Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of anarchist accounting (AA) on stakeholder relationship capability (SRC) in the context of Iranian capital market companies.

This study is based on a descriptive survey-correlation data collection method. As this study is on (AA) and (SRC) in Iran, the population of the study is made up of all financial managers and heads of the accounting department of capital market companies in Iran. Among 185 companies (Tehran Stock Exchange [TSE]), 100 companies were selected as samples which are all in the TSE. As suggested by Niles (2006), a minimum sample size of 10% of the population is generally acceptable. A questionnaire survey was adopted in obtaining primary data for this study. Thus, based on Cochran sampling techniques, 395 questionnaires were returned and became the basis of analysis. Also, partial least square was used to test the research hypothesis.

The statistical findings indicate the fit of the structural desirability of the factor load and according to the standardized coefficient (path coefficient), the dimensions of AA have a negative and significant effect on SRC, because the path coefficient is positive.

Theoretically, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first research that tries to examine the stakeholder relationship capability through the link between social/political approaches with accounting procedures, an issue that has not been considered in any prior study. Also, conducting the present study in the conditions of social distrust in the Iranian capital market can be important, because the expansion of anarchist accounting helps to create a level of symmetry and equality in information disclosure and it can create value for shareholders.

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of aural accounting (AA) on companies’ stakeholder relationship capability in the Iranian capital market.

In terms of methodology, this study adopts a mixed approach based on both inductive and deductive foundations. The goal is to develop a comprehensive theoretical framework regarding the feasibility and practical implementation of AA and to assess its impact on the ability to interact with stakeholders. In this research, the components of AA were identified through a meta-synthesis process. Subsequently, data on these variables were collected using a researcher-made questionnaire. Additionally, a standard questionnaire was used to measure the stakeholders' interaction capability. The study used partial least squares structural equation modeling for hypothesis testing. A total of 412 participants, consisting of financial managers and heads of accounting departments of capital market companies, were involved in hypothesis testing.

The results of this study indicate that AA has a significant and positive impact on companies’ stakeholder relationship capabilities. In other words, AA establishes a bidirectional flow of information, enabling companies to demonstrate a more appropriate response to the changing needs of their stakeholders.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the first research to present a framework for AA and examine its impact on companies' interaction capabilities with stakeholders. Consequently, the findings not only contribute to the expansion of theoretical literature in accounting and financial reporting but also provide multiple practical implications for capital market policymakers and standard setters regarding the potential consequences of AA.

This study aims to examine the impact of stakeholder engagement on accountability, within nonprofit organizations (NPOs). Given the pivotal role NPOs play in disaster management and community welfare, it is crucial to gain an understanding of the obligations of NPOs, in terms of their disaster responses and accountability.

Using a case-study approach, the investigation features a content analysis of social media comments regarding the Australian Red Cross’ (ARC) funds’ allocation during the 2019/2020 bushfires, followed by a similar analysis of ARC's reports. Inspired by Carnegie et al.'s (2021) definition of accounting as a social science, this study uses dialogic theory and a transformative participatory framework, to evaluate how interactive stakeholder engagement influenced accountability strategies used by the NPO, to ensure its sustainable development.

The findings reveal that there was a significant increase in stakeholder engagement on social media, following negative media coverage, with participants voicing concerns over ARC’s method of funds’ allocation, delays in funds distribution and seemingly excessive administrative costs. ARC addressed these concerns by issuing Bushfire Reports, and conducting online Q&A sessions, in a bid to establish transparency. This study emphasizes how dialogic accounting can challenge accounting's limited scope – one that often overlooks ecological concerns and social justice.

This study uses the perspective of dialogic accounting theory to explore the relationship between stakeholder engagement on social media, and NPO accountability. It demonstrates how robust stakeholder engagement can challenge NPOs to establish accountability, thereby bridging the information gap between themselves and the public. The use of dialogic accounting theory allows the study to shift from the traditional focus of accounting research, which is the financial objectives of powerful entities, to the voices of the marginalized, the stakeholders, who are impacted by NPO decisions, and, in doing so, it highlights the potential for NPOs to foster accountability, and so advance sustainable development initiatives.

This study aims to structure a model for integrating social value into strategic management based on identifying the critical success factors (CSF) for such integration in the investigated companies.

This research was based on the actor–network theory. Through a rigorous approach to the case study methodology in a two-stage process lasting 21 months, we carried out this study.

Companies that use the polyhedral social accounting model in their strategic management processes do so without a reference model. We identified CSF for integrating social value, which was incorporated into a protocol model based on stakeholder theory and the use of social accounting.

Practitioners can use the proposed model to maintain the alignment of strategic performance and purpose. Using social accounting based on indicators and financial proxies allows managers to incorporate social value into strategic management in terms of financial value.

The institutional demand for social information is based on the growing sensitivity of companies. Aligning social values with business strategies contributes to social sustainability.

This study focuses on an unresearched emerging phenomenon. Since the first approach to stakeholder theory, the development of a stakeholder-oriented strategy has faced the lack of a stakeholder accounting system. The polyhedral model of social accounting could help overcome this problem as it provides information that allows a novel and innovative method to make a stakeholder-oriented strategy effective.

This paper seeks to investigate the influence of stakeholders on accountability relationships and the development of accounting practices and processes within two Tanzanian non‐governmental organisations (NGOs).

Stakeholder analysis is employed to evaluate the positions of stakeholder groups in terms of Mitchell et al.'s attributes of power, legitimacy and urgency. Data analysis was undertaken using a grounded theory approach.

The research found that overseas donors were the stakeholders with the highest salience as a result of which they significantly influenced accountability relationships and accounting processes and practices within NGOs. Despite the often proclaimed NGOs' objective of improving welfare of beneficiary groups there appeared to be little accountability by NGOs to beneficiaries. Differences in the accounting functions in the NGOs were explained by the influence of dominant stakeholders, the credibility of the organisation and its managers and the varied ways through which the organisations negotiated and accounted for funding. Moreover, accounting was virtually unemployed in internal decision‐making processes indicating that it was largely a tool for satisfying claims of the highly salient stakeholders.

This paper makes a contribution to the literatures of both stakeholder theory and NGO accounting. From the grounded theory analysis it is suggested that the stakeholder framework of Mitchell et al. could be usefully extended in the three areas of power asymmetries of definitive stakeholders, stakeholder salience asymmetries across organisational phenomena and asymmetries across time.

The paper contributes to the empirical accounting literature by seeking a deeper understanding of how and why accounting and accountability relationships develop within NGOs. It sheds light on a type of organisation that has not been extensively studied in the public sector management literature.

This paper introduces the special issue “Rebuilding trust: Sustainability and non-financial reporting, and the European Union regulation”. Inspired by the studies published in the special issue, this study aims to examine the concept of accountability within the context of the European Union (EU) Directive on non-financial disclosure (hereafter the EU Directive) to offer a critique and a novel perspective for future research into mandatory non-financial reporting (NFR) and to advance future practice and policy.

The authors review the papers published in this special issue and other contemporary studies on the topic of NFR and the EU Directive.

Accountability is a fundamental concept for building trust in the corporate reporting context and emerges as a common topic linking contemporary studies on the EU Directive. While the EU Directive acknowledges the role of accountability in the reporting practice, this study argues that regulation and practice on NFR needs to move away from an accounting-based conception of accountability to promote accountability-based accounting practices (Dillard and Vinnari, 2019). By analysing the links between trust, accountability and accounting and reporting, the authors claim the need to examine and rethink the inscription of interests into non-financial information (NFI) and its materiality. Hence, this study encourages research and practice to broaden mandatory NFR practice over the traditional boundaries of accountability, reporting and formal accounting systems.

Considering the challenges posed by the COVID-19 crisis, this study calls for further research to investigate the dialogical accountability underpinning NFR in practice to avoid the trap of focusing on accounting changes regardless of accountability. The authors advocate that what is needed is more timely NFI that develops a dialogue between companies, investors, national regulators, the EU and civil society, not more untimely standalone reporting that has most likely lost its relevance and materiality by the time it is issued to users.

By highlighting accountability issues in the context of mandatory NFR and its linkages with trust, this study lays out a case for moving the focus of research and practice from accounting-based regulations towards accountability-driven accounting change.

The purpose of this paper is to explain how sustainability reporting and stakeholder engagement processes serve as vehicles of dialogic accounting (DA), a form of critical accounting that creates opportunities for stakeholders to express their opinions, and the influence of dialogic interactions on the content of sustainability reports.

Content analysis is used to investigate reports published by 299 companies that have adopted Global Reporting Initiative guidelines. This paper studies how organizations engage stakeholders, the categories of stakeholders that are being addressed, the methods used to support stakeholder engagement, and other features of the stakeholder engagement process. Companies that disclose stakeholder perceptions, the difficulties met in engaging stakeholders, and actions aimed at creating opportunities for different groups of stakeholders to interact were subjects of discussion in a series of semi-structured interviews that focus on DA.

Companies often commit themselves to two-way dialogue with their stakeholders, but fully developed frameworks for DA are rare. However, signs of DA emerged in the analysis, thus confirming that sustainability reporting can become a platform for DA systems if stakeholder engagement is effective.

The findings contribute to the accounting literature by discussing if and how sustainability reporting and stakeholder engagement can serve as vehicles of DA. This is accomplished via a research design that is based on in-depth interviews and content analysis of various sustainability reports.

This study investigates the implementation of a sustainable circular business model from an accounting perspective. Its goal is to understand if and how decision- makers use management accounting systems, and what changes are needed if these systems are to support the transition toward a circular economy.

Dialogic accounting theory frames the case study of six companies that built a value network to develop and implement an innovative packaging solution consistent with circular economy principles. Content analysis was utilised to investigate the accounting tools used.

The findings indicate that circular solutions generate new organisational configurations based on value networks. Interestingly, managers’ decision-making process largely bypassed the accounting function; they relied on informal accounting and life cycle analysis, which stimulated a multi-stakeholder dialogue in a life cycle perspective.

The research provides theoretical and practical insights into the capability of management accounting systems to support companies seeking circular solutions.

The authors offer implications for accounting practice, chief financial officers (CFOs) and accounting educators, suggesting that a dialogic approach may support value retention of resources, materials and products, as required by the circular economy.

The research contributes to the debate about the role of accounting in sustainability, specifically the need for connecting for resource efficiency at the corporate level with the rationalisation of resource use within planetary boundaries.

The study contributes to the limited research into the role of management accounting in a company’s transition to circular business models. Dialogic accounting theory frames exploration of how accounting may evolve to help businesses become accountable to all stakeholders, including the environment.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the socio-political role of materiality assessment in sustainability reporting literature and discuss the potential of materiality assessment to advance more inclusive accounting and reporting practices, in particular critical dialogic accounting.

Drawing on literature on the concept of materiality together with insights from stakeholder engagement, commensuration and critical dialogic accounting the paper analyses disclosure on materiality in sustainability reports. Empirically, qualitative content analysis is used to analyse 44 sustainability reports from the leading companies.

The authors argue that, first, the technic-rational approach to materiality portrays the assessment as a neutral and value-free measurement, and second, the materiality matrix presents the multiple stakeholders as having a unified understanding of what is considered important in corporate sustainability. Thus, the technic-rational approach to the materiality assessment, reinforced with the use of the matrix is a value-laden judgement of what matters in corporate sustainability and narrows down rather than opens up the complexity of the assessment of material sustainability issues, stakeholder engagement and the societal pursuit of sustainable development.

The understandings and implications of the concept of materiality are ambiguous and wide-reaching, as, through constituting the legitimised set of claims and information on corporate sustainable performance, it impacts our understanding of sustainable development at large, and affects the corporate and policy-level transition towards sustainability. Exploring insights from critical dialogic accounting help us to elaborate on the conceptions and practical implications of materiality assessment that enhance stakeholder engagement in a democratic, rather than managerial, spirit.

Stakeholder theory research identifies changes in language as one possible mechanism to overcome the deficiencies of current accounting practices with regard to social aspects. This study aims to examine the effects of the terms used for specific accounts on company internal decision-making, drawing on the example of “value creation accounting”.

The study uses a survey based-experiment to analyze the effects of terms used for specific accounts on decision-making, with a focus on social aspects (in particular expenditures for staff) in cost reduction and expenditure decisions.

The findings indicate that wordings, which more closely relate to value creation than to costs, decrease cost reductions and increase the priority ascribed to the social aspect of reducing staff costs in times of financial shortage. The effects of terms used on cost reductions are stronger among female decision makers.

The analysis suggests that conventional accounting language best suits organizations that aim at incentivizing decision makers to primarily cut costs. By contrast, if an organization follows an approach that puts importance on social aspects in times of financial shortage and on not doing too sharp cost reductions, value creation-oriented language is the more effective approach.

The study suggests that the specific terminology used for accounts should be chosen more carefully and with awareness for the possible effects on cost reduction decisions as well as on social consequences.

This study contributes to a better understanding of the relevance of language in accounting. It suggests that the terms used for accounts should be chosen purposefully because of their far-reaching potential consequences for stakeholders as well as for the organization.