Ravi Bhushan and Donald R. Lessard　Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology　　Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 4:2 1992　　 Abstract 　In this paper we examine the practices of representative samples of U.S.-and U.K.-based international investment managers in order to determine whether and how they are affected by accounting deversity and, therefore, by the presence ro ab-sence of quantitative reconciliation, and what their views are towards greater disclosure, reconciliation, or harmonization. We find that all three forms of reduced diversity - more uniform disclosure, quantitative reconciliation to U.S.GAAP, and international harmonization are viewed as good things by managers. None, however, appears to be critical in the investment process. Reconciliation is a costly requirement and we conclude that the SEC's insistence on reconcil- iation is not well-founded and that other means, especially greater emphasis on mutual recognition subject to certain minimum standards of disclosure and pres- entation, would be more effective. 　*The financial support of the International Financial Services Research Center at M.I.T. is gratefully acknowledged. We thank Gary Bergstrom, Sara Hanks, 　　　Richard Levich, Bevis Longstreth, and an anonymous reviewer for their comments and Peter Pavlina for expert research assistance.