Expertise Management by Public Accounting Firms

Research suggests that professional expertise may be viewed as an attribute of an accounting firm rather than just an attribute of individual experts. One research paper constructs a model that leads to the identification of three strategies applicable to accounting firms. A Knowledge firm develops and sells proprietary knowledge to a selective clientele, whereas a Full Service firm develops and sells general professional knowledge to a broad clientele. A Relationship firm is in-between the other two firm types. 

Associations are hypothesized between these strategies and a variety of firm activities such as client selection, diffusion (or concentration) of expertise within the firm, sharing of expertise within the firm, and formalization of quality control processes. A questionnaire was completed by 219 audit and tax partners and consulting, insolvency and forensic accounting principals in 15 public accounting firms.

The results are consistent with the existence of three distinct types of firms. The results also indicate that partners are aware of local pressures that they personally face (such as the need to sell more services to clients) and less aware of the effect of broad structural features of the firm (such as size and decision aids). The key structural features that are salient to partners involve the need for selectivity in choosing clients and the need for the firm to develop specialized proprietary technical knowledge.

To learn more about this research on expertise, read the paper “Expertise Management by Public Accounting Firms” by Michael Gibbins and Karim Jamal, University of Alberta (February 6, 2001 Version).

Summary of the KPMG Professional Judgment Framework

KPMG LLP, one of the four largest international public accounting firms, launched an initiative in 2009 to enhance the professional judgment and professional skepticism of its people and teams. KPMG collaborated with two professors at Brigham Young University, Professors Steve Glover and Doug Prawitt, to emphasize these skills in its training. The result of this effort is refreshed professional judgment content throughout KPMG's audit training curriculum for all levels of audit professionals.

KPMG took the additional step of sharing and leveraging its professional judgment training content to create, again in collaboration with Brigham Young University Professors Glover and Prawitt, a monograph to help students accelerate the development of their professional judgment while still in college. The previously-posted monograph is titled Elevating Professional Judgment in Auditing and Accounting: The KPMG Professional Judgment Framework.

The monograph is only available in electronic form, with live Internet links and audio files embedded. In addition, there are video files and an instructor’s manual available separately to professors who register on KPMG University Connection. To learn more, see the 2013 Summary of the KPMG Professional Judgment Framework— Understanding and DevelopingProfessional Judgment in Auditing and Accounting, available online.

COMPETENT AND VERSATILE — Professional Accountants in Business

Worldwide, more than one million professional accountants work in commerce, industry, financial services, education, and the public and not-for-profit sectors. Many of them are in positions of strategic or functional leadership. These professional accountants in business (PAIBs) are well-placed to create long-term sustainable value for their organizations.
  
PAIBs play key roles in organizations— roles that often go far beyond the stereotypical perceptions of accountants. It may not be readily apparent to all employers and business owners, but they can capitalize on professional accountants’ training, knowledge and skill sets to help guide their organizations toward long-term sustainable success.

To help the global accountancy profession respond to changing expectations of society, financial markets and organizations, the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) has identified eight drivers of sustainable organizational success. These eight drivers, which draw from various management and quality frameworks, provide a basis for understanding how professional accountants can support organizations in sustainable value creation.

The ability of PAIBs to help drive sustainable value creation is based on a range of professional skills and a particular attitude and mindset. That mindset needs to embrace five key areas: Professionalism and ethical behavior; Professional judgment; Organizational and environmental awareness; An investor and wider stakeholder focus; and Change, uncertainty and complexity. 

For more information, read the publication, Competent and Versatile: How Professional Accountants in Business Drive Sustainable Organizational Success, available at the International Center for Professional Accountants in Business on the IFAC website (www.ifac.org/paib).

Information Integrity – January 2013: An AICPA-CICA White Paper

Various types of information are increasingly being made available by business entities to stakeholders, including management, investors, regulators, shareholders and other interested parties. This information may include: excerpts from financial statements, such as inventories or accounts receivable; data from the company records, such as production volumes; and key performance indicators. Stakeholders use this information in making decisions, interpreting or using other information and generally increasing their knowledge about the subject matter.

To make the best decisions, users need to have confidence in the integrity of the information. With this in mind, the AICPA Trust Information Integrity Task Force, in conjunction with the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA), prepared a white paper called Information Integrity in January 2013. The purpose of this white paper is to define what information integrity means and to provide context for it to users, preparers and practitioners.

The 28-page white paper offers insight on how information can have integrity and discusses how information integrity can be achieved and maintained. It should be of interest to professional accountants in the accounting profession as a whole, including those in public practice, in business and industry, and other participants in the business reporting process, such as producers and consumers of business information.

Pathways Commission Report (July 2012)

The Pathways Commission Report (July 2012) summarizes two years of collective effort by over 50 individuals representing stakeholders in a broadly defined accounting profession – encompassing public and corporate accounting, education, and government. The impetus for this project came from the US Department of the Treasury’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (ACAP) report recommending that the American Accounting Association (AAA) and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) study the possible future structure of higher education for the accounting profession.

With a mission to consider accounting education and the accounting profession in the broadest sense, the Commission’s recommendations are expansive in scope; they demonstrate the need to address difficult and persistent issues and impediments so that the discipline and profession of accounting can better meet the challenges and opportunities of the future.

The Future Outlook section of the Report (on page 133) concludes that “As accounting and business evolve, the required knowledge and skills will also change. Adoption of more principle-based standards will require more judgment. More judgment may lead to a wider variability in decisions and, possibly, increase the risk of litigation. At the same time, pressures to conform to economic forces may increase. Measurement issues and fair value calculations may enhance financial reporting, but they are also more subject to manipulation. Therefore, responsible judgment becomes even more important as does ethical behavior consistent with the accounting profession’s responsibilities.”

For more information, visit the Pathways Commission Homepage on the website of the American Accounting Association and read the highlights in the Indiana CPA Society blog posting “It Won’t Be Easy, But It’s Worth Doing” dated December 13, 2012.

Practice-Based Education – Perspectives and Strategies

There are many challenges facing researchers, educators, practitioners and students in today’s practice worlds. Published in 2012, the 37-page Australian book Practice-Based Education- Perspectives and Strategies is part of a series that examines research, theory and practice in the context of university education, professional practice, work and society. The series examines places where two or more of these areas come together.

Themes explored in the series include university education of professions, society expectations of professional practice, professional practice workplaces and strategies for investigating each of these areas. The authors bring a wealth of practice wisdom and experience to examine these issues, share their practice knowledge, report research into strategies that address these challenges, share approaches to working and learning and raise yet more questions. The conversations in the series contribute to expanding the discourse around the way people encounter and experience practice, education, work and society.

This book explores the principles, context, practices and strategies of practice-based education from multiple perspectives. It examines the place and nature of practice-based university education, that is, education that prepares graduates for practice. This seems initially to be a straightforward goal. However, practice-based education is, in reality, a complex of ideas, pedagogies, opportunities and possible experiences. In this complexity of realisation and simplicity of concept lies its strength and potential for rich and productive higher education.

The book is written by leading academics in higher education and is aimed at a broad audience including university educators, as well as researchers and those in the professions. The book examines goals, trends, perspectives and strategies of practice-based education in international, professional education programs. There are three sections: 1. Contesting and Contextualising Practice-Based Education; 2. Practice-Based Education Pedagogy and Strategies; and 3. The Future of Practice-Based Education.

The e-professional embracing learning technologies

According to the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), technology is now embedded in the workplace: nearly all numerical and written work is done via computers, and the way research, analysis and assurance is carried out has been transformed by technology and access to the Internet. As more and more activity goes online, finance professionals are keeping up with regulation, filing reports, accessing data and so on, remotely in cyberspace. They are becoming e-professionals.

The ACCA recently issued The eProfessional Embracing Learning Technologies. The report shares the views of a panel of experts from multinational corporations, global professional services firms, learning providers and other professional bodies, on current and future trends in online learning and assessment.

It explores the world of the accountant, focusing on three areas:

·       how online approaches to learning and assessment are affecting professional development at an individual level;

·       the impact these learning technologies are having on employers of finance professionals; and

·       what the future of online learning and assessment may look like.

The conclusion (on page 5 of the report) notes that: “The panellists point to two key reasons for the shift in attitudes and the dramatic rise in uptake of learning technologies during the first decade of the 21st century:

·       First, e-learning provides more sophisticated options for knowledge acquisition and application, largely thanks to the increased capabilities of mobile devices, technologies such as Skype, learning apps and game-based learning.

·       Second, technological developments are driving new learning approaches which are considered to be more flexible and fit for purpose. Learning programmes now fit around work, rather than work being accommodated around study leave.”

Furthermore, it states that: “This sophisticated blend of learning approaches is facilitating a much more strategic approach to professional development. Organisations are integrating learning technologies into their growth plans to ensure that they capture the advantages of flexibility, innovation and sophistication that can be realised through a technology-enabled people strategy. The panellists are in no doubt that the developments we have seen so far are merely the tip of the iceberg, and that further shifts will follow, driven not just by technology, but also by global factors, strategic change and professional endeavour.”

In addition to this report (also available as The eProfessional – Five Minutes On), the ACCA website presents video interviews with PwC’s global development leader - Richard Pollard, CEO of BPP Business Schools - Martin Taylor and managing director of Towards Maturity - Laura Overton.

Professional Judgment - Education Continued

A recent article in CAmagazine states "Professional development isn’t what it used to be. Like the information it imparts, continuing education for CAs — and the type of knowledge that’s in demand — is changing." The article quotes from Jeffrey Gandz, a professor and managing director of program design for the executive development division of the Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario.


Gandz notes that: "On the one side is upgrading of knowledge and skills via shorter, more compressed, efficient delivery systems. On the other, there is a growing focus on developing judgment and much more recognition that context and effective developmental experiences are critical."

Beyond talent management, increasingly professional development is focused on what goes into decision-making. "We spend a lot of time talking about operational, reputational and quantitative risk and the impact of rapid change and turbulent environments on the kinds of business decisions being made in our executive programs," says Gandz. "The time from 2008 to today has seen a lot of uncertainty, so we talk much more about strategic options rather than strategies cast in stone. Certainly there is more humility about being right and greater focus on making good decisions but recognizing that circumstances vary greatly." In other words, he says, judgment is used.

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) is using a structured, team-based approach to learning on the job. "It’s a way to capture teachable moments as they arise and in the process help accelerate the development of our junior people and reinforce learning on the job," says Kate Hand, learning and development director for national assurance practice at PwC Canada. "Rather than stop and have someone attend a seminar or e-learn session, we now have a structure and specific techniques we can use when an opportunity arises. So we’ve addressed the learning gap and provided feedback and support. As a result, our junior team members have more opportunities to take on more rewarding work. As well, it improves communication across the team because you are coming together to address issues in a real-time, real-life, relevant way."

For example, this fall PwC launched a program dealing with professional skepticism that blends a formal learning component with the team-based learning approach. "How do you teach judgment? By sharing war stories of near misses," says Hand. "Our senior team members have these stories but they might not always think to share them with junior team members. Now, they can come together to talk about what professional skepticism means for the client, how to address it and assess it and what to do when something is unusual. Junior team members might not otherwise have the confidence to question a client."

(The article "Education CONTINUED" on pages 24-31 in the December 2011 CAmagazine is also available online.)

Collaboration on Professional Judgment Matters for CAs – Part 1 of 3

A new research report has just been completed on Professional Judgment Matters: Assessing the Merits of Enhanced Communication and Collaboration. The aim is to stimulate dicussion and debate on the exercise of professional judgment by Chartered Accountants.



The executive summary in the report states that: “Chartered Accountants (CAs) practice in a wide variety of fields including public accounting, industry, government, education, research, consulting, regulation and standard setting. In each of these areas, CAs are recognized for their expertise and for their ability to exercise sound “professional judgment” in a multitude of different contexts.

According to the academic research, the value of professional judgment is a function of both its importance and its quality, and each depends on the other. Together, these two attributes provide the foundation for this research initiative, which assesses whether there is a need for enhanced communication and collaboration by CAs on professional judgment matters. In other words, can an Internet-based professional judgment resource centre help to improve the quality of professional judgment? This is in the public interest, as well as the interests of policy developers and the business community. Clearly, it is also in the best interests of the profession. 

This research initiative takes a seven-step approach, as follows:

• Step 1 – Review the definitions of professional judgment (see Chapter 1);
• Step 2 – Review the current research literature (see Chapter 2);
• Step 3 – Create a communications blog (see Chapter 3);
• Step 4 – Open a dialogue with CAs (see Chapter 4);
• Step 5 – Undertake an Internet-based survey (see Chapter 5);
• Step 6 – Review recent developments and other matters (see Chapter 6);
• Step 7 – Suggest practical ways to move forward (see Chapter 7).

Chapter 1 explains the purpose, methodology and anticipated outcomes of this research initiative. It also provides several definitions proposed in the literature and professional standards with regard to professional judgment. In addition, it concludes that Chartered Accountancy meets the criteria for a “profession” because:

• there is mastery by the practitioners of a particular intellectual skill, acquired by lengthy training and education;
• there is a specialized code of ethical conduct, laid down and enforced by that society or institute, designed principally for the protection of the public; and
• there is a belief, on the part of those engaged in the calling, in the virtue of interchange of views, and in a duty to contribute to the development of their calling, adding to its knowledge and sharing advances in knowledge and technique with their fellow members.

In light of these criteria and others, it is apparent that sound “professional judgment” should be based on ethical behaviour together with an appropriate foundation of technical skills and critical thought processes, sustained and enhanced by professional development. In addition, it requires the application of relevant knowledge, expertise and practical experience in selecting a rational course of action.”

Additional excerpts from the executive summary are provided in Part 2 and Part 3 of this series of posts.

Accountants’ Insecurity Relating to Work Diversity

Chartered Accountants (CAs) practice in a wide variety of fields. This requires different competencies and implies the application of professional judgment in a multitude of different contexts. However, academic research provides evidence that, shortly before the collapse of Enron, experienced CAs were appreciably insecure about their professional identity and the appropriateness of the basic principles of their system of expertise. According to the research findings: “Interviewees were uncomfortable with the realities of auditor independence, were doubtful of the future of the profession, and had difficulties in describing the key features of a typical professional accountant in a context where accounting firms and individual accountants become involved in domains conceptually far removed from accountancy’s core domains.”

The research paper reported that: “...expert accountants did not trust to a high degree their system of expertise. Furthermore, our interviews suggest that through their reflexive abilities, accountants interpreted a number of their daily working experiences as being inconsistent with the routine and procedural application of accounting/auditing knowledge, thereby generating doubts about several of the key premises that underlie accounting expertise. As a result, interviewees had inconsistencies in the biographies of their professional lives; they saw the role of the firms and that of the professional institutes to be antagonistic. However, although doubts about the profession’s system of expertise regularly emerged from interviewees’ daily experiences, interviewees were not affected by these doubts to the point of being incapable of continuing their working lives as CAs or of engaging in radical reform initiatives.”

The research paper concludes that: “...All of this leads us to suggest that professional institutes establish channels for rank and file members to communicate concerns emerging from reflexive interpretations of daily experiences, and adopt mechanisms to examine these concerns and formulate, if necessary, proposals for institutional change. Like most modern institutions, professions seek to exclude from their members’ lives fundamental issues that cast doubt on the premises of their systems of expertise.”

The paper further concludes that: “Although suspicious and dissenting voices may be costly to deal with in the short term, it seems to us that providing conduits for members’ concerns and adopting a process to examine them might translate into professions having standards that better respond to the needs of society. These changes might also result in practitioners being better equipped to deal with situations in which they feel insecure, and perhaps avoid the occurrence of corporate scandals where auditors are blamed for not having issued qualified reports. Unfortunately, it seems that it takes a crisis of legitimacy on the scale of Enron to enact change.”

To learn more about this research, refer to the research paper “Professional Insecurity and the Erosion of Accountancy’s Jurisdictional Boundaries” by Yves Gendron, Ph.D, CA, University of Alberta  and Roy Suddaby, Ph.D, University of Iowa, Canadian Accounting Perspectives, Vol. 3 No. 1 (2004) pp. 85–115.

Learning about Professional Skepticism – Part 3 of 3

What does it mean to be sceptical? What does it mean to cast doubt on something you feel is not right, despite popular consensus? Scepticism may be generally defined as a personal disposition toward doubt or incredulity of facts, persons, or institutions.

For a general overview of sketicism, watch the YouTube video "What is Skepticism? A primer for understanding reality."

For an indepth analysis, refer to the research paper "A Model and Literature Review of Professional Skepticism in Auditing" by Mark W. Nelson, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Vol. 28, No. 2, November 2009, pp. 1–34. This paper reviews research that examines professional skepticism in auditing. Consistent with much research and with recent regulatory concerns, the paper defines professional skepticism as "indicated by auditor judgments and decisions that reflect a heightened assessment of the risk that an assertion is incorrect, conditional on the information available to the auditor."

In many circumstances the assertion in question will be a client’s assertion that the financial statements are free of material misstatement, but the definition could apply to other assertions as well (e.g., attesting to the effectiveness of a client’s internal controls). This definition reflects more of a "presumptive doubt" than a "neutral" view of professional skepticism, implying that auditors who exhibit high professional skepticism are auditors who need relatively more persuasive evidence (in terms of quality and/or quantity) to be convinced that an assertion is correct. Depending on how an auditor's decisions are evaluated, it is possible under this definition for an auditor to exhibit too much professional skepticism, in that they could design overly inefficient and expensive audits.

The paper provides a model that describes how audit evidence combines with auditor knowledge, traits, and incentives to produce judgments that reflect professional skepticism. The model also describes how, given a judgment that reflects some level of professional skepticism, the judgment combines with auditor knowledge, traits and incentives to produce actions that reflect relatively more or less professional skepticism. The model highlights that auditors’ pre-existing knowledge, traits and incentives all combine (and potentially trade off or interact) to affect the amount of professional skepticism in audit judgment and audit actions. This perspective also facilitates understanding how audit firms can influence professional skepticism in practice via hiring, training, performance appraisal, review, decision aids, incentives and changes in tasks and institutions.

Professional Judgment – Ethical Thinking by Chartered Accountants

It is generally accepted that ethical thinking by Chartered Accountants (CAs) is based on their knowledge and the application of fair and comprehensive codes of professional conduct, such as the IFAC Handbook of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants. Education, training and experience, as well as professional and organizational commitment, influence a CA’s ability to utilize principled ethical thinking when exercising professional judgment.

Accounting research suggests that accountants can think about ethical issues in one of three ways that correspond to the three types of ethical thinking: pre-conventional, conventional and principled thinking. CAs use pre-conventional ethical thinking when they decide what is right or wrong based upon consequences, and often, self-interest. An example of using pre-conventional thinking is management’s decision to pad a budget because a bonus will be received if the budget is met.

CAs use conventional ethical thinking when social consensus, such as accepted practices, rules and laws, define what is right or wrong. An example of using conventional ethical thinking is management’s structuring a contract, such as a lease, solely to achieve a particular accounting result. CAs use principled ethical thinking when they use universal ethical principles of justice and the common good to determine what is right or wrong. An example of using principled ethical thinking is management’s voluntarily disclosing to shareholders the firm’s environmental and social practices, even if they are less than flattering, because it is right or justifiable to do so. Once CAs use principled ethical thinking to determine the right thing to do, they should be encouraged to do it.

For more information, read the article “Ethics and the accountant” by Linda Thorne, PhD, CA and Dawn Massey, PhD, CPA in the premier issue of CMA Magazine online.

Should Professional Judgment be a Pillar of Accounting Education?

Chartered Accountants (CAs) practice in a wide variety of fields. For example, they may be auditors of publicly-traded corporations, advisers to privately-held organisations, CFOs (overseeing treasury, financing and strategic investment decisions), IT consultants, corporate finance advisers, tax specialists, forensic accountants, accounting professors, controllers (managing performance measurement and control systems), internal audit directors, government financial officers and insolvency practitioners. Each of these careers requires different competencies and implies the application of professional judgment in a multitude of different contexts.

The diversity that one encounters within the accounting profession raises several questions for which answers are not necessarily forthcoming. For example, do these different career streams require different sets or portfolios of cognitive skills? Do these career streams demand similar or distinct levels of cognitive skills? Moreover, does the optimal configuration between specific expertise and cognitive skills differ across these career streams? In that regard, the advent of articling within business organizations as an alternative to accounting firms is likely to bring further broadening in the range of careers and experiences of professional accountants.

Judgment and expertise in professional accounting have been topics of interest for many decades. Both concepts share many commonalities as judgment is the most evident outcome from expertise, while expertise is required to exercise judgment. However, both concepts can also be considered to be multi-dimensional. Two key aspects that underlie professional judgment in accounting are 1) relevant knowledge and experience so that 2) a choice must be made between alternatives.

In summary, we have learned a lot over the past two decades about professional judgment and expertise, but there remains some uncertainty as to what they are, as well as how and when to develop them. It appears that the development of professional expertise and judgment through generic learning processes may not be optimal. The literature also raises questions as to whether university education is necessarily the best time to provide such professional judgment and expertise abilities.

The preceding views are adapted from the discussant’s comments “Further Developing Professional Attributes in CAs: An Impossible Challenge?” by Michel Magnan, PhD, FCA, Concordia University, in response to the presentation “Teaching the Fine Arts of Being a Professional Accountant” by Susan Wolcott, PhD, CPA. Both the presentation and the discussant’s comments were part of the November 22, 2010 symposium Leveraging Change - The New Pillars of Accounting Education which was held in Toronto, Canada. The pillars of accounting education include: professional judgment; professional and personal attributes; accounting principles and concepts; ethical decision making; and integration.

(For more information on this symposium, contact Irene Wiecek, FCA, at the University of Toronto and/or Tim Forristal, CA, or Gord Beal, CA, at the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA). Refer to the CICA website for more information on What Do CAs Do?)

Can you really teach good judgment? (Part 1 of 3)

According to a recent publication, Elevating Professional Judgment in Auditing: The KPMG Professional Judgment Framework, a common question people have is, “Can you really teach good judgment?” Many believe that it is a gift; either you have it or you do not. Others would say you cannot teach good judgment; rather, it must be developed through the “school of hard knocks” after many years of experience. There is no question that talent and experience are important components of effective professional judgment, but it is possible to enhance your professional judgment skills through learning and applying some key concepts. As with other important skills, the sooner you start learning how to make good professional judgments, the better.

The KPMG monograph and related training materials (available at the KPMG University Connection) were developed with the help of two professors from Brigham Young University, Steven Glover and Douglas Prawitt. Their research focuses on the judgment and decision making of accounting and auditing professionals. They have taught graduate (MBA) courses on effective judgment and decision making for many years.

Graduate courses in professional judgment are also being offered at selected Canadian universities, For example, Professor Efrim Boritz teaches a course on Professional Judgment (ACC 690 on pages 90-91) at the University of Waterloo. The course covers a variety of topics, such as: Introduction to Professionalism and Professional Judgment; Being a Trusted Adviser; Methods of Studying Professional Judgment; Bounded Rationality; Heuristics, Framing and Biases; Knowledge, Expertise, Specialization; Ethics, Skepticism and Rules of Professional Conduct; Multi-person Tasks and Professional Judgment; Role of Decision Aids in Professional Judgment; and, Conflicts and Negotiations.

SEC Views on a Framework for Professional Judgment – Part 2 of 3

According to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Committee on Improvements to Financial Reporting (“CiFR”), there are many categories of accounting and auditing judgments that are made in preparing financial statements. Any guidance should encompass all of these categories, if practicable (see Final Report, pages 88-96).

Some of the categories of accounting judgment are as follows:

·       selection of accounting standard;

·       implementation of an accounting standard;

·       lack of applicable accounting standards;

·       financial statement presentation;

·       estimating the actual amount to record; and

·       evaluating the sufficiency of evidence.

In addition, there are many levels of professional judgment that occur related to accounting matters. Preparers must make initial judgments about uncertain accounting issues; the preparer’s judgment may then be evaluated or challenged by auditors, investors, regulators, legal claimants and even others, such as the media. Guidance should not suggest that those who evaluate a judgment must re-perform the judgment according to the guidance. Instead, guidance should provide clarity to those who would make a judgment on factors that those who would evaluate the judgment would consider while making that evaluation.

Judgment, with respect to accounting matters, should be exercised by a person or persons who have the appropriate level of knowledge, experience, and objectivity to form an opinion based on the relevant facts and circumstances within the context provided by applicable accounting standards. Judgments could differ between knowledgeable, experienced, and objective persons. Such differences between reasonable judgments do not, in themselves, suggest that one judgment is wrong and the other is correct.