Search results

Purpose/Aim: Over the last quarter of a century, several voluntary frameworks and non-financial reporting standards have been developed by various initiatives and organisations. Especially after the 2008 financial crisis, which deepened into values crises, the need for evaluating social, environmental, and economic consequences and herein for non-financial disclosures accrued. This chapter aims to outline the current state in the ecosystem for non-financial reporting and its projected future developments and suggests further developments in this field. Since financial institutions played a negative role in the crises and will be important in future responsible investing, the authors also addressed some financial institutions’ specific non-financial issues.

Method: In search of an answer to our questions about whether existing non-financial reporting pronouncements meet (various) stakeholders’ expectations and whether international pronouncements are needed, we rely on triangulation. We start with the identification of phenomena of non-financial reporting. Description of phenomena is further on supplemented with a literate overview. Based on a review of prior research and study of the current framework’s pros and cons, we present a possible path of further development in non-financial reporting. Making that mixed-methodological approach is used (i.e. deductive and inductive reasoning).

Results/Findings: The authors deduce that there has been a substantial increase in demand for non-financial information, social responsibility ratings and other non-financial information services on behalf of preparers, users of such reports and the public. The authors particularly highlight the shortcomings that currently exist and outline the characteristics that future international non-financial reporting frameworks would have to meet with the awareness that such framework or standards will have their advantages and disadvantages. As seen by the authors, the main problem is how to achieve political consensus and then general acceptance by users.

Originality/Significance: The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation has become active in the field of non-financial reporting and started a project to become an internationally recognised standard-setter. However, with many mandatory or voluntary initiatives being started in this field, IFRS Foundation will need to address many challenges and ambiguities to become a leading organisation in non-financial reporting. Therefore, the research question is whether a new board, comparable to the International Accounting Standards Board, with the straightforward task of setting non-financial reporting standards would be needed in the future.

Apparently, scholarly attention is shifting to Society 5.0. The study of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), including its impacts on industrial productions and services, is saturated. However, there is a need for scientific investigations of the relatively new emerging concept of Society 5.0, especially regarding its relationship with I4.0. Given this necessity, the chapter conceptually examines Society 5.0 new normal and its antecedent – I4.0, with a value of the economically productive society in the post-coronavirus pandemic era. The chapter further elucidates the strategic role of emotional resilience and I4.0 collaborative partnership. Society 5.0 aims for a new society based on the notion of a human-centred economy and inclusivity. Consequently, new sets of innovative and artistic jobs will possibly emerge, driven by human competencies in collaboration with technology. In other words, Society 5.0 new normal is targeting a balanced or blended economic approach that favours a fit between society and industry and ensures that all citizens live a high-quality life by eliminating the delimiting effect of technology such as artificial intelligence (AI) on the physical space and wellbeing of the people. Hence, I4.0 collaborative partnership and emotional resilience are perceived as strategic and influential in achieving the feat of a Super Smart Society.

Purpose: This chapter focuses on the enterprise’s ethics and social responsibility, which are interdependently resulting in an enterprise’s credibility and better performance. The authors provide a comprehensive tool that can help enterprises and humankind to find a better way toward new economic and social conditions, thus society’s transformation, beginning with the enterprise-level innovation of decisions that originate from the (key) stakeholders’ personal level innovation of decisions. The purpose is to show a possible path toward requisitely holistic enterprises’ governance, management and practice.

Method: The authors use a qualitative methodological approach, based on three relations (the law of requisite holism, the law of hierarchy of succession and interdependence, and the law of entropy) and three elements (10 guidelines defining the subjective starting points and objectives, and 10 guidelines on assuring the agreed policy to survive in latter steps of working process) of Dialectical systems theory. This chapter methodologically also follows the ethics of interdependence. Based on the research, the authors propose to use the supplemented credibility strategy as a possible methodological way of introducing enterprise ethics into practice.

Findings: The authors introduce a supplemented model of the strategy of an enterprise’s credibility. The authors propose using this new model to develop an enterprise’s social responsibility and ethics in a broader sense. The authors focus is on financial institutions’ governance and credibility. The main finding of this chapter is that strong regulation of the financial sector contributes positively to all four dimensions in the strategy of an enterprise’s credibility – if it is requisitely holistic rather than one-sided and short-term.

Originality and Significance of Findings: The strategy of an enterprise’s credibility could be used as a practical implementation tool for (key) stakeholders. They can use the strategy of an enterprise’s credibility to innovate its behavior toward appropriate holistic behavior and sustainable development stimulating. This new tool can lead enterprises toward (more) social responsibility, enterprise ethics and credibility. In applying this theory to financial institutions, the authors find that such financial regulation (and supervision) significantly strengthens multiple dimensions of enterprise credibility. In this regard, the authors find it favorable and encourage such regulation in all enterprises engaged in financial services, including non-bank institutions. Besides, to add to more comprehensive social benefits, the authors find it favorable to encourage similar development in other economic sectors, not the opposite, deregulation.