This is a chapter largely of personal observation; some backed up by research but much of it subjective judgement based on continuing observation. I have pointed out that the IASB is a committee, and makes decisions by majority vote; consequently it may be inconsistent overall because of the diversity of views within that committee. The members of the committee also change, which impacts where the majority lies. I have suggested that the trend in Board appointments is away from standard-setters and towards regulators, and towards involving a smaller proportion of English mother tongue members.
In relation to the ideas that inform their standard-setting I have pointed out that they are obliged to be guided by the Conceptual Framework, and this has led in the first decade to a stance where they look at changes in assets and liabilities as the fundamental building blocks of performance measurement. This may make them more susceptible to recognizing executory contracts and moving the boundaries of recognition. I note that anti-abuse issues are given a good deal of prominence, and much of this derives from US experience.