Search results

The purpose of this paper is to understand sustainability assurance (SA), and diversity in that practice, by examining assurance providers’ understandings of the practice and the influences that those understandings have on the actual assurance process. It focuses on the issues beyond the content of statements in SA reports.

This paper employs semi-structured interviews, supplemented by textual data sources. Research participants are assurance providers in the UK, including those within and outside the accounting profession. Drawing on the perspective of actor-network theory, the study focuses on the associations between different actors and how those shape the assurance practice.

The findings indicate that providers’ understandings of SA practice vary significantly. This variation has a major effect on how the assurance practice is conducted. The study identifies four types of SA engagements, which are designated as: social assurance, integrated assurance, formative assurance and compliance assurance. Such a categorization provides a broad-based understanding of the operationalization of SA and the degree of heterogeneity within it.

This paper extends the understanding of SA by focusing on the practice beyond the statements made by assurance providers, which have been the predominant focus of analysis in the existing literature, and by offering a categorization of the diversity in practice. The focus on the associations between assurance providers and other actors provides a new perspective for exploring the fundamentals of the practice.

A number of organisations outsource their information systems and information technology infrastructure to a type of organisation called a “service organisation”. In the current business environment, where cyber risks are increasing, it is important to have a mechanism to ensure the credibility of these service organisations. This paper, therefore, aims to understand the contextualisation of accountability and trust of related organisations through the use of assurance engagements.

This paper is conceptual in nature; however, textual data sources are used to support the theorisation of accountability and trust in the context of companies using service organisations. It uses publicly available assurance reports and related assurance standards for observing the accountability mechanism in practice, to understand the purpose of the assurance.

Assurance statements for service organisations mainly provide reputation-based, not contract-based, accountability. Limited access to the assurance reports and limited responsibility of service auditors potentially decrease the degree of this reputation-based accountability. The findings reveal a potential accountability paradox regarding the role of assurance practice, as to whether it serves as a managerial tool to build trust or as an accountability mechanism for stakeholders.

This paper extends the understanding of accountability and trust in the context of this unconventional form of organisational relationship. It urges more transparency in terms of the accessibility of assurance reports to provide information to wider stakeholders. The findings add to the latent literature on organisational trust and voluntary assurance practice.