Search results

This study aims to explore the impact of international financial reporting standard no. 8 (IFRS 8) on segmental information reporting (SIR) after the post-implementation review (PIR) issued by international accounting standards board (IASB). This impact is examined in relation to quality and quantity as SIR dimensions represent, respectively, the level of reported items and segments. As a complement to this, the chief operating decision maker (CODM) identity is considered to understand the patterns of SIR dimensions.

The SIR of the UK financial times stock exchange 100 (FTSE-100) listed companies over the period 2013-2016 is the research’s scope. Several criteria were developed to ensure a representative research sample. A disclosure index approach was used facilitating the use of content analysis for data collection, which pertained to the dimensions of SIR published by the FTSE-100 following IFRS 8 PIR.

The IFRS 8 PIR has had several implications shaping the growing trend that is underpinned by the SIR dimensions published by FTSE-100 companies. First, the SIR quantity dimension positively corresponds over 2013-2016, but it still does not meet IASB’s demands. This, secondly, also applies to the quality dimension of SIR to uncover inconsistency with the existing knowledge being held regarding the introduction of IFRS 8. More specifically, the response of the FTSE-100 to mandatory and voluntary items seems to be in transition of substitution. Third, CODM’s identity was an insightful dimension in rationalising the understanding through the aforementioned dimensions. It is undertaken by boards of directors or executive committees and the case of the latter is associated with more disclose in relation to the CODM’s identity.

These findings reveal implications to: academics undertaking further research about IFRS 8 PIR to challenge or endorse this conclusion, using similar or alternative approaches; the stakeholders’ decision-making process; and policymakers to re-think the structure of mandatory and voluntary items.

This paper provides empirical evidence on the quality and quantity of SIR published by FTSE-100 companies following IFRS 8 PIR.

Drawing on statements made under the transparency in supply chains provision of the UK Modern Slavery Act, this paper aims to examine how firms are responding to modern slavery risks in their supply chains.

Using an institutional theory lens, a content analysis of modern slavery statements by financial times stock exchange (FTSE) firms is carried out. The analysis focusses on sources of modern slavery institutional pressure and changes that firms have made in their structures, policies and practices in response to modern slavery risks.

Three sources of institutional pressure are inferred from modern slavery statements: international human rights accords (coercive), multi-stakeholder initiatives (mimetic) and professional standards (normative). Changes made by firms in direct response to modern slavery include adopting new policies, strengthening contract terms, establishing working/steering groups and creating new key performance indicators. FTSE 100 firms have been more proactive than FTSE 250 firms in making these changes, as have firms in higher risk industries.

The analysis covers FTSE firms only. Responses to modern slavery risks by non-FTSE firms deserve attention.

The UK Modern Slavery Act relies on non-government organisations and consumers to hold firms to account over modern slavery. Policymakers should be aware that while this strategy might work with high profile firms, it is less applicable to firms that operate below the public radar.

The paper shows that institutional theory has validity for explaining corporate responses to modern slavery risks.

An abundance of academic studies have been devoted to the investigation of corporate social responsibilities, and although the business world seems to have accepted the general idea that it should be socially responsible, it has never been asked what executives perceive their social responsibilities to be. Additionally, extensive research in an attempt to identify the relationship between corporate social and financial performance by investigating companies' annual and financial reports has shown largely inconclusive results. This paper therefore aims to investigate the insights of corporate executives on both the issues of the social responsibilities of business and the link between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and financial performance. With respect to corporate executives, the authors investigated if there are differences between the perceptions of executives of FTSE 100 and FTSE All‐Share.

The data was collected via online survey and semi‐structured interviews with the executives of FTSE All‐Share companies. Out of 531 executives, the authors received 82 responses of a response rate of 17 per cent. They contacted 178 executives representing FTSE 100 companies and received 29 responses of a response rate of 17.6 per cent. In order to build a phenomenological approach to this study, the authors interviewed four executives to document their opinions and thoughts.

The results indicate that the business world holds a narrow view of its social responsibilities whilst maintaining that it is possible to be both profitable and respectful to its stakeholders. The analysis also reveals that socially responsible businesses employ CSR in pursuit of their commercial interests and consider it to be their competitive advantage. Moreover, the business seems to have integrated CSR into all its operations and activities and considers it as a necessity rather than luxury, which suggests that CSR and financial performance are in synergy.

One major contribution of this study is the difference analysed between perceptions of executives of FTSE 100 and other FTSE All‐Share companies on whether CSR policies and activities are implemented only when extra financial resources are available. This might suggest that FTSE 100 companies are more likely to have already integrated CSR into their business strategy and therefore devote financial resources to their CSR programs. Other FTSE All‐Share companies, in contrast, might still be regarding CSR as an add‐on and therefore spend monies on CSR only when they have extra financial resources available. The similar explanation can be offered for the difference between perceptions of executives of FTSE 100 and other FTSE All‐Share companies as to whether implementation of CSR policies and activities will increase overheads, increase share prices in the following years and help raise new capital.

We investigate the return and volatility spillovers from major UK banks to Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 (FTSE 100) index using Gaussian estimation and continuous time models as well as discrete time multivariate GARCH (MGARCH) modelling approaches. Using daily, weekly and monthly data over the period December 1999–December 2010, which includes the recent 2007–2009 global financial crisis, empirical estimates of uni- and/or bi-directional return and volatility spillovers are provided. The bivariate MGARCH results reveal strong return spillovers from the FTSE to the banks, and no return spillover from the latter to the FTSE. Nevertheless, strong bi-directional volatility transmission is verified. The continuous time analysis provides mixed evidence of feedback effects over the different models.

This paper aims to provide unique interdisciplinary research evidence between the risk information disclosed by auditors and the risk information disclosed by corporate managers. In particular, it investigates the association between the level of risk information disclosed by auditors (key audit matters [KAMs]) and the level of corporate narrative risk disclosure.

The study sample consists of the UK FTSE all-share non-financial firms across six financial years. The authors use a computer-aided textual analysis, and the authors use a bag of words to score the sample annual reports.

The results suggest that KAMs and corporate narrative risk disclosure levels vary across the industries. The authors found a significant positive association between the risk information disclosed by auditors and the risk information disclosed by corporate managers. Also, the authors found that FTSE 100 firms exhibit higher significance between the ongoing concern and the level of narrative risk disclosure.

The study approach helps assess the level of management risk reporting behaviour due to the new auditor risk reporting standards. This helps to emphasise how auditors and companies engage and communicate risk-related information to stakeholders. Standard setters should suggest a more detailed reporting framework to protect the shareholders. The unique findings are incredibly beneficial to the regulators, standard setters, investors, creditors, suppliers, customers, decision makers and academics.

This paper provides a shred of extraordinary evidence of the impact of auditor risk reporting and management risk reporting. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study has yet investigated the corporate narrative disclosure after the new audit standards ISA 700 and ISA 701.

Tracker funds offer an attractive balance between risk and return, by providing the profit of the index, with the reduced risk associated with the broad market cover. An effectively designed tracker fund will achieve best tracking of the index with minimal running and trading costs. This paper aims to investigate the use of improved optimisation methods for the design and maintenance of tracker funds.

Most current methods of tracker fund optimisation use quadratic programming (QP), due to its simple formulation and efficient solution. However, the explicit tracking of the return of the index and the optimal selection of the subset of shares composing the fund is not directly available using these methods. This paper investigates ways to overcome the shortcomings of current methods by using genetic algorithms (GA). A GA based tracker fund optimisation method is applied to Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 data using computer simulations.

Tracking performance is presented and compared to QP. Results show the advantage of the new method for various conditions of tracker fund subset size and update rates. In particular, there is an improved performance when evaluating the errors in optimising returns of the index.

The paper intentionally sets out to use commercially available software to implement the optimisation approaches, thus demonstrating that the advantages of using GAs are easily realisable and do not require tailor made software.

The paper provides a direct comparison between the established approach of QP and a GA. The implementation uses commercially available software and is therefore easily realisable in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to explore, empirically, the contribution of human capital (HC) to value creation and the external disclosure of HC. The specific aims are to: investigate the relative contribution of HC to the generation of firm value; compare the differences in the perceptions of human resource (HR) directors and finance directors (FDs) in relation to this contribution; examine the relationship between the internal collation and external disclosure of HC information; investigate incentives and disincentives to the external disclosure of HC information; and investigate the most appropriate medium to externally disclose HC information.

A questionnaire survey of (HR) directors of UK listed companies was conducted. Responses are compared to those from FDs obtained from a previous survey on the broader concept of intellectual capital disclosure. In total, 13 follow‐up interviews were conducted. The matched views of the (HR) specialist and the FD are compared for eight case companies.

Employee skills and education, employee commitment, positive employee attitudes and behaviour, and employee motivation are considered to contribute to value creation the most. Information on employee turnover, employee training and development, and workplace safety is frequently collated. There also appears to be attempts to capture information on aspects such as employee satisfaction, motivation, and commitment. Marked differences exist between the extent to which information is internally collated and externally disclosed. External disclosure appears to be a valuable recruitment tool. However, giving away information which may harm competitive advantage is a serious concern. The annual report was considered the most effective written form of communication for disclosing HC externally. Despite some disparity in views, there is evidence to suggest recognition by FDs of the value of human capital and commitment to its external disclosure. Contrary to prior research, evidence from the small matched sample indicates no significant difference in views between the two functional specialists regarding the importance to value creation of four key HC components.

A comparison across the full range of HC issues is not possible as the FD IC survey was unable to address HC in as much detail as the HC survey.

This paper contributes to the understanding of HC and its disclosure by comprehensively investigating such issues for a large sample of UK companies.

The paper provides an invited “Viewpoint” from Professor Susan Vinnicombe, along with contributions from Professor Sharon Mavin, on women leaders’ progress on UK company boards and suggests areas for future research.

Draws on data from the annual UK The Female FTSE Board Report (2021) and The Hidden Truth Report (2022), tracking gender diversity on UK company boards. Professor Vinnicombe outlines reflections on progress, and jointly the authors highlight suggested areas for future women-in-leadership research.

The authors argue against the continued use of the business case for gender diversity and suggest a research agenda for future women-in-leadership research concerning: gender-aware Chairs of Boards and Chief Executive Officers and men allies; access and appointment to senior board roles; and bias in senior appointments. We suggest a return to examining barriers to women’s progress in middle management, the role of middle managers/leaders and the uptake and impact of established flexible ways of work at executive levels. New research is possible into how women leaders in top positions have a positive influence on gender diversity yet are discriminated against by various publics. The authors recommend further intersectional research as a priority for women-in-leadership research to enable further theorizing and feminist progress.

Professor Sue Vinnicombe has dedicated her academic career to questioning barriers to women’s progress in management/leadership and actively influencing organisational practice. Sue was influential in the field before her first co-authored papers were published in Women in Management Review (our predecessor) in 2001 and 2002. Professor Sharon Mavin is a previous co-editor of Gender in Management: an international journal. Her first papers were published in Women in Management Review in 1999 and 2001. Sharon is co-editor of the Special Issue, women-in-leadership research and feminist futures: new agendas for feminist research and impact on gender equality.

The authors construct asset portfolios comprising small-sized companies and value stocks that provide with higher returns for the UK market based on a three-factor model with incorporated behavioural features. The authors were able to demonstrate that value factor model is vulnerable to behavioural patterns, especially corporate fraud. In all of the above, the authors utilised a new proportional sorting methodology against the value ranking approach, commonly employed in empirical studies. Strong evidence is observed that portfolio performance based on various syntheses of allocated assets reveals counter-intuitive results related to the BE/ME, namely, that expected returns based on size and BE/ME produce significant errors and small firms retain consistently better returns. The reason might be the unusual accounting techniques many firms follow to receive extended capital after management decisions. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors were able to demonstrate that value factor model is vulnerable to behavioural patterns, especially corporate fraud. In all of the above, authors utilised a new proportional sorting methodology against the value ranking approach, commonly employed in empirical studies. Strong evidence is observed that portfolio performance based on various syntheses of allocated assets reveals counter-intuitive results related to the BE/ME, namely, that expected returns based on size and BE/ME produce significant errors and small firms retain consistently better returns. The reason might be the unusual accounting techniques many firms follow to receive extended capital after management decisions.

Value factor model is vulnerable to behavioural patterns, especially corporate fraud. In all of the above, the authors utilised a new proportional sorting methodology against the value ranking approach, commonly employed in empirical studies. Strong evidence is observed that portfolio performance based on various syntheses of allocated assets reveals counter-intuitive results related to the BE/ME, namely, that expected returns based on size and BE/ME produce significant errors and small firms retain consistently better returns. The reason might be the unusual accounting techniques many firms follow to receive extended capital after management decisions. Overall, asset pricing models with embedded risk factors which entail either shares or dividends are logically circular behavioural simultaneities, thus invalid when tested and estimated by statistical methods as an outcome of the EMH.

In distinctive contrast to the recent literature, the authors show that the returns from a size factor model of small stocks tend to outperform big stocks especially in crisis periods. Moreover, the authors were able to demonstrate that value factor model is vulnerable to behavioural patterns, especially corporate fraud. In all of the above, the authors utilised a new proportional sorting methodology against the value ranking approach, commonly employed in empirical studies. Strong evidence is observed that portfolio performance based on various syntheses of allocated assets reveals counter-intuitive results related to the BE/ME, namely, that expected returns based on size and BE/ME produce significant errors and small firms retain consistently better returns. The reason might be the unusual accounting techniques many firms follow to receive extended capital after management decisions. Overall, asset pricing models with embedded risk factors which entail either shares or dividends are logically circular behavioural simultaneities, thus invalid when tested and estimated by statistical methods as an outcome of the EMH.

This study aims to examine the relationship between the attributes of audit firms (Big 4, audit fees, busy season, audit firm tenure and audit partner gender) and the impact of these attributes on key audit matters (KAM) readability in Malaysia.

The auditor's reports and financial data were analysed from a sample of FTSE 100 Malaysia-listed companies for the fiscal years 2017–2019, consisting of 258 observations. Panel regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the possible associations between audit firm attributes and KAM readability. The Flesch reading ease score and Coleman–Liau index were applied to measure KAM readability.

The findings show that female audit partners significantly impact KAM readability; further analysis also revealed that companies audited by Big 4 audit firms and higher audit fees tend to report a more readable KAM disclosure in the FTSE 100 in Malaysia.

The regression results provide empirical evidence of the influence of audit firm attributes on KAM readability. This study also examined important corporate governance players, such as external auditors and those charged with governance, who form the audit committee's qualities when analysing the determinants of KAM reporting variations in Malaysia.