Search results

This paper aims to develop a conceptual framework informed by a literature review. This framework aims to deepen and broaden the understanding of the relationship between corporate governance mechanisms and non-financial reporting (NFR) through qualitative research approaches.

A review of corporate governance and NFR literature and existing research frameworks leads to the development of a conceptual framework to encourage future qualitative accounting research on the corporate governance mechanisms for NFR.

Few studies consider the complex interrelationships between NFR and corporate governance mechanisms. Quantitative studies using secondary data sources dominate accounting research on the topic. Of the small number of qualitative studies, many are theoretical and offer little new knowledge about the effectiveness of corporate governance mechanisms in practice. The research framework, developed from a literature review and consideration of multiple qualitative approaches, proposes numerous avenues for future research.

This paper is based on a scoping review of the literature using peer-reviewed journal papers. Other researchers may have identified additional literature for inclusion, including grey literature.

More qualitative research into NFR and corporate governance mechanisms may help to guide practitioners seeking to incorporate sustainability into their governance practices.

The critical relationship between NRF and corporate governance is under-explored in research yet has significant consequences for organisations pursuing sustainability.

The authors develop a conceptual framework for qualitative accounting research on NFR and corporate governance, addressing key outstanding questions in this area and considering different theoretical perspectives when approaching this critical topic. Although there is scope for further research in general in this promising area, including quantitative reviews and discursive studies, qualitative research would be of particular value. The authors also outline multiple directions for nurturing academic debate.

This study aims to examine the association between board characteristics (namely, diligence, independence, gender diversity, size and expertise) and sustainability-related disclosures (SRD) in Malaysia.

A robust SRD index of 409 items is used to derive SRD scores for 56 Malaysian listed companies from 2018 to 2020, yielding 168 observations. Pooled ordinary least squares is applied to test the research hypotheses and model.

The authors find that board members in audit committees and female board members show a significant relationship with SRD, casting doubt on the widely held belief that other board characteristics (such as size, diligence, independence and expertise) independently impact SRD. However, the authors find that market influence (firm value) and firm size are associated with SRD.

SRD is at its nascent stage, and companies are cherry-picking on what to report, as evidenced in the SRD scores. Regulators and policymakers must recognize the complex interplay between various factors impacting SRD for the timely issuance of comprehensive rules for firms to comply. The regulators’ drive for more female board representation can be a boost to enhance the sustainability agenda for Malaysian listed companies. The SRD scoring template can be used on post-2020 data to investigate the sustainability maturity of Malaysian listed companies.

The authors evidence that SRD practice is in the early stages of maturity using the comprehensive SRD scoring template. Although the findings contradict prior studies, the authors believe this is driven by the robust SRD measure based on the latest Global Reporting Initiative and Bursa rules.

The purpose of this paper is to improve the understanding of the social contexts of sustainable Lean culture in healthcare by examining self-efficacy (SE) as a fundamental construct related to the value of perceived readiness, prior education of Lean and the importance of leadership’s system-level support.

A descriptive correlational study was conducted to identify the relationships between SE and Lean readiness factors, SE and prior Lean training, SE and clinical vs administrative roles and SE and perceived system-level support in a large health system.

There was a statistically significant difference in self-reported readiness to use Lean tools between individuals who had received Lean training during their academic education and those who had not; however, their level of education did not impact SE. Lastly, and perhaps most important, the learner who embodies SE also has system-level support.

Future directions of this research, in addition to assessing team readiness as other studies suggest, would be to evaluate individual team member readiness by gauging SE and addressing deficits prior to the deployment of process improvement (PI) projects to promote success and sustainability.

This contributes to the ongoing scholarship of Lean management systems, providing clinical and non-clinical leaders with a contextual understanding of their supportive role in the SE of teams.

This study demonstrates the value of understanding SE of individual team members and how it can contribute to overall improved team outcomes, directly impacting the sustainability of Lean change culture and its promotion of improved patient safety, cost efficiencies and access to care.