends to a co-constructed message: it is co-authored and thus changed (Burleson, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref71">15</reflink>]; Goffman, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref72">31</reflink>]). The original intent of a speaker's message may be misinterpreted or completely altered when the listener's meaning is ascribed (Lundsteen, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref73">48</reflink>]); affecting the degree of shared understanding that is achieved (Burleson, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref74">15</reflink>]). Being skilled in listening is to be cognisant of this process of co-construction; to have due regard for the potential impact of the interpretation; and to be prepared to interrupt the drive toward premature acquiescence. This, it is argued here, can be achieved through reflexive listening.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-6">Reflexive listening</hd> <p>To be reflexive involves questioning our 'attitudes, thought processes, values, assumptions, prejudices and habitual actions, to strive to understand our complex roles in relation to others' (Bolton, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref75">12</reflink>], p. 13). Reflexive listening therefore demands that we pause whilst listening, withhold judgement and think, with the aim of disabling the powerful state of inertia that inclines towards acceptance (Dewey, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref76">26</reflink>]). To be clear, acceptance should not be considered in the same sphere as professional scepticism – the balance between independence and trust (Rennie, Kopp, & Lemon, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref77">59</reflink>]). Instead, reflexive listening involves us overcoming the acceptance of a message as 'heard' without recognising that we, as hearer, will have unavoidably acted upon the message; and that the result should be subject to further thought.</p> <p>Accentuated and thoughtful criticality are therefore integral to reflexive listening, as with accounting practice (Carnegie & Napier, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref78">16</reflink>]). Thus, laying out the sophistication and significance of listening in this manner goes some way to addressing the challenges noted earlier, namely: developing accounting students' appreciation of listening as a skill to be honed (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref79">67</reflink>]) and highlighting its relevance for accounting practice (Carr et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref80">17</reflink>]; Lin et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref81">46</reflink>]). The next step is to integrate reflexive listening into a teaching session. This is achieved by drawing on the prior discussion of communication practices in accounting; providing a context that promotes listening; and utilising a pertinent vocabulary within which interpretation and evaluation are necessary.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-7">Accounting for probabilities</hd> <p>Accounting is often forward-looking: considering future cash flows, going concern and predicted earnings. In accounting for a firm's operations, revenue recognition, cost reporting, tax computations, capital investments, paybacks and depreciation are inherently temporal. Furthermore, the evaluation of conversations with clients, partners or colleagues guides future action (Skærbæk, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref82">63</reflink>]), where overconfidence versus conservatism is often of prime concern (Ahmed & Duellman, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref83">1</reflink>]). Subsequently, in these and many other contexts in which accountants practice, the ability of the practitioner to mindfully evaluate the discussion is vital to appreciate the position, interests and concerns of all parties (Aldhizer, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref84">2</reflink>]; Bentley, Omer, & Sharp, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref85">9</reflink>]; Murnighan & Bazerman, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref86">51</reflink>]).</p> <p>When discussing forthcoming events we are involved in a 'process of reaching the absent from the present' (Dewey, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref87">26</reflink>], p. 26). As a result, the conversation often involves prediction and, in assessing the likelihood of happenings, the use of terms of probability. Given the importance of timing, recognition and disclosure in accounting, the use and interpretation of probabilities in accounting practice has been the subject of a number of empirical studies. Scholars have considered the effect on audit evaluation (Amer, Hackenbrack, & Nelson, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref88">5</reflink>]), liability reporting (Botosan, Koonce, Ryan, Stone, & Wahlen, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref89">14</reflink>]) and contingent loss (Harrison & Tomassini, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref90">38</reflink>]). This body of work has not only emphasised the prevalence of probability terms in accounting, but also notes a concern for accounting practice as a result of their imprecision.</p> <p>The concern reported in the above studies revolves around one central issue: the imprecision of probability terms means that we each necessarily evaluate their meaning. It is therefore possible that our evaluation of a probability term will differ from the evaluation of the same term by those around us. The potential difference in evaluation is of concern because of the possible effect on financial reporting, such as what is or is not accounted for. However, it is this potential difference in the evaluation of probability terms that is useful to emphasise the extent to which listening is a co-construction; and as a consequence, the importance of reflexive listening. Specifically, when listening to others' evaluation of a probability term, any difference to our own evaluation of the same term highlights that without reflexive listening conversations are dangerous playgrounds of miscommunication. It is this prospect that is drawn upon in developing the teaching instrument.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-8">Developing the game</hd> <p>Prior work has recognised the importance of developing listening skills amongst accounting students. With this aim, scholars have designed and recommended a range of approaches including role play (Aldhizer, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref91">2</reflink>]), group work (Daff, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref92">23</reflink>]), assessing the presentations of peers (Thompson, Leintz, Nevers, & Witkowski, [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref93">69</reflink>]), drawing on case studies (Srinivasan, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref94">65</reflink>]), using memory tests and associations (Peterson, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref95">55</reflink>]) and encouraging discussion and paraphrasing within peer groups (Clark, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref96">19</reflink>]). Following their review of these approaches, Stone and Lightbody ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref97">67</reflink>]) recommended listener attentiveness and listener responsiveness as two key areas for future work. Linking with the earlier discussion and noting this recommendation, this paper now moves to describe an instrument that seeks to invoke listener attentiveness and responsiveness.</p> <p>The instrument stemmed from a research project funded by the Higher Education Academy (HEA), UK. The project ran from August 2012 to July 2013 and aligned with the HEA's employability and students-as-partners research streams. The project was titled 'The Probabilities of Communication' and seven first-year Accounting and Finance undergraduate students volunteered to take part in the project as student partners. They supported the Principal Investigator (present author) in developing the approach; engaged in the game with other students; and reflected on their experiences as part of the wider research project. The instrument developed as part of the research project is called the PEG. Over 100 students throughout the university – enrolled on a range of programmes including Accounting and Finance, Economics, Mathematics, Politics, English and Law – played PEG. The sample reflected readiness, availability and timetabling commitments. In addition, 4 PEG sessions with around 30 accounting practitioners took place. These participants worked at a large accounting firm contacted by the present author and were self-selecting. The practitioner sessions were run as per those with students, as detailed below. The data from all of these sessions provide the learning points discussed later. Data were drawn from personal field notes, written notes of conversations at the PEG sessions and subsequent interviews with a number of the accountants who participated in the sessions.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-9">The game</hd> <p>In a small group session – sessions have included 6 to 15 participants – the room is laid out in boardroom-style. The instructor offers a short introduction to the game. This introduction should make clear that there are no right or wrong answers in playing PEG. The preamble might refer to a related lecture or include a story of the importance of communication in the workplace or accounting practice; and conclude with a short explanation of how the game is played. This opening has been kept very brief due to the simple nature of the game; the clear instructions on the front page of the booklet and the desire to minimise the instructor's influence on the way in which players engage with PEG.</p> <p>In addition, the brevity of the introduction supports PEG's underpinning pedagogical approach, which is one of experiential learning: learning through individual, emergent experience that is relevant, meaningful and therefore made 'real' (Kolb, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref98">44</reflink>]). The knowing that emerges from experiential learning aligns with the goals of playing PEG: promoting interpersonal skills and developing critical thinking that can be applied to real-world settings, including professional contexts (Snyder, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref99">64</reflink>]). Therefore, when combined with the accompanying discussion, playing PEG embeds participants' emergent experiences in the context of accounting practice and wider business world.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-10">Format of the game</hd> <p>PEG is split into three parts and is presented in an A4 half-fold booklet. This format was chosen for purposes of presentation and aesthetics: aiming to improve engagement and readability by offering a degree of separation for each section. However, in practice this format led to an interesting learning point and dialogue, as noted later. The front page provides instructions for the game:</p> <hd1 id="AN0114515450-11">How to play PEG:</hd1> <p> <bold>Part A</bold> – Start by translating each word/phrase of probability into a percentage</p> <p> <bold>Part B</bold> – Then read the short story, would you follow Joe?</p> <p> <bold>Part C</bold> – Finally, convert each percentage into a word or phrase</p> <p> <emph>Part A.</emph> On the inside of the booklet, the left-hand page displays a grid of 6 columns by 15 lines. The grid is made up of 3 columns of 15 probability terms (such as 'definitely') each separated by a blank column where players write their conversion of the lexical terms into numbers of probability (percentages). An example is:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td><bold>word or phrase</bold></td><td><bold>%</bold></td><td><bold>word or phrase</bold></td><td><bold>%</bold></td><td><bold>word or phrase</bold></td><td><bold>%</bold></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>not likely</td><td /><td>high likelihood</td><td /><td>fair chance</td><td /></tr><tr><td>high possibility</td><td /><td>very certain</td><td /><td>strong possibility</td><td /></tr><tr><td>doubtful</td><td /><td>highly improbable</td><td /><td>pretty unlikely</td><td /></tr><tr><td>rather unlikely</td><td /><td>maybe</td><td /><td>probable</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>Part B.</emph> The booklet's inside facing page presents a short story that players read and assess in probability terms. As with Part A, the main focus of Part B is to foreground the skill of listening. Yet, this part also offers the prospect of discussing a range of other issues, as noted later.</p> <p>Read the short story, would you follow Joe?</p> <p>Ben and Ting are joint-leaders of a group taking part in a character building walking expedition. They are entering the final stage of the expedition and are navigating the group through the countryside of Southumberford. They have been walking for just over four hours and estimate they have around an hour to go. The rain starts to fall heavier and the wind changes to a cold northerly direction; the group are getting very grumpy.</p> <p>Next, just when they thought things couldn't get much worse, the map is blown away by a particularly aggressive gust of wind. They decide to continue walking parallel to the forest when in the distance they notice the path splits into two. Ben and Ting are unsure of which path to take.</p> <p>Joe mentions that he's walked this way with his grandfather on many occasions and that the group should take the left-hand path because it is definitely quicker. Ben and Ting ask for your opinion on Joe's suggestion.</p> <p>On a scale of 0–100%, how certain are you that Joe knows the quickest way?</p> <p> <emph>Part C.</emph> The back page of the booklet offers a smaller grid of four columns with five lines and asks players to convert the number percentages into a word or term of probability. An example is:</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td><bold>%</bold></td><td><bold>word or phrase</bold></td><td><bold>%</bold></td><td><bold>word or phrase</bold></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>15%</td><td /><td>100%</td><td /></tr><tr><td>85%</td><td /><td>40%</td><td /></tr><tr><td>0%</td><td /><td>65%</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0114515450-12">Playing the game</hd> <p>Following the brief introduction, as noted above, one copy of PEG is issued to each player. The players complete each of the three sections. When every player has completed PEG, the instructor requests that the players one-by-one call out their evaluation of a selection of terms in Part A; the story in Part B and a range of the percentages in Part C. Each part of the game has the same aim: to invoke listener attentiveness and responsiveness (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref100">67</reflink>]); and, in so doing, develop players' appreciation of listening as a key skill. The PEG sessions have taken between 35 and 50 minutes, depending on group size and level of interaction.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-13">Discussion</hd> <p>Feedback on the effectiveness of PEG as a teaching instrument is summarised to:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> PEG is simple to understand and play.</item> <p></p> <item> All players – students and practitioners – described how taking part in the session was an enjoyable experience.</item> <p></p> <item> In addition, and arguably most notably, following their playing of PEG participants reported that they had reconsidered the importance of listening for accounting practice and/or the workplace.</item> </ulist> <p>Beyond the above, PEG delivered learning opportunities on a range of levels. The majority matched the project's aims – specifically, emphasising the sophistication and significance of listening, the importance of developing listening skills and the application of reflexive listening in accounting practice and wider business context. However, a number of learning points emerged during the PEG sessions. They are included here for completeness and to show that playing PEG should be approached with responsiveness on the part of the instructor to maximise the range of learning experiences. The learning points are discussed across five themes: Engaging with PEG; Parts A to C; and Listening to Clients and Colleagues.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-14">Engaging with PEG</hd> <p>First, it was of interest to observe the manner in which the players engaged with the game. Most groups completed PEG in complete silence; in just a few sessions players spoke to a near neighbour. In addition, players varied in the way they completed the grids: some in columns, some in rows; others filled in the grids in numerical order – small to large was most typical; and the majority evaluated their probability terms in percentages that ended with 0 or 5. It is to be noted that behavioural variation was evidenced across groups, but within each group one approach often dominated. Although clearly not pertaining to the development of listening skills, observing this behaviour was intriguing. The students who were partners in the research moved from being solely interested in the original aims of the project to also considering how players responded to, and engaged with, PEG and each other. Scholars may wish to explore the behavioural response to playing PEG as part of their research; and/or, may feel that splitting groups into players and observers would add another dimension to their teaching session.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-15">PEG: Part A</hd> <p>Following on from the completion of PEG, players are asked to call out their evaluations of the different terms from the grid in Part A. The instructor takes the lead here and chooses the first term – often the top left for ease of pin-pointing. During this part of the session, when players listened to their peers call out their evaluations, they consistently exchanged looks that denoted surprise and confusion – demonstrating listener attentiveness and responsiveness (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref101">67</reflink>]). This period was characteristically highly engaged with a great deal of conversation and much laughter: this explosion of noise in stark contrast to the silence that typically accompanied the completion of the booklet, as noted above.</p> <p>When the players are listening to peers calling out their evaluations, if/when a notable variation in evaluation occurs, and if none of the players makes a comment, then the instructor might make a remark. The instructor's comment may relate to a 'typical' conversation in accounting, such as the probability of a debt being recovered and how a difference in individuals' evaluations might affect whether or not a transaction is recognised in the accounts. Alternatively in the context of collaborative projects, the instructor might remark: 'imagine if you were talking to a colleague about the likelihood of a task being completed by the deadline'. In sessions to date, however, players have often made an animated commentary of the differences. Two examples are now presented. First, an exchange between Accounting and Finance students:Student A:'Maybe' equals 60%? More than half? More than half a chance? Why? Why is 'maybe' more than 50%?Student B:Well 'maybe' is more likely than not isn't it? So, it's more than 50%.Other players:general comments of agreement, disagreement etc.Student A:If I asked you if you were going to the gym later and you said 'maybe', I'd think you were 50/50. That's what I would mean if I said it. I would be more surprised, I think, if you were there.Other players:Calls of 'me too' or 'I wouldn't' ... Student B:Well I'm not going to the gym later – absolutely not.Student A:100%?!</p> <p>This exchange was light-hearted and enjoyed by the whole group. It highlighted very clearly the ease of miscommunication and how a listener might make assumptions about the future actions of the other based on his or her own evaluation. Said differently, it emphasised how the listener co-constructed the speaker's message and reckoned its meaning based on his/her evaluation of 'maybe'. It is during this part of the PEG session that the instructor can guide the conversation, stress the importance of listener attentiveness and responsiveness (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref102">67</reflink>]), ask questions, reiterate the differences and highlight the significance of reflexive listening for accounting or business practice (Carr et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref103">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>A second example of PEG's utility is brought to light in a session with eight practising accountants. During the calling out of the evaluations, the whole group became involved in the following exchange:Accountant A:[to colleague, in a friendly manner] How can you possibly think that 'quite likely' is 70% and 'certain' is 60%? 'Quite likely' must be less than 'certain', isn't it? [to group] It must be, mustn't it?Other players:animated discussion – approx. 15 minutes – about how differently they had each evaluated these two terms. The majority had evaluated 'certain' as a higher percentage than 'quite likely'. However, three of them had not.Accountant B:[laughing] Well you three can work together from now on; else can you imagine where we'll end up?! And you two [referring to those with the highest divergence] well  ...  check from now on or ask a friend will you!</p> <p>These are just two examples of conversations that were replicated in each of the PEG sessions. The differences in evaluation were usually the source of a lively discussion. Players initially responded when they heard fellow players call out their evaluations – that is, listening was foregrounded. It was the hearing of the differences that triggered sideways glances, laughter or comments. The possible implications were noted either by the instructor or (more often) by the players themselves.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-16">PEG: Part B</hd> <p>The story of the walking expedition in Part B presents two learning points. First, as with Part A, players evaluate the story, listen to the evaluation of their peers, and then consider the implications of any disparities. Second, players are asked to discuss any difference in their individual evaluation of 'definitely' in the grid in Part A when compared to their evaluation of 'definitely' in Part B. With regard to this second learning point, players are asked to call out their evaluations in succession: from Part A and then Part B. In sessions to date, players typically evaluated 'definitely' in Part A at 95% or 100% (most common), but this percentage fell when they evaluated 'definitely' in Part B. Discussions suggest that when evaluating Part A, those players who were considering themselves using the term (most common) rated 'definitely' higher in Part A than in Part B (when Joe is using the term).</p> <p>Players were asked to talk about why they had evaluated the term differently in Part A and Part B. The conversations normally revolved around issues of trust, teamwork and the importance of context. Specifically, players in a number of sessions spoke of being 'out of control' on the walking expedition and how new settings would 'force them' to trust another person. Consequently, aside from the importance of listening, Part B offered an opportunity to engage in a dialogue of a number of other issues central to accounting practice, and the workplace more generally, including teamwork and trust.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-17">PEG: Part C</hd> <p>Beyond referring to one or two evaluations and highlighting the importance of reflexive listening in Part C, it was of interest to observe the way in which players completed the grid. Specifically, players would often turn to Part A during their completion of the grid in Part C. However, the reviewing of Part A was not performed in an open relaxed manner; rather, players would turn to Part A as though this was in some way against the rules of the game. They would often furtively turn the page of the booklet and return back quickly, as if hoping no one would see. Players would sometimes 'catch' other players doing the same and immediately glance away. This performance was replicated by students and accounting practitioners; and was witnessed in every session.</p> <p>In developing PEG, the booklet format was chosen for presentation and aesthetics only, but observing this behavioural response was interesting and players were asked to discuss their actions. They spoke of being influenced by their past experiences of tests and examinations: highlighting that practices are both situated and historical; and inscribed in bodies and minds (Nicolini, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref104">53</reflink>]; Orlikowski, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref105">54</reflink>]). If replicated in future sessions, scholars with an interest in practices or related fields may wish to explore players' behavioural response to PEG in their research and/or teaching.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-18">Listening to clients and colleagues</hd> <p>Following their PEG sessions, all of the accounting practitioners spoke of the importance of evaluating probability terms to accounting (Amer et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref106">5</reflink>]; Botosan et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref107">14</reflink>]; Harrison & Tomassini, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref108">38</reflink>]). Furthermore, they described how playing PEG highlighted the importance of reflexive listening – of pausing and checking – in working with both clients and colleagues. In relation to clients, a representative remark:</p> <p>Clear communication is critical to our interactions with our clients on a daily basis. Using PEG really brought home the importance of checking with our clients that our interpretation of the likely outcome of particular issues matches theirs.</p> <p>In relation to colleagues, practitioners' comments emphasised that listening requires knowledge of the profession's vocabulary (Loewenstein, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref109">47</reflink>]), but they also remarked that what was sometimes even more important is considering the context or culture in which the vocabulary is used:</p> <p>We have close ties with multinationals and colleagues in other countries take a different view of timescales. Unlikely is an example. I've been caught out with unlikely in estimations in the past. So, this [PEG] would be an excellent way of broaching the issue.</p> <p>Furthermore, as they progressed in their career a number of participants described the importance of listening when managing a team, one observed:</p> <p>As a manager of the team if I said probably I would mean more likely than not but I see now that others may not hear it like that. I'm surprised that probably for some is less than 50%. That is a shock, to be honest. It is a real shock. It makes you think about how  ...  about how well I actually communicate. How good a manager am I? How much do I assume? And do I listen properly? And yes obviously with others too – budgeting managers. When they say they'll probably do something, I'm thinking it's more likely than not, but they might not. Very interesting ... </p> <p>Reflecting the findings of much research, the accounting practitioners spoke of their accounting training as being focused on the teaching of technical skills (Gracia, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref110">34</reflink>]; Jackling & De Lange, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref111">39</reflink>]; Kavanagh & Drennan, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref112">41</reflink>]). In addition, the practitioners emphasised the significance of 'soft' skills – including listening – for new entrants to the profession and those seeking career progression (Gammie et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref113">30</reflink>]; Jones, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref114">40</reflink>]; Keneley & Jackling, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref115">42</reflink>]; Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref116">62</reflink>]); and noted that playing PEG had provided a number of important learning points and facilitated a useful discussion.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-19">Conclusion</hd> <p>Enhancing students' employability and value in the labour market is one of the aims of higher education (CBI/NUS, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref117">18</reflink>]). Being an able communicator is considered a vital part of being employable and yet, within the accounting field, studies continue to find a sizeable gap between graduates' skills and employers' requirements (Siriwardane & Durden, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref118">62</reflink>]). Accounting programmes deliver lessons in a range of communication skills, but the skill of listening is often neglected (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref119">67</reflink>]). The practices that underpin skilful listening are much sought after in the graduate employment market, namely: accentuated and thoughtful criticality. As a result, furthering all students' appreciation of the intricacies and behaviours of skilled listening – specifically, reflexive listening – is a worthwhile endeavour.</p> <p>As such, the paper describes the development and use of an instrument – the PEG – that sought to emphasise the sophistication and significance of listening. Taking an experiential learning approach (Kolb, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref120">44</reflink>]), feedback from those who played PEG highlighted that it achieved its aims in developing players' appreciation of listening as a skill to be honed (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref121">67</reflink>]) and foregrounded the importance of listening for accounting practice and the workplace more widely (Carr et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref122">17</reflink>]; Lin et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref123">46</reflink>]). Along with stressing the importance of listening skills, a number of other instructive discussion points emerged from playing PEG. In sessions to date these have included teamwork and trust. Of course, these topics could vary in subsequent sessions, and educators should be attentive to players' reactions to best capture the discussion and maximise the usefulness of PEG sessions.</p> <p>The learning points detailed above should be viewed in light of a number of limitations. First, as with any form of interactive activity, PEG relies on the ability of the instructor to engage the group and on the willingness of participants to engage with the game. With this in mind, the instructor is advised to have a range of examples with which to develop a meaningful discussion around the effect of differences in the evaluation of probabilities for accounting practice or the workplace more generally. It is this associating discussion that connects participants' individual experiences of PEG with the importance of developing listening skills.</p> <p>Second, engagement with PEG does not necessarily lead to an improvement in the effectiveness of players' listening skills. Conversations with participants following the PEG sessions suggest that they experienced a shift in their thinking around the importance of listening. However, the effect on players' subsequent listening behaviour was not explored. Third, listening takes place within a context and as part of an interactive event. As a result, the de-contextualised nature of PEG does not fully engage with the immersive experience of listening. For example, non-verbal cues, found to have an important impact on listening (Stone & Lightbody, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref124">67</reflink>]), are not taken into account. Nevertheless, the response of players during the game and afterwards indicates that PEG offers a range of 'realisable' and applicable learning points.</p> <p>Responding to the above limitations offers opportunities for future research. Furthermore, there are a number of other areas that could be developed. In his introduction to a special issue of the <emph>International Journal of Listening</emph>, Bodie ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref125">10</reflink>]) notes that listening research has often focused on comprehension and information acquisition; he proposes a move towards a greater exploration of the interpersonal nature of listening. Subscribing to a similar view, Bostrom ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref126">13</reflink>], p. 23) suggests that future research should consider 'integrating interpretive, relational, and behavioral aspects of communication'. He argues that behavioural change is an effect of communication – including listening. In this regard, PEG could be used to examine participants' temporal framing during listening and the relationship with future behaviour. For instance, PEG could be drawn upon to explore whether the evaluation of possible future outcomes or the result of past events has a greater influence on individuals' behaviour.</p> <p>In his call for more integrated and sophisticated listening research, Bodie ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref127">11</reflink>], p. 81) states that 'much less is known about the specific behaviors that constitute "good listening" and their connection to important outcomes'. In this matter, focusing on reflexive listening and the co-construction process offers one starting point. One example, and a topic that emerged during the playing of PEG, is team working. Questions that might be explored include: do team members with similar evaluations of the same probability terms (a) perceive they collaborate in a more effective way; (b) perform more effectively in team tasks and/or (c) achieve more effective team results. Considering behaviours more widely, and as noted earlier, scholars with an interest in practices or related fields may wish to study players' behavioural response to PEG in their research. This future work might include an examination of the way in which players engage with PEG and/or each other.</p> <p>In addition, this study has taken a purely qualitative approach leaving a range of opportunities for quantitative analysis. It would be of value to explore any differences in experience and/or evaluation of probability terms when taking into account factors such as age, gender, cultural background, programme of study, stage of degree programme (including undergraduate or postgraduate) or level of work experience. Furthermore, scholars might wish to consider an analysis of the evaluation of a range of probability terms: which terms have the largest divergence and therefore might have the biggest impact for business or accounting practice? Finally, a longitudinal study of players to examine any perceived change in listening skills or interpersonal behaviour following their engagement with PEG would be of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-20">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>Clare would like to thank the following students (now graduates) for their support and enthusiasm throughout the project: Lok Kan (Fortuna) Chan, Joseph Darby, Ben Hair, Loucas Louca, Andreas Minaides, Christos Zantis and Fiona Zhou. To download PEG and meet the project team, please visit: https://peggame.wordpress.com/</p> <hd id="AN0114515450-21">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.</p> <ref id="AN0114515450-22"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref83" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Ahmed, A. S., & Duellman, S. (2013). Managerial overconfidence and accounting conservatism. Journal of Accounting Research, 51(1), 1–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00467.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref84" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Aldhizer III, G. R. (2013). Teaching negotiation skills within an accounting curriculum. Issues in Accounting Education, 28(1), 17–47. doi: 10.2308/iace-50310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref54" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2003). Managers doing leadership: The extra-ordinarization of the mundane. Human Relations, 56(12), 1435–1459. doi: 10.1177/00187267035612001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref42" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Ameen, E., Bruns, S. M., & Jackson, C. (2010). Communication skills and accounting: Do perceptions match reality? CPA Journal, 80(7), 63–65.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref88" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Amer, T., Hackenbrack, K., & Nelson, M. (1995). Context-dependence of auditors' interpretations of the SLAs no. 5 probability expressions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 12(1), 25–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1995.tb00479.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref33" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2000). Core competency framework and educational competency assessment. Retrieved July 14, 2014, from <ulink href="http://www.aicpa.org/interestareas/accountingeducation/resources/pages/corecompetency.aspx">http://www.aicpa.org/interestareas/accountingeducation/resources/pages/corecompetency.aspx</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref64" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Arora, N. K. (2003). Interacting with cancer patients: The significance of physicians' communication behavior. Social Science & Medicine, 57(5), 791–806. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00449-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref26" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Arquero Montanö, J. L., Jimenez Cardoso, S. M., & Joyce, J. (2004). Skills development, motivation and learning in financial statement analysis: An evaluation of alternative types of case studies. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 13(2), 191–212. doi: 10.1080/09639280410001676611</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref85" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bentley, K. A., Omer, T. C., & Sharp, N. Y. (2013). Business strategy, financial reporting irregularities, and audit effort business strategy, financial reporting irregularities, and audit effort. Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(2), 780–817. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2012.01174.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bodie, G. D. (2011). The understudied nature of listening in interpersonal communication: Introduction to a special issue. International Journal of Listening, 25(1–2), 1–9. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2011.536462</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bodie, G. D. (2013). Issues in the measurement of listening. Communication Research Reports, 30(1), 76–84. doi: 10.1080/08824096.2012.733981</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bolton, G. (2010). Reflective practice: Writing and professional development. London: Sage Publications Ltd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bostrom, R. N. (2011). Rethinking conceptual approaches to the study of 'listening'. International Journal of Listening, 25(1–2), 10–26. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2011.536467</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Botosan, C. A., Koonce, L., Ryan, S. G., Stone, M. S., & Wahlen, J. M. (2005). Accounting for liabilities: Conceptual issues, standard setting, and evidence from academic research. Accounting Horizons, 19(3), 159–186. doi: 10.2308/acch.2005.19.3.159</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burleson, B. R. (2011). A constructivist approach to listening. International Journal of Listening, 25(1–2), 27–46. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2011.536470</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carnegie, G. D., & Napier, C. J. (2010). Traditional accountants and business professionals: Portraying the accounting profession after Enron. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(3), 360–376. doi: 10.1016/j.aos.2009.09.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carr, S., Chua, F., & Perera, H. (2006). University accounting curricula: The perceptions of an alumni group. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 15(4), 359–376. doi: 10.1080/09639280601011040</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CBI/NUS. (2011). Working towards your future: Making the most of your time in higher education. Retrieved July 14, 2014, from <ulink href="http://www.nus.org.uk/Global/CBI%5fNUS%5fEmployability%20report%5fMay%202011.pdf">www.nus.org.uk/Global/CBI%5fNUS%5fEmployability%20report%5fMay%202011.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, T. (1999). Sharing the importance of attentive listening skills. Journal of Management Education, 23(2), 216–223. doi: 10.1177/105256299902300211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cooper, L. O. (1997). Listening competency in the workplace: A model for training. Business Communication Quarterly, 60(4), 75–84. doi: 10.1177/108056999706000405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Corson, M., & Miyagawa, T. (2012). Global CFO from scorekeeper to strategist. Financial Executive, 28(9), 20–23.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cranmer, S. (2006). Enhancing graduate employability: Best intentions and mixed outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 169–184. doi: 10.1080/03075070600572041</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daff, L. (2012). Lessons from successes in medical communication training and their applications to accounting education. Accounting Education, 21(4), 385–405. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2011.633832</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daff, L., de Lange, P., & Jackling, B. (2012). A comparison of generic skills and emotional intelligence in accounting education. Issues in Accounting Education, 27(3), 627–645. doi: 10.2308/iace-50145</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department for Education and Employment. (2000). Skills for all: Research report from the national skills task force. Sudbury: Author.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. Reprint 1997.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Flynn, J., Valikoski, T.-R., & Grau, J. (2008). Listening in the business context: Reviewing the state of research. International Journal of Listening, 22(2), 141–151. doi: 10.1080/10904010802174800</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friedmen, A. L., & Lyne, S. R. (2001). The beancounter stereotype: Towards a general model of stereotype generation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(4), 423–451. doi: 10.1006/cpac.2000.0451</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gabriel, S. L., & Hirsch, M. L. (1992). Critical thinking and communication skills: Integration and implementation issues. Journal of Accounting Education, 10(2), 243–270. doi: 10.1016/0748-5751(92)90001-L</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gammie, B., Gammie, E., & Cargill, E. (2002). Personal skills development in the accounting curriculum. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 11(1), 63–78. doi: 10.1080/09639280210153272</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Golen, S., & Lynch, D. H. (2008). The importance of listening skills in tax preparation. CPA Journal, 78(9), 56–59.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gracia, L. (2010). Accounting students' expectations and transition experiences of supervised work experience. Accounting Education, 19(1–2), 51–64. doi: 10.1080/09639280902886033</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gray, F. E. (2010). Specific oral communication skills desired in new accountancy graduates. Business Communication Quarterly, 73(1), 40–67. doi: 10.1177/1080569909356350</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gray, F. E., & Murray, N. (2011). 'A distinguishing factor': Oral communication skills in new accountancy graduates. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 20(3), 275–294. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2011.560763</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hardy, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Grant, D. (2005). Discourse and collaboration: The role of conversations and collective identity. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 58–77. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2005.15281426</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harrison, K. E., & Tomassini, L. A. (1989). Judging the probability of a contingent loss: An empirical study. Contemporary Accounting Research, 5(2), 642–648. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1989.tb00730.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jackling, B., & De Lange, P. (2009). Do accounting graduates' skills meet the expectations of employers? A matter of convergence or divergence. Accounting Education, 18(4/5), 369–385. doi: 10.1080/09639280902719341</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, A. (2010). Generic attributes in accounting: The significance of the disciplinary context. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 19(1–2), 5–21. doi: 10.1080/09639280902875523</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kavanagh, M., & Drennan, L. (2008). What skills and attributes does an accounting graduate need? Evidence from student perceptions and employer expectations. Accounting & Finance, 48(2), 279–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-629X.2007.00245.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keneley, M., & Jackling, B. (2011). The acquisition of generic skills of culturally-diverse student cohorts. Accounting Education, 20(6), 605–623. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2011.611344</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kennedy, F. A., & Dull, R. B. (2008). Transferable team skills for accounting students. Accounting Education, 17(2), 213–224. doi: 10.1080/09639280600826166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning experience and the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lin, P., Grace, D., Krishnan, S., & Gilsdorf, J. (2010). Failure to communicate: Why accounting students don't measure up to professionals' expectations. The CPA Journal, 80(1), 63–65.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Loewenstein, J. (2014). Take my word for it: How professional vocabularies foster organizing. Journal of Professions and Organization, 1(1), 65–83. doi: 10.1093/jpo/jot004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lundsteen, S. W. (1979). Listening: Its impact on reading and the other language arts. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English/ERIC.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morgan, G. J. (1997). Communication skills required by accounting graduates: Practitioner and academic perceptions. Accounting Education, 6(2), 93–107. doi: 10.1080/096392897331514</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moyers, T. B., & Miller, W. R. (2013). Is low therapist empathy toxic? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors: Journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 27(3), 878–884. doi: 10.1037/a0030274</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Murnighan, J. K., & Bazerman, M. H. (1990). A perspective on negotiation research in accounting and auditing. The Accounting Review, 65(3), 642–657.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicolini, D. (2011). Practice as the site of knowing: Insights from the field of telemedicine. Organization Science, 22(3), 602–620. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0556</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicolini, D. (2013). Practice theory, work, & organization: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3), 249–273. doi: 10.1287/orsc.13.3.249.2776</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peterson, R. T. (2007). An exploratory study of listening practice relative to memory testing and lecture in business administration courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 70(3), 285–300. doi: 10.1177/1080569907305075</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. (2013). Employability guide. Retrieved July 14, 2014, from <ulink href="http://www.pwc.co.uk/careers/student/employability/employability.jhtml?WT.mc%5fid=prettyurl%5femployability%5f2013%5fURL">www.pwc.co.uk/careers/student/employability/employability.jhtml?WT.mc%5fid=prettyurl%5femployability%5f2013%5fURL</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ratnatunga, J., & Alam, M. (2011). Strategic governance and management accounting: Evidence from a case study. Abacus, 47(3), 343–382. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6281.2011.00344.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rautalinko, E., & Lisper, H.-O. (2004). Effects of training reflective listening in a corporate setting. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(3), 281–299. doi: 10.1023/B:JOBU.0000016712.36043.4f</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rennie, M. D., Kopp, L. S., & Lemon, W. M. (2010). Exploring trust and the auditor-client relationship: Factors influencing the auditor's trust of a client representative. Auditing, 29(1), 279–293. doi: 10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.279</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rouse, J. (2007). Practice theory. In S. Turner & M. Risjord (Eds.), Handbook of the philosophy of science (vol. 15): Philosophy of anthropology and sociology (pp. 639–682). London: Elsevier.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sin, S., & McGuigan, N. (2013). Fit for purpose: A framework for developing and assessing complex graduate attributes in a changing higher education environment. Accounting Education, 22(6), 522–543. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2013.847320</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Siriwardane, H. P., & Durden, C. H. (2014). The communication skills of accountants: What we know and the gaps in our knowledge. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 23(2), 119–134. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2013.847329</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Skærbæk, P. (2005). Annual reports as interaction devices: The hidden constructions of mediated communication. Financial Accountability & Management, 21(4), 385–411. doi: 10.1111/j.0267-4424.2005.00226.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snyder, K. (2003). Ropes, poles, and space: Active learning in business education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 4(2), 159–167. doi: 10.1177/1469787403004002004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Srinivasan, S. K. (2010). Lend me your ears: On the role of listening skills in the case method. Vilakshan: The XIMB Journal of Management, 7(3), 125–130.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stewart, J. (1983). Interpretive listening: An alternative to empathy. Communication Education, 32(4), 379–391. doi: 10.1080/03634528309378559</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stone, G., & Lightbody, M. (2012). The nature and significance of listening skills in accounting practice. Accounting Education, 21(4), 363–384. doi: 10.1080/09639284.2011.617062</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stoner, G., & Milner, M. (2010). Embedding generic employability skills in an accounting degree: Development and impediments. Accounting Education, 19(1–2), 123–138. doi: 10.1080/09639280902888229</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson, K., Leintz, P., Nevers, B., & Witkowski, S. (2004). The integrative listening model: An approach to teaching and learning listening. The Journal of General Education, 53(3–4), 225–246. doi: 10.1353/jge.2005.0011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wells, P., Gerbic, P., Kranenburg, I., & Bygrave, J. (2009). Professional skills and capabilities of accounting graduates: The New Zealand expectation gap? Accounting Education, 18(4/5), 403–420. doi: 10.1080/09639280902719390</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Willcoxson, L., Wynder, M., & Laing, G. K. (2010). A whole-of-program approach to the development of generic and professional skills in a university accounting program. Accounting Education, 19(1–2), 65–91. doi: 10.1080/09639280902886082</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilton, N. (2011). Do employability skills really matter in the UK graduate labour market? The case of business and management graduates. Work, Employment and Society, 25(1), 85–100. doi: 10.1177/0950017010389244</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yi, M., & Tayles, M. (2009). On the emergence of strategic management accounting: An institutional perspective. Accounting & Business Research, 39(5), 473–495. doi: 10.1080/00014788.2009.9663379</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zandbelt, L. C., Smets, E. M. A., Oort, F. J., Godfried, M. H., & deHays, H. C. J. M. (2006). Determinants of physicians' patient-centered behavior in the medical specialist encounter. Social Science & Medicine, 63(4), 899–910. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.01.024</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Clare Butler</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref127"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1107190
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Probability Evaluation Game: An Instrument to Highlight the Skill of Reflexive Listening
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Butler%2C+Clare%22">Butler, Clare</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Accounting+Education%22"><i>Accounting Education</i></searchLink>. 2016 25(2):107-123.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 17
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2016
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accounting%22">Accounting</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Probability%22">Probability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Games%22">Educational Games</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Listening+Skills%22">Listening Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reflection%22">Reflection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation%22">Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Communication%22">Interpersonal Communication</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Employment+Potential%22">Employment Potential</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Job+Skills%22">Job Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cooperative+Learning%22">Cooperative Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experiential+Learning%22">Experiential Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Effectiveness%22">Instructional Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Qualitative+Research%22">Qualitative Research</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/09639284.2015.1089178
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0963-9284
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This paper describes the development of the Probability Evaluation Game (PEG): an innovative teaching instrument that emphasises the sophistication of listening and highlights listening as a key skill for accounting practitioners. Whilst in a roundtable format, playing PEG involves participants individually evaluating a series of probability terms and then calling out their evaluations amongst fellow players who have done the same. When listening to peers' responses, any difference in evaluation of the same term confronts players with the knowledge that without skilled, reflexive listening conversations are dangerous playgrounds of miscommunication. The PEG presents a valuable learning opportunity where the potential impact of this issue for accounting and business world can be discussed. This paper details how PEG was developed, its format and how it has been used with students and accounting practitioners. Furthermore emergent, and often intriguing, learning points are discussed and related to accounting and the workplace more generally.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 74
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2016
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1107190
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1107190
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/09639284.2015.1089178
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 107
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Accounting
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Probability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Games
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Listening Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reflection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Communication
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Employment Potential
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Job Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cooperative Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Experiential Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Qualitative Research
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Probability Evaluation Game: An Instrument to Highlight the Skill of Reflexive Listening
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Butler, Clare
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2016
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0963-9284
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 25
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Accounting Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1