Search results

The purpose of this paper is to distinguish between corporate accountability and corporate governance, explore the development of corporate accountability and examine the role of the tripartite audit function in securing this accountability.

A normative approach has been adopted and the research is based, primarily, on an examination of relevant literature.

Society facilities the growth of economic entities by providing them with resources. As their command over resources increases, these entities gain significant economic, social and political power and accountability is demanded of their managers as a check on possible abuse of this power. Historically, as companies have increased their power in society, those to whom and that for which their managers are held accountable have been extended. Today, the managers of large public companies are considered to be accountable to society as a whole for a wide range of corporate activities. The discharge of corporate accountability traditionally relied on the preparation and audit of accountability reports (financial statements). However, from the 1990s, responding to the increasing severity of the impact on society of unexpected corporate failures – and continued failures – responsible corporate governance was added as an accountability requirement. Further, as the activities for which companies are accountable have been extended (paralleling the growth of their “power” in society), so corporate responsibility information has featured as an element in their accountability reports. As these changes have occurred, the importance of the tripartite audit function in securing corporate accountability has come to be recognised and its members – the company's external and internal auditors and its audit committee – have become increasingly multi‐disciplinary in nature.

The paper explores the questions of why corporate accountability arises and how it is discharged. It explains the relationship between corporate governance and accountability and the role of the audit function in securing corporate accountability. It also provides insights into changes occurring in the audit function and how these might develop.

The purpose of this paper is to integrate the context of sustainability in a framework for greater corporate accountability.

Applied conceptual research.

This literature review shows that current corporate accountability frameworks forces companies to focus on a narrow source for value creation based on imperfect economic theories inadequate response to societal issues and misleading measurement systems. The current conceptual accountability frameworks are dramatically inadequate in the context of escalating sustainability issues and needs of both society and business. The business responses, through corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, voluntary sustainability reports and industry standards are only a poor attempt to address the fundamental sustainable development challenges. Economic theory has defined externalities as residual to the market and as market failure requiring government intervention.

This paper proposes a direct valuation and formal accounting of externalities on the corporate balance sheet, with an offsetting appraisal of the social licence to operate for the corporation, thus creating a meaningful and integrated basis for accountability.

The current definition and understanding of corporate accountability is challenged. The paper presents a broad grounding in relevant literature for change to the current corporate accountability framework. The main contribution of this paper towards theory development is that meaningful corporate accountability framework in the context of sustainability can connect social progress to the economic value of the firm's strategy.

This paper aims to review traditional corporate governance and accountability research, to suggest opportunities for future research in this field.

The first part adopts an analytical frame of reference based on theory, accountability mechanisms, methodology, business sector/context, globalisation and time horizon. The second part of the paper locates the seven papers in the special issue in a framework of analysis showing how each one contributes to the field. The paper presents a frame of reference which may be used as a “roadmap” for researchers to navigate their way through the prior literature and to position their work on the frontiers of corporate governance research. The paper is primarily discursive and conceptual.

The paper encourages broader approaches to corporate governance and accountability research beyond the traditional and primarily quantitative approaches of prior research. Broader theoretical perspectives, methodological approaches, accountability mechanism, sectors/contexts, globalisation, and time horizons are identified.

Greater use of qualitative research methods are suggested, which present challenges particularly of access to the “black box” of corporate boardrooms.

Drawing on the analytical framework, and the papers in the special issue, the paper identifies opportunities for further research of accountability and corporate governance.

This paper aims to fill gap in the literature and explore policy options for resolving the problems of accountability by framing three research questions. The research questions are (i) whether certain elements of Scott’s (2014) institutional pillars attenuate (accentuate) corporate and public accountability; (ii) whether the presence of ruling party-affiliated enterprises (RPAEs) create an increase (decrease) in the degree of corporate (public) accountability; and (iii) whether there is a particular form of ownership change that transforms RPAEs into public investment companies.

Using a qualitative research methodology that involves term frequency and thematic analysis of publicly available textual information, the paper examines Mechkova et al.’s (2019 forms of government accountability. The paper analyzes the gaps between the de jure and de facto accountability using the institutional pillars framework.

The findings of the paper are three. First, there are gaps between de jure and de facto in all three (vertical, horizontal and diagonal) forms of government (public) accountability. Second, the study finds that more than three fourth of the parties that contested the June 2021 election did have regional focus. They did not advocate for accountability. Third, Ethiopia’s RPAEs are unique. They have regional focus and are characterized by severe forms of agency and information asymmetry problems.

The main limitation of the paper is its exploratory nature. Extending this research by using cross-country data could provide a more complete picture of the link between corporate (public) accountability and a country’s institutional pillars.

Academic research documents that instilling modern corporate (public) governance standards in the Sub Sahara Africa (SSA) region has shown mixed results. The analysis made in this paper is likely to inform researchers and policymakers about the type of change that leads to better corporate (and public) accountability outcomes.

The institutional change proposed in the paper is likely to advance the public interest by mitigating agency and information asymmetry problems and enhancing government accountability. The changes make the enterprises investable, save scarce jobs, enhance diversity and put the assets in RPAEs to better use.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that uses the institutional pillars analytical framework to examine an SSA country's corporate (public) accountability problem. It demonstrates that accountability is a domestic and a (novel) traveling theory. The paper identifies the complexity of resolving the interlock between political institutions and business enterprises. It theorizes that it is impossible to instill modern corporate (public) accountability standards without changing regulatory, normative and cultural cognitive pillars of institutions. The paper contributes to the change management and public interest literature.

This study aims to examine the mechanisms that were being used to enhance board accountability of Ghanaian listed banks, and how board accountability can be improved.

The 2011 and 2016 annual reports of listed banks on the Ghana Stock Exchange were examined, and a survey questionnaire was sent to board members of nine banks.

The results show that the directors of Ghanaian listed banks prioritise a shareholder approach to accountability, with a shift towards stakeholders. Audit committees, external audits and internal audits were the main mechanisms used by these banks to enhance board accountability. Some of these mechanisms were not used effectively by a number of these banks.

Board accountability can be improved by appointing very competent people to the board, the national adoption of a mandatory code of corporate governance, regular rotation of external auditors and requiring non-executive directors to stand for re-election more frequently. Our research identifies weaknesses of accountability mechanisms and offers timely recommendations for banks and regulators to build stronger corporate governance systems.

This study obtained valuable opinions of the boards of directors, provides insights on boards of Ghanaian listed banks and contributes to the literature of corporate governance and accountability in Africa.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether Shell Nigeria’s Global Memorandum of Understanding (GMoU) promotes corporate-community accountability as a basis for fostering sustainable community development in the Niger Delta.

Shell Nigeria’s GMoU stand-alone reports were analysed through the lenses of accountability and transparency theoretical frameworks to explore the extent to which GMoU, as a corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiative, is dialogically embedded and practised. Meaning-oriented content analysis was deductively used to isolate pertinent themes and generate findings from the background theoretical literature.

The authors find that Shell discursively appropriates the meaning of accountability and transparency in a manner that allows it to maintain its social legitimacy and the asymmetric power relations between itself and host communities whilst restricting communities’ agency to hold it accountable. Shell does this by interpreting the notion of participation restrictively, selectively deploying the concept of transparency and accountability and subtly exerting excessive control over the GMoU. Thus, the GMoU’s potential to contribute to sustainable community development and positive corporate-community relation is unlikely tenable.

Accountability and transparency are core and critical to corporate-community relations and for achieving community development CSR objectives, but are often taken for granted or ignored in the CSR literature on the Niger Delta of Nigeria. This paper addresses this gap in the literature by using accountability and transparency lenses to unpick GMoU model and contribute to studies on CSR practices by oil multinational corporations (MNCs) in developing countries. Indeed, the use of these lenses to explore CSR process offers new insights as to why CSR practices have failed to contribute to sustainable community development despite increased community spending by oil MNCs.

In the Covid-19 pandemic era, corporate responsibility and accountability for maintaining employee health and safety, particularly from this pernicious virus, have become a matter of major social and economic importance. From an accountability through action perspective, this study aims to set out to evaluate the potential occupational health and safety accountability consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic.

This paper is based upon purposive sampling of several sets of publicly available data including published research literature addressing corporate social responsibility and accountability, and the literature more specifically addressing occupational health and safety (OHS) and its reporting. Also included are recent Web-based reports and articles concerning Covid-19-related OHS government and industry sponsored guidelines for employers and their workplaces across the UK and Australia.

The findings of this research highlight that firstly, the extant literature on OHS has been predominantly functionalist in its approach and that accountability through action provides an opportunity to make employers more visibly accountable for their response to Covid-19. Secondly, the paper highlights that despite recent progress on OHS issues significant concerns remained in the pre-Covid-19 era and that emerging regulations and legal obligations on employees have the potential to make OHS issues a prominent part of corporate social responsibility research.

Disease and mental health statistics reveal the potential significance of their expansion in the Covid-19 environment, and regulatory and legal liability concerns emerge as potential drivers of renewed corporate as well as researcher attention to OHS issues. Implications for the emergence of a broader range of accountability forms and visibilities are also canvassed.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate organisational accountability to less economically powerful stakeholders in the absence of formal corporate social reporting (CSR) guidelines. In addition, this study emphasises the role of administrative and institutional reforms in empowering stakeholders in a developing country context, namely, Bangladesh.

Consistent with prior literature, this qualitative study collected data through semi-structured interviews with 23 representatives from NGOs, media, civil society, customers, regulators, trade union leaders and employees who are considered as less economically powerful stakeholders. This paper draws on the demand for administrative reforms along with an institutional support structure (Owen et al., 1997) to enhance CSR and corporate accountability.

The empirical evidence shows that there is a need for a stand-alone mandatory CSR to achieve stakeholder accountability. It also shows that there are demands from “stakeholders to right to know” about the company’s social and environmental performance along with stakeholder engagements. There is a perceived demand for administrative reform along with institutional supports that can contribute to the CSR development in Bangladesh. These administrative reforms would encourage transparent corporate social and environmental practices. Given the socio-economic and vulnerable environmental conditions of Bangladesh, stakeholders in this study suggested contextually relevant CSR guidelines towards greater accountability.

This paper is one of the few engagement-based studies which explore the perceptions of less economically powerful stakeholders towards CSR developments in an emerging economy – Bangladesh. The findings of this study using the theoretical lens of accountability with administrative and institutional reforms lead us to conclude that companies in Bangladesh have low level of CSR towards stakeholder accountability and stakeholder engagements.

The paper contributes to the CSR literature by highlighting the needs of CSR from the stakeholder’s accountability perspective.

The purpose of this study is to examine whether the expectations and requirements contained within the corporate governance code have an impact on how accountability is perceived, understood and practiced by company board members in an emerging economy (Mauritius).

The paper relies on 24 semi‐structured interviews of board members in listed and non‐listed companies and also analyses the accountability implications present in the local code of corporate governance and relevant reports. The analysis is informed by the typologies of board accountability and process developed by Roberts in 2001 (socialising, individualising, sovereign and complementary) and is complemented by Pettigrew and McNulty's 1995 notions of minimalist and maximalist boards.

From a state which can largely be associated to the notion of sovereign governance and a minimalist board, the findings reveal a substantive change in the type of board accountability but it is one which privileges an individualising form of board interactions. A move to a more empowered “maximalist” board is also noted. Notwithstanding, the paper uncovers specific issues with the INED as an accountability mechanism in that there is much fuzziness on his/her role and motivations and whether INEDs can conceivably contribute to a socialising form of board accountability.

The paper responds to calls for more qualitative research on how boards actually operate in emerging economies, at a time when an increasing number of countries have adopted corporate governance requirements drawn primarily from the Anglo‐American model. This paper contributes to the literature by providing empirical evidence on corporate board processes and dynamics in non‐Western contexts.

The United Nations Global Compact initiative is presented for businesses and nonbusiness as a universally accepted set of principles. The aim of the 10 principles in the areas of Human Rights, Labor, Environment, and Anticorruption is to encourage businesses to align their operations and strategies with committed values. The Global Compact network involves not only companies but also governments, labor, and civil society organizations. Corporations, community, and environment are integral parts of a system that correlate to each other. In light of the assumption that business operations have increasingly observable effects on the environment, economy, and social life on a global scale, it is necessary to have accountable and sustainable firms. The Global Compact is a voluntary strategic policy initiative, and it has become more important in where interactions between organizations and stakeholders to be more dynamic. On the other hand, sustainability has economic, social, and environmental dimensions, and in accordance with these dimensions, it is necessary for firms to take into account the influence of their operations on their stakeholders. Thereby, from theoretical perspectives, the primary objective of this chapter is to illustrate the role of Global Compact in corporate accountability and sustainability.

An extensive literature research is conducted in order to understand the relationship between Global Compact principles and corporate accountability and sustainability.

From a theoretical point of view, there are some conditions for the advancement of the corporate accountability and sustainability. For instance, there is need for stakeholders’ insistence about incorporating social and environmental values into the business economic decisions. Thus firms could contribute to not only worlds’ economic but also social as well as environmental future.

The research is a theoretical study, but for further studies, empirical studies can be conducted to understand the interactions between Global Compact principles and corporate accountability and sustainability.

This study may be useful for managers to realize the role of Global Compact principles on corporate accountability and its contribution to being a sustainable firm.

There is a lack of studies that analyze the role of Global Compact principles on corporate accountability and sustainability. Examining the principles in light of corporate accountability and sustainability will add a value to the literature in this area.