Financial Reporting in the XBRL Age_FERF

8/12/2019 Financial Reporting in the XBRL Age_FERF

1/21

Financial Reporting in the XBRL Age:A Step-by-Step XBRL Implementation


2/21

Executive Report October 2005


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Purpose and Introduction 2

XBRLs Adoption Evolution 3

External Reporting and XBRL 4

Internal Reporting and XBRL 7

Taking XBRL to the Next Level 8

Whats in a Number? The Specifics of XBRL 8An XBRL Item 9XBRL Financial Reporting Taxonomies Architecture 10

An XBRL Implementation; Step by Step Project Plan 12Step 1-Identify a Team: Accountant and XML Developer 13

Step 2-Assess Scope of Reporting and Determine Taxonomy 13Step 3-Compare and Map 10-K/10-Q to Taxonomies 14Step 4-Extend the Taxonomy as Necessary 15Step 5-Create an Instance Document and Validate Calculations 16Step 6-Review and Validate Instance Document 16Step 7-Publish the Instance Documents and Taxonomy 17

Conclusion 18

About the Authors, CFIT and FERF 19


3/21

2

Executive Report October 2005


PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explain how theeXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) can beused to improve internal and external financial reportingand where XBRL is in its adoption evolution. To moveXBRL to broad adoption, participation and input fromfinance executives in every part of the financial reportingchain and every industry is required. For financialstatement preparers, one way to participate is throughthe Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC)

voluntary XBRL filing program. This report concludeswith a step-by-step approach for first-timeimplementation of the SECs program.

Introduction

I used to think that cyberspace was 50 years away. What I thought was 50 yearsaway, was only 10 years away. And what I thought was 10 years away... it was

already here. I just wasn't aware of it yet.

Bruce Sterling, science fiction author

Just as cyberspace crept up on Mr. Sterling, eXtensible Business ReportingLanguage (XBRL) is creeping up on the world of finance. It is not 10 years away.Instead, it has arrived, unbeknownst to many financial executives, and it willchange the way financial information is reported in the U.S. and around theworld. Because XBRL is still in the early adoption phase, financial executiveshave the chance to shape the future by participating in XBRLs developmentnow.

XBRL is not technology, but a set of standards, called taxonomies, built using theeXtensible Markup Language (XML). Like accounting standards that directfinancial executives how to account for and report business transactions andfinancial information, XBRL directs executives how to report financial informationin the electronic age so that all constituents accessing the data understand theinformation they are getting. It does not replace or affect the system ofaccounting standards, it enables computer translation of financial information that


4/21

3

can be interpreted by any XBRL enabled user, essentially bar coding forfinancial information.

Financial executives face constant pressure to build a finance function that addsvalue by providing meaningful information to enable good business decisions. To

accomplish this goal, finance personnel must spend less time keying data andmore time analyzing it. Most financial analysis still uses spreadsheet programsinto which the relevant financial information must be keyed. XBRL has thepotential to make re-keying of data an activity of the past.

In addition to internal reporting pressures, external reporting pressures havebeen at the top of the agenda over the last several years. Legislation like theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and other laws aimed at eliminating conflicts ofinterest in the investment analyst industry, are forcing companies to change howand what they report to investors.

With regulatory and internal pressures forcing changes to the existing financialreporting models, XBRL is emerging as an answer in the U.S. and around theglobe. XBRL is a collaborative standard that requires input from industries andusers of financial statements. Participation in the SECs voluntary filing programis a possible introduction for those not familiar with the standard and provides theopportunity to use and improve the standards.

For those executives willing to commit time to XBRL, the impact to businessreporting improvements could be great. External and internal reporting withXBRL allows for easier access by a wider range of stakeholders. Participation inXBRL today affords the rare opportunity to shape the future by working withsoftware vendors, XBRL International, the consortium of approximately 300companies and agencies worldwide that develop the standards, analysts andother stakeholders who are actively involved in the next stage in XBRLdevelopment.

XBRLs Adoption EvolutionIn spite of attempts over the last several years to educate the financialcommunity, according to a 2005 survey by Computer Sciences Corporation andFinancial Executives Research Foundation, over 70% of financial executiveshave little or no knowledge about the standard. Like any new standard ortechnology, XBRL must pass through the various stages of an adoption curve.The first stage is characterized by small groups of users defined as enthusiastsand visionaries. Critical mass is achieved in the next stage, characterized byusers defined as pragmatists.1

XBRL is still in the early stages of the adoption curve. XBRL International, theconsortium that develops the standards, began work in 1998 and continues todayto expand the standards and taxonomies to meet the needs of businesses

1Crossing the Chasm by Geoffrey A. Moore 1991


5/21

4

worldwide. The U.S. jurisdiction of XBRL, with over 300 organization members,including Financial Executives International (FEI) and the American Institute ofCertified Public Accountants (AICPA), has released approved standards that canbe used by over 90% of US companies. Software companies are developingprogressively better XBRL products and are integrating XBRL into existing

products, but many current programs lack the ease of use necessary to bringXBRL into mainstream adoption. Several key events over the past few yearshave provided the impetus to bring XBRL alongthe enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the shakeup in the investment analyst industry that ischanging how and which companies are analyzed for investors.

External Reporting and XBRL Many investors consider investment analyst coverage essential for makinginformed decisions regarding their portfolio, but the analyst industry hasundergone significant changes in the past several years. In 2002, the SEC and

the New York Attorney General began separate proceedings to eliminateconflicts of interest in the investment analyst industry. The results have createdsignificant changes in the way analysis is performed, and has added to the costof producing it. Two cost reduction measures taken by the industry wereexpanded use of data aggregators for data collection and a reduction in thenumber of companies covered.

Data aggregators, an industry developed around the re-keying of public companyfinancial information and making the data available to third party users, have asignificant impact on the financial reporting chain, which begins with the companyand ends with the investor. The company's financial executives prepare andsubmit quarterly and annual financial reports, and other regulatory disclosures, tothe SEC. Once submitted, the SEC makes the information publicly available. Theavailable information is obtained by data aggregators that tag data according totheir own standards, and then sell the data to investment analysts. Investmentanalysts prepare their reports with this data and then provide the reports toinvestors.

Data aggregators use a software program called a parsing tool that automaticallytags financial information based upon parameters set up in the software. Forstandard items, parsing tools provide efficient and effective information.However, for non-standard items-- which are often critical to how investors view acompanys resultsthe data aggregator must decide on classification. Theirclassifications may not represent what the company had originally intended byproviding the detail.

With XBRL, the role of data aggregators may be affected because informationreceived and stored by the SEC and provided to other sources is tagged by thecompany. If the analyst is using an-XBRL enabled software program, they can


6/21

5

receive tagged data from the companys filings with the SEC and analyze asneeded.

Another key piece of the puzzle that is often missed using aggregator informationis the detailed footnote information." The average parsing tool used by

aggregators has about 300 standard elements, while the average set of financialstatements and notes has about 3,000," said Mike Willis, Partner withPricewaterhouseCoopers LLC.

With XBRL, while one company may classify items differently than anothercompany, an analyst can easily compare the two based on common tagging. Forexample, work in process inventory may be on the face of the balance sheet, ordisclosed in the footnotes, depending on the company. Using XBRL, it would betagged as work in process inventory, regardless of where it is reported. XBRLcreates more consistency among users of financial information, no matter wherethey retrieve their data.

For financial executives at small and medium sized public entities (SMEs), thecurrent external reporting structure creates other problems. Instead of having amessage delivered to investors, coverage may currently be nonexistent. Costcutting measures in the industry have reduced the number of companies coveredby some Wall Street firms as much as 18% from 2000 to 2003. Small businessexecutives argue that no coverage, translates into a permanent discount on thestock price. Many analysts agree with this negative outcome.

The number of companies under (investment analyst) coverage shrunk as anunintended consequence of the Global Research Settlement between the NewYork Attorney General, the SEC, and some eleven investment banks.2 Thesmaller public companies with less liquidity were the worst hit in the almostimmediate reduction of coverage, a kind of investment class cleansing, creatinghundreds, if not thousands, of research orphans, writes Gayle Essary,managing director of Investrend Research, in a 2005 comment letter to the SEC.

Dwindling coverage by Wall Street firms in 2003 versus 2000 is captured inFigure 1:

2On April 28, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the National Association ofSecurities Dealers (NASD), the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), New York State AttorneyGeneral Eliot Spitzer and other state regulators announced a final $1.4 billion settlementagreement reached with 10 Wall Street firms in their investigation into Wall Street conflicts ofinterest. Along with the monetary settlement, the firms agreed to make significant structuralchanges designed to insulate their research departments from their investment bankingdepartments.


7/21

6

Figure 1.Coverage Shrinks on Wall Street

Public Companies Covered

Firm 2000 2003

Merrill Lynch 3,500 2,469 CSFB 3,077 2,373 Smith Barney 3,000 2,300 J.P. Morgan Chase 2,400 2,260 Goldman Sachs 2,315 1,950 Morgan Stanley 2,150 1,925 Lehman Brothers 1,650 1,605

Source: The Wall Street Journal

Such research orphans often believe that their stock price is undervalued

according to their financial executives. If you talk to CEOs at most smallcompanies, they invariably claim their companys stock price has a sort ofpermanent discount due to lack of analyst coverage. Most small companies,even more than they want a higher stock price, want more liquidity in their stock,says David Harper, editor-in-chief of the monthly newsletter Investopedia Advisorand investment analyst for Harbinger Research.

The process of research is expensive though. Prior to the Global ResearchSettlement, the standard practice was investment banks, by far the largestemployer of investment analysts, bundled research with profitable services likeunderwriting and trading. Now that the bundled model is no longer acceptable,

the business community is trying to figure out who will pay for pricey researchservices, the company or the investor. The dilemma is lessened by XBRLbecause the technology makes the process of analyzing financial informationmore accurate, more efficient and less expensive.

Turning to the Small Market Enterprise space of inefficient exchanges like Over-the-Counter (OTC) Bulletin Board (BB), I believe the (XBRL) cost savings foranalysts that venture into this arena would be immense. For example, theMicrosoft Office Tool for XBRL Prototype is a demonstration of how you caneasily create or analyze XBRL documents directly from within Microsoft OfficeExcel 2003. For investment analysts, this prototype is a useful tool to quickly

analyze data without the need to reenter or manipulate data, explains Kipley J.Lytel, Senior Partner with Montecito Capital Management, a Santa Barbara, CAbased financial management firm, and senior analyst for Investrend Research.

Mr. Harper explains, When I write-up a company report, crunching numbers andgenerating graphs occupies at least 50% of my time. What is so compellingabout XBRL is that it can automate, in real-time, much of that number crunching.Therefore, I expect to reduce the time it takes to analyze a company by about


8/21

7

50% just by using XBRL-enabled tools. And that is before we talk about some ofthe long-term potential to add value with the automatic error-checking and quasi-intelligence.

Internal Reporting and XBRL

While external transparency of financial information is valuable to many, there isalso significant potential to use XBRL internally. XBRL can become a valuableelement in complying with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act-specifically, managementassessment of internal controls (Section 404) and real-time reportingrequirements of Section 409, says Mr. Lytel.

Companies are spending a large amount of money to certify the effectiveness oftheir internal controls and have begun looking for efficiencies that will provideincreased assurance at a lower cost. The next generation of internal control toolswill easily connect through XBRL into the business and financial systems of acompany, creating an ability to monitor the effectiveness of internal controls

through tight linkage of the control system to the business/accounting systems.

Figure 2.The future of integration across business and accounting systems.

An example of how XBRL can seamlessly incorporate the control system with thefinancial system is when a particular control is over-ridden. An approval ornotification can be routed to the appropriate manager or executive. If a controlactivity has deficiencies that need correction or additional controls to mitigate


9/21


10/21

9

the rows line item description, number or value and columns, the period orduration contexts) when a financial statement is submitted.

Today when analysts want to get at the data, they interpret the line items and re-key the data. XBRL allows each of the line items, their values and the specific

columnar definitions to be represented as XML data so that software can easilyanalyze. This is accomplished through the effort of tagging a document withXBRL tags.

An XBRL Item-For financial reporting, the atomic level of reporting is an element, whereby eachelement has a single relationship to an accounting concept. In XBRL, thatelement is represented by an XBRL item.

Labels For every concept within the XBRL taxonomy, there are uniquestandard labels. An example of a standard label is Contingencies-Litigation.

References References are the link to authoritative literature supporting theconcept and related accounting reference where it is defined. For example, thereference for Contingencies-Litigation isFASB Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) 5,http://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas5.pdf, 2004-08-01

PresentationPresentation

Comptant et ComptantEquivalents

Validation

Standardization

CalculationCash = Currency +

DepositsFormulas

Cash 0

ContextsUS $

FY2004Budgeted

LabelcashCashEquivalentsAndShortTermInvestments

ReferencesGAAP I.2.(a)Instructions

Ad Hoc disclosures

PresentationCash & Cash Equivalents

XBRLItem

XBRLItem
http://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas5.pdfhttp://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas5.pdfhttp://www.fasb.org/pdf/fas5.pdf


11/21

10

Presentation Presentation is the order of elements, which makes it easy forusers to find specific content within the XBRL taxonomy.

Calculation The calculation defines how an element relates to another elementin terms of calculations. (I.e. Net Revenue less Cost of Goods Sold equals Gross

Margin).

Context or Definition Indicates for each element whether it is a special case ofsome other defined concept.

Formulas Formula supports company-specific calculations or business rules.

XBRL Financial Reporting Taxonomies Architecture-

In order for XBRL to span the breadth of industries and financial reporting needsof U.S. business, a working group in the U.S. jurisdiction of XBRL International,

called the Domain Working Group, has focused on representing U.S. GAAP inXBRL taxonomies. To provide guidance to users for building valid taxonomiesand extensions, that group also authored the Financial Reporting TaxonomiesArchitecture (FRTA). The result of these combined efforts was a categorized setof taxonomies that, used in combination, express complete financial reports ofboth public and private companies across many industry sectors.

There are three categorizations of taxonomies in the framework: Stand Alone Add-ons. The stand alone add-ons are optional taxonomies

that can be used by preparers to include in tagged financial statementfilings. Common terms are foundational building blocks that enable

industry specific taxonomies. These taxonomies include elements that arecommon, which ease maintenance and enable comparability acrosssimilar industries.

Industry-specific. Industry specific taxonomies include the specializedconcepts associated with a specific industry. Companies filing theirfinancial statements in XBRL will select an industry specific taxonomy as astarting point, prior to any company specific extensions.

Company Extensions. These are elements specific to a company notfound in the stand alone or industry specific taxonomies.


12/21

11

Common

Taxonomies for

Financial

Reporting

Industry Specific

Taxonomies

Company

Specific

Taxonomies

Industry

Specific

Management

Report

(usfr-ar)

SEC Certification

(usfr-sec-cert)

Acc ountant s

Report(usfr-ar)

MD&A

(usfr-mda)

Company

Extensions

Commercial &

Industrial(us-gaap-ci)

Primary Terms

(usfr pt)

Instance

Document

Global Common

Document(int-gcd)

Stand Alone

Add-ons

Common Terms

Figure 3. XBRL taxonomies: A collection of extensible, modularized taxonomies.

The output of tagging a companys financial statements in XBRL is an instance

document, an XML file type. An instance document is readable by softwareprograms; they require access to the taxonomies used above. In fact, theinstance document declares the Internet or Web locations (references) where theprogram can access the specific taxonomies used in the instance document.Therefore, a company filing in XBRL will need to make available their specifictaxonomies if modified or extended.


13/21


14/21

13

Step 1- Identify a team: Accountant and XML DeveloperTwo functional skill sets are required to begin the project:

An accountant who is proficient in supporting technical accounting

requirements to:o Match GAAP concepts used in the financial statements to

supporting elements in the XBRL taxonomy,o Identify gaps in financial statements and define new elements if

necessary,o Assist in quality assurance process to ensure correct tags are

applied to financial statement data. A developer with a good working understanding of XML to:

o Evaluate, install and test appropriate XBRL tools, to tag thefinancial statements and to produce a file called the instancedocument,

o

Create company-specific taxonomy extensions,o Ensure that valid XML and XBRL are created, including

identification of predictable errors. An example of a predictableerror is a calculation error based on differences in a companysfinancial statements and those expected in the XBRL taxonomy.

Step 2- Assess Scope of Reporting and Determine Taxonomy

The SECs final rule allows for latitude in the level of detail a company can decideto provide in XBRL. The first decision a project team must make is which SECform to initiate their participation in the filing program (10-Q, 10-K, etc.).Obviously, the form must coincide with project timing. Once the form is decided,

the team must assess and determine the level of detail to tag and furnish withfiled financial statements. With the recent specification, there are taxonomiesavailable for filing the financial statements, the SEC certification, themanagement report, the accountants report and the Management Discussionand Analysis.

The SEC requires filers to use the appropriate version of a standard taxonomy,supplemented with extension taxonomies as specified by the EDGAR FilerManual. Currently, there are four extension taxonomies in the EDGAR FilerManual including,

Commercial and Industrial

Banking and Savings InstitutionsInsuranceInvestment Companies.

However, the Commercial and Industrial Taxonomy (GAAP C&I) will cover amajority of U.S. public companies. Some companies may not be able toparticipate in the voluntary filing program due to lack of specialized taxonomiesrequired for their respective industries (Oil & Gas, for example).


15/21

14

Registrants choosing to file in XBRL are still required to submit their filing inASCII or HTML. The XBRL filing does not replace the current filing method.Volunteers can choose to file only a portion of their filing in XBRL according tothe SEC rules on Mandatory Content and Optional Content. The following is an

excerpt from the SEC ruling:

Mandatory Content consists of a complete set of information for all periods presentedin the corresponding official EDGAR filing from one or more of the followingcategories (as filed in the corresponding official EDGAR filing):

the complete set of financial statements (the only exceptions are that notes tothe financial statements and schedules related to the financial statementsmay be omitted unless the volunteer is a registered management investmentcompany, in which case it must include Schedule I Investments inSecurities of Unaffiliated Issuers);

earnings information set forth in Form 6-K or Items 2.02 or 8.01 of Form 8-K(whether contained in the body of the Form 8-K or Form 6-K or in an exhibit,

and whether filed or furnished); or financial highlights or condensed financial information (if the volunteer is a

registered management investment company).

Optional Content can consist only of a complete set of information that is: for all periods presented in the corresponding official EDGAR filing; related to financial information in the corresponding official EDGAR filing that

is simultaneously submitted as Mandatory Content; and from one or more of the following categories (as filed in the corresponding

official EDGAR filing):o audit opinions;o interim review reports;o reports of management on the financial statements;o certifications; oro Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and

Results of Operations (MD&A), Managements Discussion andAnalysis or Plan of Operation, Operating and Financial Review andProspects or Managements Discussion of Fund Performance(MDFP).

Step 3- Compare and Map 10-K/10-Q to Taxonomies

The project team will review the original filing item-by-item, starting with thefinancial statements and then working through notes and managementsdiscussion and analysis. The project team can use the presentation taxonomy

in the industry taxonomy most closely aligned with their company. Theorganization of the presentation taxonomy is most familiar to financial executivesbecause it is organized by financial statement line. The presentation taxonomyfor commercial and industrial business is located at: www.xbrl.org/. Ataxonomyediting tool or an instance document authoring tool are both appropriate forcompleting this step.
http://www.xbrl.org/http://www.xbrl.org/http://www.xbrl.org/


16/21

15

Carefully document which XBRL elements refer to which line items, notingexceptions, gaps, and questions. Assessing the content of the XBRL taxonomy,such as US GAAP C&I requires reviewing all elements in the taxonomy, how thepresentation language reads, calculations, and definitions, including theauthoritative references. Assessing, mapping and identifying gaps are

prerequisite activities to extending the primary taxonomies.

Step 4- Extend the Taxonomy As Necessary

Once you have compared your 10-K or 10-Q to the presentation taxonomy andhave determined that the taxonomy does need to be extended, a softwareprogram to extend the taxonomies is required. While the taxonomy can be editedand extended using a number of XML editing tools, we recommend using anevaluation copy of an available XBRL-specific tool to determine which are mostusable and best fit your needs. Currently, there are a number of software choicesthat have varying degrees of functionality and ability to extend taxonomies.

Some questions to consider: Does the presentation of the XBRL element match what my company calls

the item? If not, does this require just a modification of the label or is this a new

item? Here is where the technical accountant must recognize how thecompany reports and map to XBRL element.

Do my notes and MD&A require extensions to the taxonomies? What parts of my financial reporting require additional context definitions

(see Creating an Instance Document below)? For example, usingsegments as part of contexts requires creating the specific extensions todescribe your companies segments (business units, products, and so

forth). To what extent does a new element require calculation modifications?

Step 5- Create an Instance Document and Validate Calculations

Creating an instance document requires authoring software, a tool that allowsthe user to either associate relevant data to the specific taxonomy elements usedin the companys financial statements, or one that allows you to mark-up or taganother file format (such as Microsoft Word or Excel) with XBRL taxonomyelements. The latter focuses on the user scenario in which the primary financialstatements are authored or assembled in Word or Excel.

For many companies, working in Word and Excel likely matches the businessprocess of internal and external reporting. Both application types should includethe feature of exporting the financial reporting data to XML the specificorganization and structure to the XML document is the instance document.

Other considerations on software selection include:


17/21


18/21


19/21

18

earlier, it should amend the filing to which the XBRL-Related Documentsare attached as an exhibit.

For more details on the XBRL submission process, you should refer to theEDGAR filing manual, Appendix L

(http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals810.htm). If you work with a financialpublisher, then they will need this reference.

ConclusionSupport for XBRL continues to grow nationally and internationally. Projects likethe SECs Voluntary Filing program and the Federal Deposit InsuranceCorporations (FDIC) project to use XBRL for bank call report filings, due forlaunch on October 1, 2005, have led U.S. financial executives to take notice andget involved. Executives abroad face the same pressure as governmentagencies jump onto the bandwagon. In the United Kingdom, plans wereannounced to enable filing of Corporation Tax using XBRL in 2006. Japan'sFinancial Services Agency also said it will introduce the use of XBRL for financialstatements by fiscal 2008.3

A unique opportunity is available for financial executives who want to take part inshaping XBRL. By understanding and implementing XBRL today, participantsprovide valuable feedback to XBRL International for building the standards, aswell as to software vendors for developing products that make implementationmore efficient. Today we are on the verge of a new era in financial reporting thatwill make the process more efficient.

3Latest News About XBRL, XBRL.org
http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals810.htmhttp://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals810.htm


20/21

19

About the AuthorsThis report was authored by Taylor Hawes and Tiffany McCann. Mr. Hawes is chair ofFEIs Committee on Finance and Information Technology (CFIT), and Controller-GlobalPlatforms & Operations at Microsoft Corporation. Ms. McCann is a freelance writer whofollows emerging technologies in finance and accounting.The authors would like to thank CFIT & Michael Ohata, Director of Reporting Standards

at Microsoft Corporation, for their review and input.

About FEIs Committee on Finance and Informat ion TechnologyFEIs Committee on Finance and Information Technology (CFIT) addresses the

needs and interests of financial executives in the area of e-business technology andinformation management. This includes, but is not limited to, the development andapplication of information technology, systems and other methodologies affecting themanagement of business functions and interactions with customers, suppliers, andinvestors. The general function of CFIT encompasses research, studies or surveys, theannual FEI Technology Forum and the dissemination of knowledge.

CFIT monitors information, trends, and developments from the perspective of thefinancial executive as: a member of management interested in the use of information for

performance analysis and decision support and for e-business; the provider auditor forcontrols, security and reliability of information; and the administrator responsible forproviding, processing and disseminating information.

CFIT has the responsibility to: represent the views, attitudes and opinions of theFEI membership; maintain high standards of professional integrity and technicalcompetence; and inform and stimulate the membership interests in the use andmanagement of technology in finance and business functions.

About Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc.Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc. (FERF) is the non-profit 501(c)(3)

research affiliate of FEI. FERF researchers identify key financial issues and develop impartial,timely research reports for FEI members and non- members alike, in a variety of publicationformats. FERF relies primarily on voluntary tax-deductible contributions from corporations andindividuals.

The views set forth in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarilyrepresent those of the FERF Board as a whole, individual trustees, employees, or the membersof the Research Advisory Council. FERF shall be held harmless against any claims, demands,suits, damages, injuries, costs, or expenses of any kind or nature whatsoever except suchliabilities as may result solely from misconduct or improper performance by the FERF or any of itsrepresentatives.Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc. http://www.ferf.org200 Campus DriveFlorham Park, New Jersey 07932

Copyright 2005 by Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc.All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means

without written permission from the publisher.International Standard Book Number 1-933130-17-2Printed in the United States of AmericaFirst PrintingAuthorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use ofspecific clients, is granted by Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc. provided that anappropriate fee is paid to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923.Fee inquiries can be directed to Copyright Clearance Center at 978-750-8400. For furtherinformation please check Copyright Clearance Center online at http://www.copyright.com.
http://www.ferf.org/http://www.ferf.org/http://www.copyright.com/http://www.copyright.com/http://www.copyright.com/http://www.ferf.org/


21/21