The strengths of the paper
The paper has a very contemporary perspective to the concerned topic and while debating the rules versus principles theory the authors have presented very relevant examples from different parts of the globe. This not only makes it easier to understand but also makes one agree with the point supported by the authors. These examples quoted act as substantial evidences of the point presented by the authors. For instance at a point where the authors are explaining the need of consistency, very aptly comparative examples have been quoted from the EU, Germany and Japan. The examples make the author observe more clearly that the various philosophies of consistency are interlinked in a way that it can only be attained in companies in the companies agree to internally make these standards consistent.
Upon research on similar topic it was found that many literature findings have concluded that one set of accounting standards cannot be applicable on firms that function in diverse monetary, political and social environment. Even compliance with the most easy to observe disclosure necessities becomes difficult when expected to be implemented on a global level. (Bradshaw & Miller, 2007)
There has been an in-depth analysis if two absolutely distinct political regimes, the U.S. and Germany while trying to understand the practical application of consistency. While comparing the authors have stated and proved that the although there is a lack of constitutional provisions for all the possible issues that may arise, by and large the principles of Germany are by and large , without gaps.