Teaching and Learning Financial Performance Measurement: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Objectivity and Sufficiency

This study examines undergraduate accounting students’ perceptions of financial performance measurement in the teaching and learning context of management accounting. Specifically, it focuses on two dimensions: objectivity and sufficiency. Objectivity refers to the extent to which students perceive financial measures as neutral, factual, and fair, while sufficiency refers to the extent to which students believe financial measures alone provide enough information to evaluate managerial performance. A descriptive survey was conducted among 30 Accountancy students who had learned the topic of performance measurement systems. The questionnaire consisted of Likert-scale items measuring objectivity and sufficiency, followed by one scenario-based question requiring students to choose between a manager with higher return on investment (ROI) but weaker staff-related outcomes and a manager with lower ROI but stronger staff loyalty and innovation. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics, including mean scores, frequencies, and percentages. The findings show that students had moderate perceptions of the objectivity of financial performance measures, with a mean score of 3.11, and mixed perceptions of their sufficiency, with a mean score of 2.95. In the scenario-based question, 80% of students selected the manager with the higher ROI. These findings suggest that although students may recognise the limitations of financial measures, financial outcomes still appear influential in their evaluation preference. The study supports the need for teaching approaches that encourage students to consider both financial and non-financial information when evaluating managerial performance. Future research may include larger samples and additional scenarios to provide deeper insight into students’ decision-making processes.

financial performance measurement, management accounting, objectivity, sufficiency, undergraduate accounting students

1. Adnan, Y. M., Daud, M. N., Alias, A., & Razali, M. N. (2012). Importance of soft skills for graduates in the real estate programmes in Malaysia. Journal of Surveying, Construction and Property, 3(2), 1-13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmadc, A. M. (2025). Graduate Attributes and Employability Skills in TVET in Malaysia: A Systematic Review towards Holistic and Future-Ready Graduates. Management Research, 14(2), 100-119. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Balachandran, S. V. (2006). How does residual income affect investment? The role of prior performance measures. Management Science, 52(3), 383-394. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Basir, N. M., Zubairi, Y. Z., Jani, R., & Abdul Wahab, D. (2022). Soft skills and graduate employability: Evidence from Malaysian tracer study. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 30(4), 1975–1989. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Böer, G. B. (2000). Management accounting education: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Issues in Accounting Education, 15(2), 313-334. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Collier, P. M. (2015). Accounting for managers: Interpreting accounting information for decision making. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Crous, C., Battisti, E., & Leonidou, E. (2022). Non-financial reporting and company financial performance: a systematic literature review and integrated framework. EuroMed Journal of Business, 17(4), 652-676. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dadd, D., & Hinton, M. (2023). Performance measurement and evaluation: Applying return on investment (ROI) to human capital investments. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 72(9), 2736-2764. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Diana, N., Sudarmiatin, S., & Hermawan, A. (2023). Model of accounting information system and SMEs performance in contingency theory perspective. Asian Journal of Management, Entrepreneurship and Social Science, 3(03), 47-69. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ghani, I. A. G. A. A. (2020). Employers’ expectation and preference of graduates in Malaysia. Journal of Human Capital Development (JHCD), 13(2), 37-60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Grishunin, S., Suloeva, S., & Burova, E. (2022). Development of risk management mechanism and the system of risk metrics to evaluate and enhance the long-term orientation of the strategies of non-financial companies. Risks, 10(9), Article 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks10090182 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ismail, Z., Ahmad, A. S., & Ahmi, A. (2020). Perceived employability skills of accounting graduates: The insights from employers. Elementary Education Online, 19(4), 36-41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (1998). Innovations in performance measurement: Trends and research implications. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 205–238. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Kassim, M. A., Marfo, S., & Abu, K. (2025). Assessing the impact of five teaching strategies on the academic performance of senior high school students in financial accounting: A case study in Wa. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, 101259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kenayathulla, H. B., Ahmad, N. A., & Idris, A. R. (2019). Gaps between competence and importance of employability skills: evidence from Malaysia. Higher Education Evaluation and Development, 13(2), 97-112. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lau, Y. W., & Lim, S. Y. (2015). Accounting undergraduates’ learning approaches: Case of a Malaysian public university. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 23(S), 253–270. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Le, T. T., Le, M. H., Nguyen Thi Tuong, V., Nguyen Thien, P. V., Tran Dac Bao, T., Nguyen Le Phuong, V., & Mavuri, S. (2024). Prestige over profit, corporate social responsibility boosts corporate sustainable performance: mediation roles of brand image and brand loyalty. Journal of Global Responsibility, 15(2), 215-244. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Monteiro, A. P., Vale, J., Leite, E., Lis, M., & Kurowska-Pysz, J. (2022). The impact of information systems and non-financial information on company success. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 45, 100557. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Moo, K. H., & Da Wan, C. (2023). Graduate employability in Malaysia: Unpacking the concept, policy and practices. IIUM Journal of Educational Studies, 11(2), 3-25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Osagioduwa, L. O., & Ogbonmwan, E. E. (2022). Professional Accountants Codes of Ethics and the Public Sector Experience. The Journal of Accounting and Management, 12(3), 18-42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Osman, I., Ibrahim, A., Mohd, I. H., Hashim, M. J. M., & Ahmad, N. N. (2025). Graduate soft skills and employability in Malaysia: The view of employers from different manufacturing companies. Social and Management Research Journal, 22(1), 1-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Otley, D. T. (1980). The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5(4), 413–428. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Rahiminezhad Galankashi, M., & Mokhatab Rafiei, F. (2022). Financial performance measurement of supply chains: a review. International journal of productivity and performance management, 71(5), 1674-1707. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Rahmat, A. M., Adnan, A. M., & Mohtar, N. M. (2019, February). Industry 4.0 skillsets and ‘career readiness’: Can Malaysian university students face the future of work. In Proceedings of the international invention, innovative & creative (INIIC) conference, series (Vol. 11, pp. 28-37). Senawang, Malaysia: MNNF Network. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Salehi, A. K. (2024). Critical review of the role of accounting in the decision-making process. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 15(2), 244-264. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Sari, V. W. (2025). Financial Performance Evaluation in Property Companies Using the Residual Income Method. Journal on Economics, Management and Business Technology, 3(2), 51-60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sura, J. S., Panchal, R., & Lather, A. (2023). Economic value-added (EVA) myths and realities: evidence from the Indian manufacturing sector. IIM Ranchi journal of management studies, 2(1), 82-96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Sutjahyani, D. (2025). The Role of Performance Measurement Systems in Enhancing Managerial Decision Making: A Management Accounting Perspective. The Journal of Academic Science, 2(5), 1373-1382. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Tayles, M., Pike, R. H., & Sofian, S. (2007). Intellectual capital, management accounting practices and corporate performance: perceptions of managers. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(4), 522-548. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Tripathi, P. M., Chotia, V., Solanki, U., Meena, R., & Khandelwal, V. (2023). Economic value added research: Mapping thematic structure and research trends. Risks, 11(1), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks11010009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Remote Working Environment on Academicians’ Performance in Public Higher Education Institutions
• Training Teachers for the New Pathways: Empowering Change through Inclusive, Innovative, and Sustainable Teacher Education in Africa
• Research on the Current Status, Problems, and Countermeasures of College Students' Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence