Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the current discussions about the concept of Integrated Reporting (IR) and provides a practical and useful proposal of an instrument that could help to apply the IR concept in corporate practice.

The study uses a deductive normative research approach.

Based on a comprehensive review of international literature and research, the paper argues that a structured presentation of the traditional measure of “value added” in a so-called “value added statement” (VAS) has the potential to serve as a practical and effective reporting instrument for IR. The proposed VAS not only meets the guiding principles of IR but also reports on the monetary effects of different types of capital included in IR and in this way complements and represents the concept of IR very well.

The authors intend to stimulate the academic as well as institutional discussion on how to apply the concept of IR at the corporate level. As the characteristics of the proposed VAS comply well with the guiding principles and concepts developed in the Integrated Reporting Framework project of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and with the ultimate objective of integrated thinking, the study can inform the current considerations within and outside of the IIRC.

The future of IR and the probability of its world-wide application in practice will depend on the development of appropriate reporting tools that incorporate the central ideas of IR, currently no such reporting tools exist. In this paper the authors make an argument for a VAS as a complementing, useful and therefore appropriate reporting tool for IR.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the meaning of interdisciplinarity in accounting research and the possible benefits of moving toward a more integrated interdisciplinary approach. It also examines the drawbacks and institutional impediments to such a move.

The paper draws upon and synthesizes the authors’ experiences of involvement in the interdisciplinary accounting community over the past two decades.

The paper distinguishes between interdisciplinarity at the field level and interdisciplinarity within individual studies. Noting a lack of study-level interdisciplinarity within accounting research, it explores the potential for novel insights emerging from encouragement of such an approach.

Institutional impediments to study-level interdisciplinarity need to be addressed if the accounting academy is to realize the potentially powerful benefits and social contribution of such an approach to research. A key limitation is that the paper is based primarily on the observations and perspectives of the authors.

The paper provides a distinction between field-level and study-level interdisciplinarity.

The purpose of this research is to use an accountability framework to explain the emerging tensions in accountability and how an intended bottom‐up approach became progressively supplanted. This paper is set within an emerging Zambian microfinance organisation moving into crisis.

A series of semi‐structured interviews were conducted with key local microfinance specialists, managers and accountants, clients and past and current loan officers. Live observation of the client‐loan officer interface and internal meetings provided triangulation on accountability relationships in the midst of crisis. Data were analysed using NVIVO, a qualitative computer software package.

The findings show that tensions between vertical and horizontal accountability in practice can be directly translated into heightened pressure and stresses on both the non‐governmental organisation (NGO) and its loan officers, which constrain overall accountabilities to other stakeholders and disguise other potential dysfunctions.

This study focussed on accountability at the grassroots in microfinance NGOs with a social mission. It reveals potential for further personal, community and socially constituted accounting research within microfinance in particular.

The paper adds to the literature on NGO accountability. It will be of value to researchers and practitioners seeking to gain a better understanding of not‐for‐profit organisations whose goals are not primarily wealth creation. It also gives details on under‐researched areas in accounting, namely NGOs and poverty reduction, and practices in Sub‐Saharan Africa.

IFAC, a Swiss‐registered non‐governmental organization, is emerging as an important international (auditing) standard setter amongst a powerful group of regulators, including the World Bank, the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the European Commission (EC). The purpose of this paper is to focus on the changing governance and accountability structures within IFAC, the way such changes are shaping, or re‐shaping, its “public interest” commitments and the resulting strategic implications for processes of auditor regulation and public oversight in the global financial arena.

The material and analysis presented in the paper derives from an extensive review of official reports, consultation documents and related responses, a range of other information available on IFAC's web site (www.ifac.org) or those of other key regulatory players in the global financial arena.

The paper analyzes how IFAC is succeeding as an international standard setter with an established place in the global financial infrastructure. From analysis of the recent establishment of a Public Interest Oversight Board (PIOB) and the changing nature of representation on IFAC's Public Interest Activity Committees (PIACs), the paper reveals a growing reliance on governance by experts together with a growth in influence of the large, multinational accounting firms. Governance of auditors has become a matter of global importance and governance structures are being reconfigured.

By highlighting the changes that have taken place within IFAC's governance system, the paper establishes the importance for public policy of further study and debate concerning the nature and practical operation of such a system, particularly given IFAC's position within a complex but developing global governance arena.

IFAC is becoming an integral player in global financial governance processes and yet has not been subject to any substantial academic accounting research. This paper seeks to rectify this by focusing on the structures and processes underpinning both the development of IFAC's International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) and its own global strategy for advancement.

The purpose of this paper is to review the use of content analysis in social and environmental reporting (SER) research. It explores how the relevant literature has evolved over time and particularly how recent developments have affected the validity and reliability challenges that researchers face when executing the method.

The paper combines a quasi-systematic review of the literature employing content analysis (examining a sample of 251 studies published over the last 40 years in a wide array of journals with interest in the field), with a largely interpretive meta-analysis, using an index, considering the research questions asked and frameworks used as well as the specific content analysis decisions.

A number of issues of concern in the use of the method are identified, mainly over comparability and reliability of coding schemes. Potential explanations are developed and methodological refinements that could enhance the usefulness of content analysis methods in SER research are subsequently proposed.

It should be acknowledged that, as 251 SER studies have been reviewed, there is always the possibility that some unique studies that could have contributed in the discussion have been ignored.

By reviewing the use of the method in a comprehensive sample of 251 SER studies published over the last 40 years in a wide array of journals with interest in the field, the paper also offers a guide for researchers (particularly in the SER field) wishing to employ content analysis in the future.

The paper contributes to the literature by offering a critical and comprehensive review of the method’s theoretical underpinnings and application in SER research, and by describing changing patterns in content analysis, in order to help build a more secure foundation for future work.

The purpose of this research is to seek to understand and explain the non‐governmental organisation (NGO) and its location in civil society in order to provide a basis for future research work. The paper aims to explore and develop understandings of accountability specifically in the context of the NGO and then extend these insights to the accountability of all organisations.

The paper is framed within a theoretical conception of accountability and is primarily literature‐based. In addition secondary data relating to the issues of concern are collated and synthesised.

The research finds that the essence of accountability lies in the relationships between the organisation and the society and/or stakeholder groups of interest. The nature of this relationship allows us to infer much about the necessary formality and the channels of accountability. In turn, this casts a light upon taken‐for‐granted assumptions in the corporate accountability and reminds us that the essence and basis of success of the corporate world lies in its withdrawal from any form of human relationship and the consequential colonisation and oppression of civil society.

The principal implications relate to: our need to improve the analytical incisiveness of our applications of accountability theory; and the possibility of the accounting literature offering more developed insights to the NGO literature. The primary limitations lie in the paper in being: exploratory of a more developed understanding of accountability; and a novel excursion into the world of the NGO and civil society – neither of which feature greatly in the accounting literature.

These lie in the current political struggles between civil society and capital over appropriate forms of accountability. Corporations continue to avoid allowing themselves to be held accountable whilst civil society organisations are often accountable in many different and informal ways. Ill‐considered calls from capital for more oppressive NGO accountability are typically, therefore, hypocritical and inappropriate.

NGOs are introduced in a detailed and accessible way to the accounting literature. The concept of accountability is further developed by examination of relationships and channels in the context of the NGO and, through Rawls' notion of “closeness”, is further enriched.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the phenomenon of accounting in non‐governmental organisations (NGOs). It seeks to understand accounting processes and reporting practices in NGOs and the conditions that sustain those processes and practices. NGOs have become important institutions in world affairs but accounting research has not developed significant interest in their operations.

The research executes a grounded theory strategy as the principal methodology for the inquiry. Fieldwork was undertaken in three Tanzanian NGOs.

The research established the importance of accounting in the process of navigating organisational legitimacy. This was achieved due to its important role in symbolising organisational competence. Two principal strategies were employed by organisations in navigating legitimacy – building credibility and bargaining for change.

The paper makes a contribution to the limited empirical research into accounting in NGOs in developing countries and to grounded theory, accounting research. The principal finding, that in the NGOs studied the primary purpose of accounting was its symbolic use in navigating legitimacy and that it has a minimal role to play in internal decision making, is an important finding for practice as well as for understanding and knowledge. Finally, the paper sheds light on accountability in NGOs by narrating how the phenomenon is constructed and perceived by organisations and stakeholders. Future research should extend our understanding of these phenomena across a broader range of NGOs to incorporate differences in geographical location, religious affiliation and also include Northern donor organisations.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how the managers of early adopting Australian firms contribute to the institutionalisation of integrated reporting (IR).

This study is situated within institutional theory. The authors undertook semi-structured interviews with 23 Australian managers. The authors drew on Gabriel's (2000) poetic analytics to show how the sensemaking activities of the early adopters contribute to the institutionalisation process.

Two main narratives dominate our managers’ experience: IR as story-telling and IR as meeting expectations. These two narratives are constructed simultaneously and theyset up contrasting plots regarding salient events, responsibilities and characters that are resolved through one or more of three “inter-narratives” that background these tensions. The inter-narratives suggest time, the company's strategy, and talking and engagement can solve problems.

The authors argue that the managers of early adopting firms are important in the institutionalisation process. Even though they may not necessarily be institutional entrepreneurs they do engage in important “institutional work”. The study is limited by its predominant focus on only one participant to the institutionalisation process, and it is may be the case that the institutionalisation of IR is not ultimately successful.

Provides in-depth insights into an under-researched participant in an institutional field contributes to institutionalisation. Additionally, it sheds light on the conditions under which firms will engage with IR.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the multiplicity of views on integrated reporting and to consider the possibility of, and impediments to, reconciling these multiple rationales (“orders of worth”) and thus gain legitimacy through a compromise. This sheds light on the understanding of integrated reporting as such, as well as shows how legitimacy struggles are resolved in practice around complex accounting practices in heterogeneous environments.

This explorative paper empirically applies Boltanski and Thévenot's sociology of worth (SOW) framework to analyse integrated reporting in the Dutch reporting field. Data were collected using multiple methods, including 64 semi-structured in-depth interviews with a wide range of relevant actors, and documentary analysis. Data were coded for the presence of orders of worth and legitimating compromise mechanisms.

The author's analysis suggests that integrated reporting combines the disparate domains of industrial, market, civic and green order of worth. These different logics of valuation need to be reconciled in a compromise in order for integrated reporting to become a legitimate practice. Such a compromise requires a common interest, avoidance of clarification and maintenance of ambiguity. The author's analysis suggests these mechanisms are violated though, with the risk that integrated reporting gets captured by investors and accountants, leading to local private arrangements rather than durable legitimate compromise.

First, SOW informs the understanding of integrated reporting. It highlights in particular its fragility as fundamentally different rationales need to be reconciled, which is a challenge yet also gives rise to creative frictions. Second, the SOW framework creates the possibility for scholars to look closer at the dynamics of legitimacy and at the possible mechanisms to attain legitimacy in fragmented and heterogeneous environment.

The SOW framework offers tools for practitioners, in particular those working within a pluralistic context. The various mechanisms of compromise discussed in this paper provide practical guidelines for how to manage this complexity and gain or maintain legitimacy.

This rich empirical study combines a novel theoretical approach (the SOW framework) with an analysis of the relatively unexplored topic of integrated reporting. At the same time it introduces a conceptualisation of legitimacy that highlights communicative and constitutive dialogue and goes beyond fit and compliance.