Critical analysis of management accounting in Brazil from the viewpoint of stricto sensu postgraduate professors of the area

This work presents a critical analysis of management accounting in Brazil, from the perception of professors from the management area of stricto-sensu postgraduate programs in accounting. The central goal was to identify the view of these professors on management accounting. The research, which is of the empirical-analytical and descriptive type, concentrated on identifying and analyzing the following elements: (i) profile of faculty members; (ii) differentiation between financial and management accounting; (iii) priorities of management accounting; and (iv) significance of the themes treated by management accounting. The empirical-methodological analysis was used through a survey, conducted with the application of semi-open questionnaire with the faculty members indicated by the coordinators of Postgraduate programs. As a conclusion, a significant convergence was found between the perception of the faculty members and the literature, especially in connection with the user, focus of analysis and regulating bodies, however, a few points were reasonably out of tune (other users, principles and significant themes).

, Vitória, Vol. 6, No 3, Art. 4, p. 267-283, Sep -Dec 2009 www.bbronline.com.brdifficulties in obtaining such information.However, differently from the financial, management accounting, because it is not normative, can be understood in several ways, depending on the view of the author.Frezatti et al. (2007)  Process of identification, measurement, accumulation, analysis, preparation, interpretation and communication of financial information used by managers to plan, assess and control within the organization to ensure appropriate use and accountability of its resources.

Louderback et al. (2000)
Provide information to support the needs of internal managers of the organization.

Anthony and Welsch (1981)
Supply useful information to managers, who are persons within the organization.

Hansen and Mowen (1997)
Identify, collect, measure, classify and report information that is useful to managers in planning, control and the decision process.

Horngren, Foster above Datar (2000)
Measure and report the financial and non financial information which help managers to take decisions, to achieve the objectives of the organization.

Horngren, Sundem and Stratton (2004)
Process of identification, measurement, accumulation, analysis, preparation, interpretation and communication of information that assist the managers to reach organizational objectives.Chart 1: Comparison of available evaluations Source: Frezatti et al. (2007, p. 12) The main points in common in terms of concepts/objectives are: Composition of the process: The stages of the process that involves management accounting are similar, some more comprehensive and detailed, and include: identification, measurement, accumulation, analysis, preparation, interpretation and communication of information.
Information to users: In relation to the way of referencing to which the information are intended, they are both directed to users more comprehensively (internal users) and more specifically, in terms or the decision process (managers).Generally speaking, the consequences of this separation are more of a semantic order.
Support to decision process: The description of the stages of the process (plan, assess and control) coexists with more generic terms (support the needs of managers or useful information, which help managers to achieve organizational objectives).
Connection with objectives of the entity: it can be described as " [...] help managers to reach their organizational objectives."(Horngren et al., 2004, p. 4).

PRINCIPAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING
The complexity inherent to management accounting begins by the way how it can be treated.To some researchers, it does not present significant differences in relation to financial accounting and, for others, it can constitute something totally different.Its characterization, therefore, must occur by elements that the literature presents as distinct.In this research, one has chosen to use a comparative perspective of elements that permit to understand its existence from differences in relation to financial accounting.Observing the differences, people can decide if the management accounting is necessary and if the cost/benefit justifies it.Several authors describe differences among financial and management accounting, according to the table below.

Sources
Elements of differentiation with financial accounting Anderson, Needles and Cadwell (1989) 1.Primary users of information 2.Types of accounting systems 3.Restrictions of definitions 4.Measurement units 5.Focus of the analysis 6.Frequency of reports 7.Degree of reliability of information generated Louderback et al. (2000) 1. Different audiences (internal and external to the company) 2. Focus of classification (controllability, behavior and responsibility in the case of management accounting) 3. Sources of information (in the event of management, not only financial) 4.Specific user versus generalized user 5.Focus on past information and focus on information that permits to understand, plan and predict the future Anthony and Welsch (1981) 1. Structure: financial accounting 2. Principles: GAAP versus the three principles 3.Includes non monetary information 4.Different temporal foci: past and future 5.Frequency of reports 6.Different foci on precision 7.End in itself or not Hansen and Mowen (1997) 1.Specific x general rules Horngren, Foster and Datar (2000) 1. Guiding principles 2. Different emphases on past and future 3.Different interests on behavior Horngren, Sundem and Stratton (2004) 1.Primary users 2.Freedom of choice 3.Behavioral implications 4.Time focus 5.Time horizon 6.Reports 7. Outline of activities Chart 2: Principal differences between financial and management accounting Source: Frezatti et al. (2007, p. 13) The differentiation aspects were considered in the preparation of questions to identify the peculiarities of each accounting.As it was to be expected, each author discusses the theme in his peculiar way.The first effort consisted in agglutinating the approaches, from the congruence of elements which correspond to the points of the research analysis.Generally speaking, the most emphasized differences were (Frezatti et al., 2007):  Primary users of informationemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989), Louderback et al. (2000) and Horngren et al. (2004).In the case of financial accounting, one is dealing with persons and entities external to the entity, while, in management accounting, it is the various hierarchical levels and even of functional internal areas constituted in the users.
 Types of accounting systemsemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989), Louderback et al. (2000) and Anthony and Welsch (1981).In the case of financial accounting, the approach of the double matches is compulsory, while, in management accounting, there may be adjustments without compensation.In the latter, different information systems from those used in financial accounting and even non-monetary information can be used.
 Freedom of choiceemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989), Anthony and Welsch (1981), Hansen and Mowen (1997), Horngren et al. (2000) and Horngren et al. (2004).Financial accounting has as a characteristic compulsory adherence to accounting principles.In management accounting, even though it is fundamental that they are defined, there may not be formalized criteria.
 Measurement unitsemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989) and Anthony and Welsch (1981).In terms of measurement unit, the currency used in financial account is the local currency of the country.In turn, in management accounting, any currency may be used and may consider, in fact, non-monetary measurement units, such as labor hours, kilos, liters, etc.
 Focus of analysisemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989), Louderback et al. (2000), Anthony and Welsch (1981), Horngren et al. (2000) and Horngren et al. (2004).This requirement can be understood in different ways.It can take into account the perspective of detailing that the reports require or even the past or future dimension intended.One can have a different behavioral perspective in relation to a given area or group of managers.
 Frequency of issuance of statements to usersemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989), Anthony and Welsch (1981) and Horngren et al. (2004).The temporal question may affect the theme both for the period of the scope and by the frequency of reports.
 Degree of reliabilityemphasized by Anderson et al. (1989) and Anthony and Welsch (1981).The reliability is linked to the objectivity and possibility of verification, materializing by some type of audit in financial accounting.In management accounting, in normal conditions, in function of the subjectivity of certain numbers, this possibility of audit proves different.
 Existence of regulating bodies or definers of rules.Because financial accounting is normative, bodies can be found, connected or not to governmental authorities, which define or recommend rules and principles for the preparation of statements.In other cases, these same norms are used by management accounting not by imposition but by convenience.
 Legal requirement of specialized professional.In some countries, the responsibility and authority to prepare the financial accounting statements are limited to professionals graduated in accounting and registered in their class entities.In management accounting, on the other hand, this obligation cannot be the standard.

DESIGN OF FIELD RESEARCH
The research was characterized as empirical-analytical, of the descriptive type and proposes, as a result, to describe the perception of professors of post graduation in accounting science on management accounts in Brazil.

Structure of the questionnaire
The structuring of the questionnaire, as an instrument of collection of data, took into account a combination of the approach of various authors, as presented in topics 2 and 3. Once the desired elements were identified, the variables selected to capture these data were specified considering their respective scales (Table 3) and, then, the questions of the questionnaire were presented.
The data were collected in the binary and ordinal scales.In questions in connection with the ordinal scale, answers were agglutinated such as "I totally agree" and "I partially agree".In turn, in block 10, the indications of the themes were grouped from the three preferred indications of each researcher.

Identification and analysis of the adequacy of the respondent
The respondents are the management accounting professors who work in the postgraduate programs in accounting science in Brazil.Their identification was made by the coordinators of the stricto sensu postgraduate programs.From the universe of 51 faculty members, 80% have complied with the request for filling in the questionnaire.Some questions were not answered by all faculty members, which did not impair the analyses conducted.

Treatment and analysis of data
The treatment of data takes into account descriptive statistics, considering each block BBR, Braz. Bus. Rev. (Engl. ed., Online), Vitória, Vol. 6, No 3, Art. 4, p. 267-283, Sep -Dec 2009 www.bbronline.com.br of questions (Table 3).The variables considered to provide the explanatory power (age, sex, title, time that the person has held the title, professional origin, etc.) were used as discriminating factors in the analyses of occurrences that drew attention.

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Initially the data in connection with the profile of respondents are presented and, afterwards, the analysis of the data collected in each block of the questionnaire.With respect to the profile of respondents, one can highlight that the average age is 46 years old, with an average period with the title of 7 years and 6 months.The predominant titling of doctorate is accounting (63%), according to Table 1.From the 40 professors, 34 (85%) have predominant experience in the area of management accounting, 5 (13%) have predominant experience in the area of the financial accounting and 1 of the professors has experience in both areas (financial and management).
An aspect to be highlighted is in connection with the migration of professionals from one area to the other.From the 40 respondents, 28 (70%) specified his/her graduation or doctorate title and, from these, 17 (61%) graduated in accounting, whereas only 5 (29.4%) took a phD course in other areas and 2 (7.1%) graduated in economics and accounting, and 1 obtained a title in accounting and another in administration.From 9 remaining respondents (32%), whose graduation was in other areas (administration, economics, mathematics or engineering), only 1 obtained the title of doctor in the same area in which he graduated and 8 of them (88.9%)obtained the phD in another area, from which 5 obtained their title in accounting.The purpose of Block 1 of the questionnaire was to identify which are the basic users of management accounting information, in the opinion of the professors.The analysis of Table 2 permits to identify that 95% of the respondents totally agree that the managers area users of management accounting, while the other 5% partially agree.For 43.6%, the shareholders, in some way, used management accounting, which can be explained by the strong presence of controlling shareholders in company management in Brazil.The government was considered as a user by 7.9% of respondents.It draws attention that 21.1% consider the creditors as users of management accounting.A possible explanation results from the fact of financial institutions requesting this complementary information to companies, including of a management nature.The questionnaire permitted still the appointment of other users, with the indication, for example, of employees and analysts in the area of investments as users, however, by a not very expressive number of respondents.As observed in Table 2, 95% of respondents consider the manager as the basic user of accounting information.In the following question, one sought to identify this manager (Table 3).

Primary users of management accounting
Totally or partially agreeing, the interviewees strongly associate the figure of manager to directors and managers (95%+5%=100%), supervisors (60%+30%=90%) and analysis (24.3%+29.8%=54.1%).The total employees did not significantly associate with the figure of administrator.However, considering the open answers, he starts to be associated to the figure of administrator when the employee is delegated authority and responsibility.
When questioned about the need for two accounting systems, one for financial accounting and another for management accounting, to comply with the information needs of users, 56.1% affirm that there is a need and 14.6% that there isn't.For the remaining 29.3%, this need will depend on factors such as: (i) type of system adopted by the organization; (ii) organizational culture; (iii) size of company; (iv) type of information required.

Types of accounting systems
Block 2 of the questionnaire sought to identify the perception in connection with the accounting information system used.
The first question of this Block sought to identify the perception of respondents with respect to the use of integrated management systems by the organizations.In the opinion of 75.6% of respondents, the companies do not use integrated management systems.
For 22.0%, the companies are in the phase of implementation and only for 2.4%, the companies adopted this type of system.This perception has consequences on what the faculty member prioritizes and teaches, since the student's reality needs adaptation.
As demonstrated in Table 4, for 95% of respondents, accounting uses other databases in addition to the financial one, and non-monetary data were pointed out as significant in management accounting by 89.2% of respondents.

Freedom of choice
With Block 3, one sought to identify the degree of freedom of choice of the procedures used by management accounting.
This questioning was centered on the application of accounting principles and if these could be applied in different ways by financial and management accounting.For the majority of interviewees, the principles of entity and continuity must be applied in the same way by the two forms of accounting.The other principles may be adjusted to the needs of users, in the opinion of respondents, as demonstrated on Table 5.

Measurement Units
Block 4 of the questionnaire dealt with perception in connection with the exclusive use of measurement in currency, both by financial accounting (CF) and by management accounting (CG).
Only 5 respondents (12.5%) agree that the two forms of accounting must use exclusively monetary measurements.Among them, only one justified his answer: Yes, because management accounting is supported on financial accounting, whose measurement principles at least in relation to financial reports, are the same.The inclusion of non monetary items in the reports is a function of controllership, whose role is more ample and for which, both financial and management accounting are only tools, among others that it uses to perform its function.
From the 35 professors who answered "No" (87.5%),only 4 (10% of the total) did not specify other types of measurements.Among the specifications of other measures are found the most varied types, in the more generic form, such as measures that are relevant to decision-making and non-financial indicators; and in their more specific form, such as hours, kilos, liters, number of employees, tons, number of complaints, volumes, percentages, number of events, level of satisfaction.
Among those who answered yes, one is a PhD in Economics and the others are PhD's in accounting.The average of years they have held this title of the 5 respondents is 8.2 years.

37.5% (D) 40% (C)
On the other hand, among those who answered No, 51.4% are PhD's in accounting, 14.3% in Engineering, 8.6% in Administration, 5.7% in other areas (economics and agribusiness) and 20% did not specify their title.The average of years of holding the PhD title of this group is 7.5 years.

Focus of analysis
Block 5 of the questionnaire sought to capture the perception of professors in connection with the focus of the forms of accounting.Table 6 presents the result on the focus of Financial Accounting.Generally speaking, there is a relative convergence in the perception of professors that the focus of CF is more in the company as a whole than in the parties that make it up (77.5% of respondents totally or partially agree).Only 10% of respondents totally or partially disagree with this affirmation.
When analyzed, the title of PhD of those who agree and disagree with this focus, one notices that there are great differences, as 54.8% and 55.6%, respectively, are PhD's in Accounting.The distinction is in the number of years they have held the title: 12 and 6 years respectively.Only 5 of the respondents (12.5%) were in an intermediary position (neither agree nor disagree).
With respect to the discordance on the valuing of business units (52.5%), cost centers (65%), product groups (52.5%) and projects (60%), one can observe a weaker convergence (there were 30 distinct respondents, from whom 63.3% are PhD's in Accounting, with title on average for 6.5 years).
The group of professors that, somehow, agree (partially or totally) that the focus of CF is in business units (32.5%), cost centers (25%), product groups (32.5%) and projects (32.5%) is formed by 18 different respondents.From these, 8 are PhD's in Accounting (6.5 years with title on average), 4 are PhD's in Engineering, 2 are PhD's in Administration, 2 are PhD's in Economics and 2 did not specify.
With respect to the affirmation that the accounts plan of financial statements is single for both fields of accounting (CF and CG), even though with different details, one observed a dispersion in opinions: 37.5% disagree (totally or partially), 22.5% neither agree nor disagree and 40% agree (totally or partially).
Table 7 presents the result of the focus of Management Accounting:  The perception of the professors that the focus of CG is more on the company as a whole than on its parts is shared by 33.3% of respondents (totally or partially agree).Among the 13 respondents of this group, 46.2% have a PhD in Accounting (7.2 years with title on average), 38.4% in other areas (1 in Administration, 2 in Economics and 2 in Engineering) and 15.4% did not specify.
The majority of respondents (51.3%) disagree with this affirmation (totally or partially).Among the 20 respondents of this group, with respect to the PhD, 65% are in Accounting (6.7 years with title on average), 20% in other areas (1 in Administration and 3 in Engineering) and 15% did not specify.Only 6 respondents (15.4%) positioned in an intermediate way (neither agree nor disagree), from which 50% are PhD's in Accounting (5.3 years with title on average).
A significant result can be observed in relation to agreement (total or partial) that the focus of management accounting is turned to business units (92.3%), cost centers (97.4%), product groups (94.9%) and projects (94.9%).It is almost unanimous, given that none of the respondents disagreed (39 different respondents, from whom 56.4% are PhD's in Accounting, with title for 6.6 years on average).Some professors positioned themselves in an intermediate way (neither agree nor disagree) with respect to valuing, by financial accounting, of business units (7.7%), cost centers (2.6%), product groups (5.1%) and projects (5.1%).Among these professors (6 different respondents), 1 is a PhD in Accounting (title for 6 months), 2 are PhD's in Administration and Agribusiness, respectively, and 3 did not specify.
In relation to the affirmation that the accounts plan of the financial statements is unique for both fields of accounting, although with different details, one observed a dispersion in opinions: 33.3% disagree (totally or partially), 20.5% neither agree nor disagree and 46.2% agree (totally or partially).

Frequency of issuance of reports
Block 6 of the questionnaire sought to capture the perception of professors in connection with the frequency of issuance of reports by CF and CG (question 6.1).result of this questionnaire is presented on Table 8: One observes that weekly periodicity is preponderantly noticed by respondents as being more of a characteristic of CG, on the other hand, the quarterly annual frequencies were associated to CF, but not so preponderantly.

Degree of reliability
The reliability that the information may have is noticed, according to the authors identified, by the demand for audit procedures.Given a certain cost/benefit, the various types (with different foci and depth) were considered relevant.
Internal audit emerges as preponderant both for financial and management accounting (62% of respondents).External audit is noticed as predominantly geared to financial accounting (84.6% of respondents).A smaller portion of respondents considers that both would require external audit (12.8%).The auditing of the headquarters, analogously to internal audit, has a more significant portion of respondents considering that both financial and management accounting should be submitted to it (60.5%).
As seen, the logic of the expectation of the relatively greater control, facility in obtaining information, complexity of assumption of responsibility and the cost/benefit of the audit, in the view of respondents, directs efforts differently, demanding more attention for financial accounting.In any case, the expectation of use both in internal audit as in that of the headquarters in management accounting is very significant.

Regulating bodies of influence
The interest in identifying who influences management accounting normatively, or even for orientation, results from the perspective of how it has or not freedom to develop.
In a diminishing sequence of influence, the respondents identified "the administrators" (100%), "to headquarters" (97.4%), "controllers" with 76.9% and "other companies" with approximately 55%.In turn, "Brazilian Corporate Law (Lei das SA's, CPC (Accounting Pronouncements Committee), CVM (the Brazilian equivalent to the SEC in the US), RF (Fixed Income), Federal Organizations, Municipal Organizations, International Agencies" influence relatively less, percentages being obtained between 5 and 18%.
The answer, which is consistent with the research made in various countries reinforces certain.First of all, the comprehension that the administrator plays an active role in the definition of management accounting.
This freedom can be smaller in the case of entities that have a headquarters, which exercises the role of delimiting.Finally, the mimetic perspective of seeking to adopt in the organization practices which have achieved success in other companies is present.

Technical Officer in charge of preparation
The majority of respondents (62.5% of faculty members investigated, with predominance of faculty members graduated in Accounting Science) consider that the registration in the class entity must be required only for the generation of financial accounts statements.A smaller portion (25%) considers that it should be required both for financial and management accounting statements.Another group that emerges considers that it should neither be necessary to the financial accounting nor management accounting statements (12.5%).When the question turns to the requirement for graduation in accounting science, the tone of the answers is similar, i.e., 50% of respondents consider that the professional should have graduated in Accounting, 27.5% consider that, both for financial and management accounting, the person in charge should have graduated in Accounting Science and 22.5% indicates that said graduation should not be necessary.When we relate the two questions, one notices greater tolerance to graduation and less in terms of registration in CRC (the Accounting Council).

Relevant themes of management accounting
The management accounting themes more valued by respondents can be observed on Table 9.The majority of respondents chose as more relevant the themes related to management information systems and management reports (68.3%),formal strategic planning (41.5%), budget (22%), performance assessment and strategic cost management (19.5%).Certain considerations can be made based on these findings.The indication of themes: management information systems and management reports, as main themes of the area can indicate the influence of controllership books published in Brazil, which have emphasized these subjects.The same consideration is made in relation to the thematic on performance assessment.To assess the performance of organizations, units, goods and services, constitutes one of the main functions of management accounting (Atkinson et al., 2000).To this effect, the motive of the (relatively) small relevance of the theme to respondents should be investigated.
It draws attention the fact that the budget theme is not considered more relevant, which evidences a perception, in Brazil, that is incongruent with the vision of the international community, according to which budget is, probably, the most used management tool in organizations (Davila and Wouters, 2005, p. 587).In general, this is one of the themes that most motivates research in international periodicals and is one the central themes of management accounting in general (Luft and Shields, 2003;Hansen et al., 2003 andCovaleski et al., 2003).
Relevantly recent themes, and quite discussed in the past 20 years, have also not proven relevant to the majority of respondents.These themes include costing and management based on activities (2.4%), balanced scorecard (2.4%), beyond budget (2.4%) and residual profit (2.5%).

Conclusions
This research has sought to capture the perception of professors of postgraduate courses in accounting science on management accounting in Brazil.The representativeness of the results achieves is evidenced by the fact that the stricto-sensu programs in accounting science in Brazil were invited at the time of the research, involving 18 Further Education institutions.
Considering that (i) heterogeneity is a relevant characteristic in the Brazilian faculty milieu, this was verified through the answers and (ii) analyses of data obtained, in essence management accounting, in Brazil, is perceived by professors of postgraduate courses in Accounting Science as follows:  The main user of management accounting (CG) is the administrator, there is not disagreement about this, and he was more strongly associated to directors and managers (100% agreement) and with supervisors (90% agreement).This reveals at the same time a strong concern with the "top of the pyramid", due to its decision power and also by the more operating levels.The consequence of this perception is that the vastness of knowledge becomes very large to meet the scope;  Use, by CG, of systems that are supported by the financial accounting database together with other bases (95%), including with non-monetary bases (89.2%).This question provoked a relevant reflection regarding the potential to meet demands for ever more sophisticated and non standard information;  Non exclusive user of currency measurements by CG (87.5%);  Among the accounting principles, the principles of entity and continuity must not be applied differently by the two fields of accounting (75%);  The focus of CG is more geared to the parts that make up organization: business units (92.3%), cost centers (97.4%), products and projects (94.9%), whose reporting was associated more strongly to lower frequencies (weekly and monthly) and whose reliability was associated to internal audit (62%) and audit of the headquarters (60.5%);  The influence of regulating entities, such as class entities (95%), CPC (90%) and bodies and tax legislation (77.5%) were more strongly associated to financial accounting, whereas the main entities that influence CG are administrators (100%), the headquarters (97.4%) and controllers (76.9%).This vision permits to think that responsibility in the development of management accounting is actually based on the administrator and that he must be prepared to understand and decide what he wants;  Requirement of registration in class entity and of graduation in accounting science for the preparation of the financial accounting statements (87.5% and 77.5%, respectively);  Main themes dealt with in CG: management information system and management reports (68.3%),formal strategic planning (41.5%) and budget (22%).One notices that the most recently developed artifacts are not very valued.The three most cited are the traditionally known.
Despite the points above converging significantly with the literature researched, one should emphasize some reasonably dissonant ones.The most relevant are (i) 43.6% of respondents agree (totally or partially) that the shareholder is one of the primary users of management accounting; (ii) 50% of respondents agree and 50% disagree that the principle of relevance must be applied in management accounting differently from financial accounting; and (iii) relatively recent themes, such as activity based cost, balanced scorecard and beyond budget, were not valued by respondents.A possible explanation for the item (i) comes from the characteristic of the Brazilian capitals market, where the figure of the controlling shareholder is still very strong, who has privileged access to information.On the other hand, in relation to other items, new investigations would apply.This work diagnosed the perception of the professors of the area, which is justified by the fact that the development of management accounting depends, among other factors, on the community knowing itself.Because one is dealing with the area of learning where environment and situation can be very different, to know the perception of faculty members, who form professors, researchers and administrators, will contribute as a point of departure for the identification of potentialities and gaps in management practices in Brazil.For such, other studies will be necessary, such as capturing the perception of the professionals of the management area, compare the perception of Brazilian professors and those of other countries.This reflection must be stimulated so that, consistently, the area produces knowledge in an ever more complex and globalized environment where competitiveness can emerge both by the way that management is developed in the organization.
Caption: DT -Totally disagree; DP -Partially disagree; NCND -Neither agree nor disagree; CP -Partially agree; CT -Totally disagree; (D)sum of the % DT and DP; (C)sum of the % CP and CT.
presented different perceptions of various authors, summarized in Table1:

Table 1 :
Formation of respondents

Table 5 :
Impact of principles on accounting information

Table 6 : Focus of Analysis of Financial Accounting
Caption: DT -Totally disagree; DPpartially disagree; NCND -Neither agree nor disagree CP -Partially agree; CT -Totally agree; (D)sum of % DT and DP; (C)sum of % CP and CT.

Table 8 :
Frequency of issuance of reports

Table 9 -
List of thematics by order of relevance