Search results

With the help of “self-learning” algorithms and high computing power, companies are transforming Big Data into artificial intelligence (AI)-powered information and gaining economic benefits. AI-powered information and Big Data (simply data henceforth) have quickly become some of the most important strategic resources in the global economy. However, their value is not (yet) formally recognized in financial statements, which leads to a growing gap between book and market values and thus limited decision usefulness of the underlying financial statements. The objective of this paper is to identify ways in which the value of data can be reported to improve decision usefulness.

Based on the authors' experience as both long-term practitioners and theoretical accounting scholars, the authors conceptualize and draw up a potential data value chain and show the transformation from raw Big Data to business-relevant AI-powered information during its process.

Analyzing current International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) regulations and their applicability, the authors show that current regulations are insufficient to provide useful information on the value of data. Following this, the authors propose a Framework for AI-powered Information and Big Data (FAIIBD) Reporting. This framework also provides insights on the (good) governance of data with the purpose of increasing decision usefulness and connecting to existing frameworks even further. In the conclusion, the authors raise questions concerning this framework that may be worthy of discussion in the scholarly community.

Scholars and practitioners alike are invited to follow up on the conceptual framework from many perspectives.

The framework can serve as a guide towards a better understanding of how to recognize and report AI-powered information and by that (a) limit the valuation gap between book and market value and (b) enhance decision usefulness of financial reporting.

This article proposes a conceptual framework in IFRS to regulators to better deal with the value of AI-powered information and improve the good governance of (Big)data.

This study aims to analyse whether theories and views of classical Islamic scholars are widely adopted as references in Islamic accounting and finance (IAF), Islamic economics (IE) and Islamic business management (IBM) research studies as part of their contribution to solving current economic and financial problems.

The research adopts a qualitative meta-analysis methodology using NVivo 12 with selected data from 474 international journal articles published between 1981 and 2021. The study considers 172 IAF articles, 111 IE articles and 191 IBM articles.

The results of the study show that the use of theories and views of classical Islamic scholars is not widespread among the examined research papers. The findings show that 90% of researchers tend to acquire modern economics, management, psychological and sociological theories instead of classical theories. Both modern and classical theories have been discussed in the studied articles namely agency theory, stakeholders' theory, ḥisbah (accountability), maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah (objectives of Islamic law) and waʿd (unilateral promise). The gaps prevail not only in the taxonomy of terms but also in the choice of paradigm references. It is found that 66% of the 474 journal articles adopt a positivist paradigm, followed by interpretivism (19%), post-structuralism (9%) and critical orientation (6%).

This paper considers only ABS ranking journal articles. Future research may consider other journal articles from different ranking groups such as Scopus or Thomson & Reuters.

The paper sheds light on how Islamic educational institutions can develop strategies for the Integration of Knowledge (IOK) in their curriculum.

This paper helps to shape the Muslims' way of thinking within an Islamic worldview which will lead to an Islamic way of expressing knowledge, skill and behaviour.

This paper contributes to the model of IOK that has been deliberated among Islamic universities, especially those that develop IAF, IE and IBM studies.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the differences of audit quality of financial statements among auditors, including Big 4 and non-Big 4 auditors.

By employing cross-sectional analysis of compliance (a proxy of audit quality) of goodwill impairment testing of listed firms in the context of Hong Kong, the variation of audit quality of financial statements of auditees has been shown.

Audit quality of Big 4 auditors is viewed to be higher than that of non-Big 4 audit firms and the homogeneity of audit quality among Big 4 auditors is not long accepted, but variation.

Even though unqualified opinions have been given on the auditors’ reports, the quality of financial statements audit is a skeptical issue because of the high level of non-compliance of goodwill impairment testing under International Financial Reporting Standards.

This study does emphasize the higher audit quality of financial statements of Big 4 auditors than that of non-Big 4 auditors and stresses the variation of audit quality among Big 4 auditors.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the amendments to International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 and the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 9 enhanced the readability, and thus the quality and usefulness of risk disclosure information.

Readability analyses are performed on companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) from 2005 to 2021. The sample period includes the period when companies disclosed information according to IAS 39 (2005–2017) and IFRS 9 (2018–2021).

The results of the analyses show risk disclosures for JSE-listed companies to be complex and difficult to understand. Furthermore, risk disclosures have become longer and less readable with the introduction of amendments to IAS 39 and the introduction of IFRS 9.

This study uses readability measures as a proxy for the complexity and usefulness of risk disclosures. The amount of utility a user of financial statements derives could be dependent on other factors such as the quality of disclosure, individual user background and perceptions.

The results have valuable implications for the various stakeholders that make use of the information contained in financial statements. Stakeholders such as regulators and standard setters should carefully assess how accounting standards change to ensure that one of the key objectives of the IASB, namely, to provide information that is relevant, reliable and understandable, is met.

The results of this study contribute to the discourse on the usefulness of companies’ risk disclosures. Though, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to compare the readability of risk disclosures from an emerging market perspective, the results can be applied to other countries using IFRS to assess the readability of risk disclosures.

This study aims to provide a critical assessment of developments in the field of voluntary corporate non-financial and sustainability reporting and disclosure (VRD). The assessment is grounded in the empirical material of a three-year research project on integrated reporting (IR).

Alvesson and Deetz’s (2021) critical management framework structures the arguments in this paper. By investigating local phenomena and the extant literature, the authors glean insights that they later critique, drawing on the empirical evidence collected during the research project. Transformative redefinitions are then proposed that point to future opportunities for research on voluntary organisational disclosures.

The authors argue that the mainstream approaches to VRD, namely, incremental information and legitimacy theories, present shortcomings in addressing why and how organisations voluntarily disclose information. First, the authors find that companies adopting the International IR Council’s (IIRC, 2021) IR framework tend to comply with the framework only in an informal, rather than a substantial way. Second, the authors find that, at times, organisations serendipitously chance upon VRD practices such as IR instead of rationally recognising the potential ability of such practices to provide useful information for decision-making by investors. Also, powerful groups in organisations may use VRD practices to establish, maintain or restore power balances in their favour.

The paper’s limitations stem directly from its aim to be a critical reflection. Even when grounded on empirics, a reflection is mainly a subjective effort. Therefore, different researchers could come to different conclusions and offer different lessons from the two case studies.

The different rationales the authors found for VRD should make a case for reporting institutions to tone down any investor-centric rhetoric in favour of more substantial disclosures. The findings imply that reporting organisations should approach the different frameworks with a critical eye and read between the lines of these frameworks to determine whether the purported normative arguments are achievable practice.

The authors reflect on timely and relevant issues linked to recent developments in the VRD landscape. Further, the authors offer possible ways forward for critical research that may rely on different methodological choices, such as interventionist and post-structuralist research.

Literature repeatedly complains about the lack of empirical data on the costs of cyber incidents within organizations. Simultaneously, managers urgently require transparent and reliable data in order to make well-informed and cost-benefit optimized decisions. The purpose of this paper is to (1) provide managers with differentiated empirical data on costs, and (2) derive an activity plan for organizations, the government and academia to improve the information base on the costs of cyber incidents.

The authors analyze the benchmark potential of costs within existing literature and conduct a large-scale interview survey with 5,000 German organizations. These costs are directly assignable to the most severe incident within the last 12 months, further categorized into attack types, cost items, employee classes and industry types. Based on previous literature, expert interviews and the empirical results, the authors draft an activity plan containing further research questions and action items.

The findings indicate that the majority of organizations suffer little to no costs, whereas only a small proportion suffers high costs. However, organizations are not affected equally since prevalence rates and costs according to attack types, employee classes, and other variables tend to vary. Moreover, the findings indicate that board members and IS/IT-managers show partly different response behaviors.

The authors present differentiated insights into the direct costs of cyber incidents, based on the authors' knowledge, this is the largest empirical survey in continental Europe and one of the first surveys providing in-depth cost information on German organizations.

This paper aims to offer a long-term systematic picture of the evolution of manufacturing offshoring (in terms of intensity, geography and drivers) highlighting the changes in the surrounding context and the resulting transitions points (“points in time”) that have shaped its development path.

Three statistical tools were adopted on a dataset of 644 cases. First, the authors resorted to multiple structural change tests to identify the transition points. Second, the authors explored offshoring geography by conducting a network analysis. Finally, the authors adopted gravity models to shed light on offshoring drivers.

Results highlight three offshoring phases: expansion (2002–2006), reconsideration (2007–2009) and rationalization (2010 onwards). During the first phase, characterized by economic growth, firms were mainly interested in economic savings; offshoring to low-cost countries was the prevailing location strategy. Subsequently, during the economic crisis, the number of cases declined and the main drivers became market-based factors together with the research for cost savings. Finally, in the third phase, when the economy was still stagnating and new manufacturing technologies appeared, the number of offshoring cases has further decreased, and technological- and market-based factors have become the main location drivers.

The study is the first to adopt a systematic, empirical and quantitative approach to analyze the evolution of the manufacturing offshoring considering both the phenomenon itself and the triggering changes in the surrounding context. In doing this, the authors also tested the importance of considering the point in time in offshoring strategies.

This study aims to offer a bibliometric and coding analysis of blockchain articles published in the accounting, auditing and accountability fields.

The data were collected using the Scopus database and a bibliometric and qualitative coding analysis with the keywords “blockchain” and “accounting” or “auditing” or “accountability.” Of the 514 initial sources, 93 peer-reviewed papers, book chapters and conference proceedings in the areas of business, management and accounting were finally selected. Nonscientific sources such as nonpeer-reviewed books and white papers were excluded.

This study reveals a promising and multidisciplinary field of research dominated by scholars and less by practitioners. Qualitative research, especially discourse analysis, is the most used method among authors. This study gives some useful insights about blockchain's definition and characteristics, business models, processes involved, connection with other technologies and relationships with accounting theories. Among the most interesting insights, the results confirm that technology as an external force can create an intersection among several research areas: accounting, auditing, accountability, business, management, computer science and engineering fields. Finally, in terms of research themes, although blockchain has a clear effect on auditing accounting, the links with the area of accountability are less clear and validated.

This study highlights the current state of the field, combining methodological approaches and providing valuable future research insights. Additionally, it is also a starting point for professionals to fully understand blockchain's characteristics and potential with a constructive and systemic approach.

The concept of materiality is becoming increasingly important for sustainability performance measurement and reporting. It is widely agreed upon that materiality matters, in the sense that companies should identify, prioritize and disclose information on sustainability issues that are considered material. There is, however, a tension at the heart of this consensus, owing to parallel approaches to materiality being used in practice. This paper aims to shed light on how and why the parallel uses of the materiality concept may cause confusion and how this tension could be resolved.

This paper takes as point of departure the tension between two approaches to materiality: based on the Global Reporting Initiative definition, which emphasizes sustainability issues that are important to stakeholders and that have significant impacts and based on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board definition, which emphasizes sustainability issues that are financially material, i.e. likely to influence the financial performance of the company. This paper discusses the nature and consequences of the tensions between how the two definitions of materiality in sustainability reporting are used in practice, with a particular emphasis on users of information in financial markets. This paper provides empirical insight on these users’ perspectives through a survey (n = 30) and qualitative interviews (n = 6) of financial market professionals.

This study reveals tensions between different approaches to materiality in practice and how this may lead users of sustainability reports to draw unjustified conclusions on the basis of materiality assessments. Specifically, this paper demonstrates the perceived shortcomings in information availability and information quality from the perspectives of different stakeholders in financial markets with different information needs.

The users of sustainability reporting information require clarity in the communication of materiality in non-financial reports. This paper addresses how such clarity can be pursued.

Clarity about materiality in non-financial reporting is important both for investors that pursue financial return on green investments and for society at large, which relies on information about real sustainability impacts.

This paper furthers the understanding of how different materiality concepts may be problematic and how recent and ongoing developments may mitigate the risks of conflating uses of the concept.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current state of forensic accounting education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), as well as to identify the desired aims and skills required to practice forensic accounting as a profession. It also seeks to understand the education and skills provided by KSA forensic accounting education programs, the job skills required by professional accountants and the skills required by professional accountants' employers.

The study is exploratory in nature. A convenience base sampling approach was used to select the academicians and practitioners working in KSA. Participants were requested to fill out an electronic questionnaire and rank each statement on a 5-point Likert score. The responses were converted and analyzed using the T-test, to evaluate the inter- and intra-group trends in the data.

The study included 58 responses from practitioners and 30 from academicians. Both groups mentioned that the classroom and the Internet were their primary source of forensic accounting information, especially in professional accounting qualifications. According to the participants, most of the institutions in KSA do not offer forensic accounting courses. Nonetheless, forensic accounting is critical for strengthening the credibility of financial reporting in courtrooms. The study finds subtle inter-group differences regarding the development of an ideal curriculum for forensic accounting, which translates to a bigger difference in curriculum development and practice skills. Both groups were optimistic about the future path of forensic accounting in KSA.

The study reports critical differences between the status of forensic accounting education and the skills required to practice forensic accountancy in KSA.