• We do not even understand it. Corporate finance people and many CPAs in public practice do not really know what it means for us. Besides, Sarbanes-Oxley and other standards that are determined by regulatory and legislative decree have our attention for now.
  
  
• Economic justification. The only thing that most of us can be certain about is that XBRL will add cost (process and software). Defining the savings opportunities to offset that cost or competitive advantage of using technology based on XBRL is unclear, even for those who understand it. Also, it may add more cost to the user than any current methodology of data preparation and presentation, eliminating the ROI of any perceived transparency.
  
  
• Who is the customer? The adoption message associated with XBRL value is convoluted. For whom will the value will be increased? Is it the information creator's (an individual or the company) or the processor of that information (analyst, CPA, SEC)? Not understanding who the real customer is complicating the marketing pitch. 
  
  
• Is it solving a real or a perceived business challenge? Some technologies start as business solutions that are misdirected, but consumer embrace of the technology saves a wayward plan. In this case, seemingly, XBRL has only business applications.
  
  
• When is a framework a standard? With conceptual technologies like XBRL, implementations of the standards are often not standard. Thus, the real ubiquity of utility is handicapped.

1. This is a need that was defined by the accounting community, but introduced into the technology community for joint development. That history means that it is essential and more difficult to merely educate the public about it. That must not be the goal. Instead, the objective to encourage broad adoption must be to introduce meaningful uses and regularly develop business cases.

 

2. Solutions must be responsive to information that customers need to truly add value. Israel's customers demand standardized data formats in the data they buy to perform analysis. Some examples include the auditor populating a trial audit and reviewing industry norms for variances and the insurance company creating a model to assess risk for premium setting during the underwriting process to create an accurate, defensible premium with speed of response.

 

3. Indeed, the taxonomies of XBRL are reflective of the different accounting standards globally. To be meaningful, applications must be developed where this does not undermine the analysis, while global accounting standards are pursued.

 

4. Customer business cases will drive this technology. Decisions and announcements driven by the exuberance in the possibilities of XBRL, like the Bank of America story, can inflict tremendous damage in the smaller successes of this misunderstood technology.

 

5. Continuously clarify whether XBRL is a document (about the event) or the event itself. XBRL is about representing data and is not a computer language; it defines the nouns of the financials not the verbs.