Paul Brown joined the School of Accounting in 2005 and completed a PhD in 2009 on the topic ‘Group versus Individual Compensation Schemes for Senior Executives and Firm Performance’ under the supervision of Professors Zoltan Matolcsy and Peter Wells (link to Australian Digital Thesis Program record). Paul managed the "Who Governs Australia" database project for the UTS School of Accounting from 2005 to 2010. Prior to this, he served as a research assistant on various management accounting, financial accounting and Corporate Governance research projects for the Accounting Discipline Group. Paul has diverse business experience in a range of industries including retail, hospitality, house renovation and dental.
Paul completed a Master of Business Administration degree in Accounting, graduating with Distinction at UTS in 2004. He received the ACCA prize for being judged the best graduating student in the Master of Business in Accounting.
As part of cross disciplinary teams, Paul has been funded for a number of notable projects, including Accounting for Value Chain Sustainability and Competitive Advantage, funded by the Australian Government Cotton Research and Development Corporation. In addition, the Leadership & Change for Energy Efficiency in Accounting & Management, funded by the NSW Office of Environment & Heritage, became a finalist in both the Green Gown Awards Australasia 2013 and Green Globe Awards 2013, receiving an award of highly commended for both in the categories of Learning and Teaching and Energy Efficiency respectively.
Paul is a member of the UTS Sustainability Working Party (since 2010). He has acted as an ad-hoc referee for the Journal of Business Ethics, Australasian Accounting Business and Finance Journal, and the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference.
Production Economics; Contracting Theory; Corporate governance; Sustainability Accounting and Reporting; Management Practices and their impact on firm performance.
Cost Management and Analysis; Management Planning and Control; Business Valuation and Financial Analysis; Business Analysis; Creative intelligence and Innovation.
Benn, S.H., Angus-Leppan, Edwards, M., Brown, P.J. & White, S. 2015, 'Changing Directions in Business Education: Knowledge Sharing for Sustainability', Building Sustainable Legacies, vol. 2015, no. 5, pp. 87-102.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Green, R., Randhawa, K. & Tan, H. 2014, 'Management practices of Australian manufacturing firms: why are some firms more innovative?', INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH, vol. 52, no. 21, pp. 6496-6517.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
Brown, P.J., Matolcsy, Z.P. & Wells, P.A. 2014, 'Group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives and firm performance: Some evidence based on archival data', Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 100-114.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
The objectives of this paper are (i) to provide evidence on the association between the choice of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives and firm characteristics, and (ii) to provide evidence on the economic consequences of adopting a particular compensation scheme. Our key findings based on 2517 firm years for the period of 20012010 show that on average, the choice between group or individual compensation schemes for senior executive compensation schemes are consistent with a firms economic characteristics and on average, the choice of compensation schemes does not affect subsequent firm performance. However, we find some evidence that firms that adopt compensation schemes inconsistent with their economic characteristics have lower subsequent performance. Our findings are robust to a number of sensitivity tests.
Agarwal, R., Green, R., Brown, P.J., Tan, H. & Randhawa, K. 2013, 'Determinants of quality management practices: An empirical study of New Zealand manufacturing firms', International Journal Of Production Economics, vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 130-145.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
A large body of research in recent years has resulted in the accumulation of knowledge about better (worse) management practices for manufacturing firms. Given the wide dissemination of knowledge about practices such as Lean Manufacturing, the importance of goal-setting, performance management systems, employee promotion and reward structures, it is unclear why some firms do not adopt these broad-based management practices. If there are management practices that have the potential to universally increase productivity of manufacturing firms, their lack of adoption by all firms in such markets remains a pertinent question. New Zealand is a small open economy facing competitive pressure from both its geographical distance from large markets and its minimum wage, which is above key international competitors. In this context we use a novel survey tool designed by Bloom and Van Reenen (2007) and McKinsey & Co. to construct a Management Practices Score (MPS) based on 18 management practices from 152 medium- and large-sized New Zealand manufacturing firms. We find that the MPS is positively associated with various firm productivity performance indicators, particularly profit per employee and firm sales, indicating that the MPS captures relevant information about management practices. We find that firm size, ownership structure, and the level of education among both managers and non-managers positively impacts management performance. Unlike the findings in earlier international research, we find that competition does not have an association with management practices. The findings here contribute to understanding why best management practices are not universally adopted by manufacturing firms.
Bailey, P., Brown, P.J., Potter, M. & Wells, P.A. 2008, 'A practical comparison of firm valuation models: cash flow, dividend and income', Journal of the Securities Institute of Australia, vol. Winter, no. 2, pp. 22-28.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Our research, based on a sample of listed Australian firms, indicates that the residual income model provides better estimates of firm value than two other commonly used models. It also provides advantages in that there is less need to forecast returns as far into the future and, with this model, a terminal value based upon a constant future return (or relatively low growth rates) can be used. This obviates the need to estimate an expected long-term growth rate, which is always problematic.
Brown, P.J. 2016, 'Calculation of environmentally sustainable residual income (eSRI) from IFRS financial statements: An extension of richard (2012)' in Bensadon, D. & Praquin, N. (eds), IFRS in a Global World International and Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Springer, Germany, pp. 141-157.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
This chapter presents a flexible approach to evaluating the extent to which an organisation has the capacity to be both environmentally and economically sustainable based on financial statements, namely Environmentally Sustainable Residual Income (eSRI). Problematically, despite International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) being a key information source for investors and other stakeholders, they give little consideration to natural and social capital in the construction of financial statements. eSRI builds on the approach to financial statement analysis advocated by Penman (Financial statement analysis and security valuation, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2012) and others, whereby users make adjustments to financial statements to derive more informative accounts. eSRI is defined as Net Profit less (i) a capital charge to evaluate economic sustainability, and (ii) environmental sustaining costs. Environmental sustaining costs are an estimate of a charge to replace or restore natural capital degraded in earning the income; essentially an opportunity cost generated by the organisation's activities. The calculation provides a representation (albeit with error) of how much environmental capital has been destroyed in the generation of income. A key advantage of eSRI is that it allows users to combine non-financial information disclosures (such as carbon emissions) with financial indicators in a theory informed manner. eSRI will be of interest to stakeholders with an interest in estimating the extent to which an organisation has the potential to be both economically and environmentally sustainable.
Agarwal, R., Bajada, C., Brown, P. & Green, R. 2015, 'Global Comparisons of Management Practices' in Wilkinson, A., Townsend, K. & Suder, G. (eds), Handbook of Research on Managing Managers, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK, pp. 327-351.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Agarwal, R., Bajada, C., Brown, P.J. & Green, R. 2015, 'Global Comparisons of Management Practices' in Wilkinson, A., Townsend, K. & Suder, G. (eds), Handbook of Research on Managing Managers, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK, pp. 327-350.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Agarwal, R., Bajada, C., Brown, P.J. & Green, R. 2014, 'Managerial Practices in a High Cost Manufacturing Environment: A Comparison with Australia and New Zealand' in Roos, G. & Kennedy, N. (eds), Global Perspectives on Achieving Success in High and Low Cost Operating Environments, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, USA, pp. 268-289.View/Download from: UTS OPUS or Publisher's site
This chapter explores the management strategies adopted by manufacturing firms operating in high versus low cost economies and investigates the reasons for differences in the management practice choices. The study reported in this chapter identifies a subset of countries that have either high or low labour costs, with USA, Sweden, and Japan being high, and India, China, and Brazil being low labour cost economies. The high labour cost manufacturing firms are found to have better management practices. In this chapter, the authors find that Australia and New Zealand manufacturing firms face relatively high labour cost but lag behind world best practice in management performance. The chapter concludes by highlighting the need for improvement in management capability for Australian and New Zealand manufacturing firms if they are to experience a reinvigoration of productivity, competitiveness, and long-term growth.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Bajada, C. & Brown, P.J. 2014, 'Management Practices in Medium-Sized Enterprises: Insights from Benchmarking Australian Manufacturing Firms' in Kotey, B., Mazzarol, T., Clark, D., Foley, D. & McKeown, T. (eds), Meeting the Globalisation Challenge, Tilde University Press, Australia, pp. 84-105.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Benn, S.H., Brown, P., Brown, D. & Crittenden, P. 2014, 'Networks of Practice for Energy Efficiency: a Role for Boundary Objects', Academy of Management Conference.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Brown, P.J., Agarwal, R., Hooper, M. & Pitsis, T.S. 2012, 'The association between management practices and employee affective state in Australian manufacturing firms', 35th Annual Congress European Accounting Association Programme, European Accounting Association (EAA), Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Brown, P.J., Matolcsy, Z.P. & Wells, P.A. 2010, 'Group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives and firm performance', British Accounting Association Annual Conference 2010, British Accounting Association Annual Conference 2010, British Accounting Association (BAA), Cardiff City Hall.
Bairstow, G.C., Brown, P.J. & Lanis, R. 2008, 'The impact incentive types on organisational performance in anglo cultures: a reply to Drake, Haka and Ravenscroft (1999)', 2008 AFAANZ/IAAER Conference website papers, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand Conference, AFAANZ, Sydney, Australia, pp. 1-48.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
Experimental research suffers from biases introduced by experiment design choices, such as the choice of alternative incentive and reward structures. We propose that framing rewards in a broader typology when researchers make decision about which reward structures to use in an experiment will minimise the potential for a false choice bias. To highlight this problem we replicate Drake, Haka and Ravenscrofts (1999) incentive structure experiment using a simpler, more theory driven design. Drake et al (1999) propose that organisational performance maybe be better if group compensation is given in preference to individualistic compensation, within the context of an information rich environment (using activity based costing). In particular, Drake et al (1999) apply an experimental research design to test that proposition using U.S. MBA students. Their results suggest that, ceteris paribus, given a group in preference to an individualistic incentive scheme, innovation, efficiency and profitability may improve. We argue that this conclusion is inconsistent with the incentive structure choices faced by managers, the societal values of the U.S., culture and agency theories in general. A possible explanation for Drake et als (1999) result is the use of a tournament incentive scheme as the basis for individual compensation. As such, we replicate the Drake et al (1999) experiment using Australian university students and an individual profit incentive scheme as the basis for individual compensation. Our results, in contrast to Drake et al. (1999), indicate that given an individual in preference to group incentive scheme, task performance improves in an information rich environment. This experiment highlights the false choice bias that reduces the generalizability of experimental research in general and highlights the value of propositions couched in a broader reward typology.
Lanis, R., Bairstow, G.C. & Brown, P.J. 2008, 'The impact of incentive types on organisational performance in anglo cultures: a reply to Drake, Haka and Ravenscroft (1999)', Program of American Accounting Association Annual Meeting, American Accounting Association Annual Meeting, American Accounting Association (AAA), Anaheim, USA.
Brown, P.J., Matolcsy, Z.P. & Wells, P.A. 2008, 'Economic determinants of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives', Program of American Accounting Association Annual Meeting, American Accounting Association Annual Meeting, American Accounting Association (AAA), Anaheim, USA.
Brown, P.J., Matolcsy, Z.P. & Wells, P.A. 2008, 'Performance consequences of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives', Technical Program of 2008 AFAANZ/IAAER Conference, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand Conference, AFAANZ, Sydney.
Brown, P.J., Matolcsy, Z.P. & Wells, P.A. 2007, 'Economic determinants of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives', 2007 AFAANZ Conference, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand Conference, AFAANZ, Gold Coast, Australia, pp. 1-66.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
This paper investigates firm characteristics associated with the choice of individual versus group compensation schemes for senior executives below the CEO level. We define individual compensation schemes where senior executives are compensated independently from other senior executives, where incentive compensation is linked to individual performance. In contrast, group compensation schemes are defined where senior executive compensation is jointly determined with other senior executives, with compensation linked to common incentives. This paper is motivated by limited evidence on compensation schemes for senior executives beyond the CEO, limiting critical evaluation of senior executives compensation. Preliminary evidence using Australian data provides support that individual compensation schemes are adopted by firms where individual senior executive inputs (effort) and outputs are separable and observable. We also find support that group compensation schemes are adopted where there are efficiencies from senior executive co-operation and interdependencies between executives, such as in integrated firms. The empirical evidence suggest that there are important differences between how firms set changes in total compensation as apposed to the mix of long and short term incentive components. The findings contribute to the ongoing debate surrounding the determination of appropriate corporate governance mechanisms in the presence of agency conflicts, and especially executive compensation schemes.
Wilkinson, S.J., Brown, P. & Ghosh, S. Horticulture Innovation Australia 2017, Expanding The Living Architecture In Australia, Expanding The Living Architecture In Australia, no. 3, pp. 1-54, Sydney Australia.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
This final report sets out the findings of the business case analysis of whether a voluntary or mandatory approach to green roofs and walls would work best in Australia It uses Sydney and Melbourne as examples to model data.
Wilkinson, S.J., ghosh, S., Pelleri, N., Brown, P. & Soco, S. Horticulture Innovation Australia 2017, Green walls and roofs: A mandatory or voluntary approach for Australia? Case Studies., Green walls and roofs: A mandatory or voluntary approach for Australia? Case Studies., no. 2, pp. 1-50, Sydney Australia.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
This report comprises cases studies of 5 international cities to ascertain the issues around delivery of green walls and green roofs. It analyses whether mandatory or voluntary approaches have been adopted and the amounts of GRGW delivered as a result.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Bajada, C. & Shashnov, M. Hargraves Institute and Food and Innovation Australia Ltd (FIAL) 2015, Innovation Capability and the Food Beverage and agri-business sectors.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
A review by University of Technology Sydney UTS on F&B companies recommends that the greatest opportunities to lift innovation culture, productivity and competitiveness lie in improving management practices and workforce skills as well as encouraging collaboration between MNCs and SMEs.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Randhawa, K. & Agarwal, N. Department of Qld Health 2011, Management Matters in Queensland Hospitals - Findings from the Queensland Health Management Practices Research Project - Background Report, pp. 1-110, Brisbane.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Randhawa, K. & Agarwal, N. Department of Qld health 2011, Management Matters in Queensland Hospitals - Findings from the Queensland Health Management Practices Research Project - Final Report, pp. 1-62, Brisbane.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Tan, H. & Randhawa, K. Ministry of Economic Development, New Zealand 2010, Management Matters - How does manufacturing measure up?, pp. 1-51, Wellington.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
This paper benchmarks management practices in New Zealand manufacturing firms against the global best. The project was undertaken by a research team from the University of Technology Sydney and is part of a world-wide study led by the London School of Economics and McKinsey & Co. The findings suggest that while some of New Zealandâs firms are as good as any in the world, there is a substantial tail of firms that are mediocre, especially in their approach to people management. This is a key differentiating factor between New Zealand and better performing, more innovative countries, and it echoes similar recent findings for Australian manufacturers. The research findings also suggest that there is a link between the quality of management scored across 18 dimensions of people, performance and operations and enterprise productivity. This study suggests that New Zealand manufacturing firms need to improve the management performance to build longer-term competitive advantage. It reveals that some management practices represent opportunities for improvement for these manufacturing firms. The study demonstrates that a costeffective way of improving the productivity performance of New Zealand firms is to promote a transformation in the calibre of the management and leadership of its organisations. This is the key to a more innovative, dynamic and sustainable economy into the future.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Brown, P.J., Tan, H. & Randhawa, K. 2010, Management Matters - How does manufacturing measure up?- Background Report for the Ministry of Economic Development (MED), New Zealand, pp. 1-125, Med Nzl.
Background Report under contract research
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Van, R.J., Bloom, N., mathews, J., Boedker, C., Sampson, D., Gollan, P., Toner, P., Tan, H. & Brown, P.J. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science and Research 2009, Management Matters in Australia: Just how productive are we?, pp. 1-42, Canberra, Australia.View/Download from: UTS OPUS
This unique research project for the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research benchmarks management practices in Australian manufacturing firms against the global best. The project was undertaken by a research team from the University of Technology Sydney, Macquarie Graduate School of Management and the Society of Knowledge Economics, and is part of a world-wide study led by the London School of Economics, Stanford University and McKinsey & Co. The findings suggest that while some of our firms are as good as any in the world, we still have a substantial `tail of firms that are mediocre, especially in their approach to people management. This is a key differentiating factor between Australia and better performing, more innovative countries.
Green, R., Agarwal, R., Tan, H., Brown, P.J. & Randhawa, K. DIISR 2009, Management Matters -Just how productive are we?- Background Report for the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR) on manufacturing firms, pp. 1-138, Canberra.
Management Matters â Just how productive are we?â Background Report for the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR) on manufacturing firms.
Brown, P.J. 2011, 'Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Poverty: A Joint Solution'.
Brown, P.J. 2006, 'Economic determinants of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives (Acct paper #85)', School of Accounting Working Paper Series.
Brown, P.J. 2006, 'Economic determinants of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives (Acct paper #90)', School of Accounting Working Paper Series.
Brown, P.J. 2006, 'Performance consequences of group versus individual compensation schemes for senior executives (Acct paper #91)', School of Accounting Working Paper Series.