Search results

Internal Control – Integrated Framework (COSO Report, 1992) defines internal control, suggests a framework for internal control, and presents criteria to use in evaluating controls. The document also provides guidance to management developing a report on controls for use by external parties. SSAE 2, “Reporting on an Entity′s Internal Control Structure over Financial Reporting” (1993) offers assistance to the practitioner reporting on management′s assertion regarding internal control over financial reporting. Discusses and provides an example of management′s report on internal control prepared according to COSO. Also discusses the accountant′s examination under SSAE guidance of management′s assertions and subsequent report and provides an example of the accountant′s report. Concludes by discussing the new business opportunities for the accountant which may result from external reporting on internal controls over financial reporting.

Professional accounting associations in various countries and governmental and other quasi‐official bodies have played an important role not only in the evolution of internal control reporting on a global scale, but also in educating management, investors, financial institutions, accountants, auditors, and other interested parties highlighting the pervasiveness of the effects of a sound internal control structure in corporate reporting as well as other aspects of an organization′s success. These associations include the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the General Accounting Office (GAO), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Cadbury Committee, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales (ICAEW), the Scottish Institute of Chartered Accountants (SICA), the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA), and others. Business failures, management fraud, corporate misconduct, international bribery, and notorious business scandals in all sectors of business have prompted the US government to take drastic action on internal control reporting to safeguard public interest. Several professional and government committees were formed to study this precarious situation: the Treadway Commission, the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission, the Packard Commission, the Cohen Commission, the Adams Commission in Canada, the Cadbury Committee in the UK, and others. The principal motivation for the changing dynamics has been growing public pressure for greater corporate accountability. The government′s pressure on the accounting profession and management of public corporations has been pivotal in spearheading internal control reporting. Examines the role of professional associations, governmental agencies, and others in promulgating standards for internal control reporting, and the impact of legislation on this aspect of internal auditing in the USA and worldwide.

Points out that traditional financial systems used for internal reporting are limited in several ways. Describes how a company implemented a philosophy of dynamic management reporting (DMR) that provided for a highly flexible performance reporting system. DMR can serve as a catalyst for organizational change, introduce new reporting concepts, incorporate a wide variety of performance measures, and encourage cross‐ functional understanding and co‐ordination.

This paper aims to investigate whether managers use impression management through the presentation of non-financial information in an integrated reporting setting.

The authors performed an experiment with experienced professional controllers and part-time students enrolled in the executive master’s degree in finance and control at universities in the Netherlands. In this experiment, we manipulated the financial performance to test if managers present non-financial information differently based on the firm’s financial performance.

This study found that impression management is not applied by including or excluding non-financial key performance indicators (KPIs) in the integrated report, but by using more prominent presentation forms for positive non-financial performance and non-prominent ones for negative non-financial performance. However, the use of impression management through the presentation form decreased when the firms’ financial performance was positive. In that instance, this study noted that managers statistically significantly more often decided to present poor non-financial performance in a prominent presentation format in comparison to managers who were not aware of the financial performance.

A limitation of this paper is that the authors focused on only two impression management strategies: opportunistic/under-reporting and the presentation form. This analysis shows that the use of impression management mainly seems to occur through the presentation format. Future research could investigate other impression management strategies in an integrated reporting setting.

The results of this study are of importance for users of integrated reports, because it will provide more insight into whether firms are truly transparent in their integrated reports. Furthermore, the theoretical implication of this study is relevant to regulatory authorities, because it sheds light on the different forms of impression management used in integrated reporting and the influence of positively or negatively performing KPIs on the decisions of preparers of integrated reports.

Therefore, in this study, the authors add to prior literature by investigating the concept of impression management in an integrated reporting setting. More specifically, the authors perform an experiment and focus on different forms of impression management (the presentation format and under-reporting) through non-financial KPIs in an integrated reporting setting and link it to firm financial performance.

This study aims to offer empirical evidence on how integrated thinking affects the integrated reporting (IR) practice and how integrated thinking originates from board and management involvement, cross-functional integration and integral link between capitals and strategies.

This study is cross-sectional and uses a mixed-method approach. The empirical data for the quantitative approach were collected from the 129 public companies listed on Colombo Stock Exchange in Sri Lanka. The personale responsible for preparing the annual report are selected as the respondents of this study. This study used partial least square modelling to test the hypotheses. The quantitative approach results are triangulated across a qualitative research approach in semi-structural interviews with ten responsible officers of integrated reporting practices.

The central finding of this study is the significant positive relationship between integrated thinking and integrated reporting practice. The qualitative results supported the quantitative findings and show that board and management involvement, cross-functional integration and integral link between capital and strategy enhance the integrated reporting practice. Top management and board management have positive beliefs about the integrated reporting practice; they initiate, encourage, influence, involve and support it. Furthermore, all company departments are involved with the integrated reporting led by the finance department and practice good coordination, communication and collaboration between departments. Moreover, it also evidenced their concern about the linkage between capital and strategy and how they do it in their organisation when practising integrated reporting.

The firms which intend to practice or enhance integrated reporting will be benefited from this study. Hence, this research assists in constructing IT through the direct role of the board and senior leadership, breaking down silos to diffuse IR throughout structures and processes, and concentrating on strategies while managing their capitals and relationships over the long term.

This study provides the initial quantitative empirical evidence on the impact of integrated thinking on integrated reporting practice. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to operationalise both integrated thinking and integrated reporting based on a questionnaire that developed and tested both constructs as higher-order reflective formative and on the relationship between integrated thinking and integrated reporting. The mixed-method approach to examine the relationship between integrated thinking and integrated reporting provides additional insights into the existing literature.

The purpose of this paper is to examine investors’ propensity to litigate when harmful events occur subsequent to accounting choices. Consistent with Culpable Control Theory, the authors find that investors are more likely to pursue litigation against management when managers are perceived to have more financial reporting flexibility, such as when they apply imprecise, principles-based accounting guidance. Investors are more likely to pursue litigation when they find management more responsible for harmful events, and they find management more responsible for those events when they perceive management to have more reporting flexibility. To provide additional insight, the authors investigate how the relationship between reporting flexibility and assessed manager responsibility is mediated by investors’ perceptions of management’s self-interested behavior. The authors consider monetary and non-monetary motivations for litigation against management such as recouping financial losses and punishing management. The results suggest that recouping financial losses is not the sole motivation for litigation. The authors provide evidence that punishing management is an important non-monetary component of the litigation decision. The results contribute to the limited literature on investor litigation decisions and inform the debate surrounding the potential effects of more principles-based accounting standards.

The authors test the hypotheses using an experiment with a 2×1 between-subjects design in which the authors manipulate reporting flexibility at two levels by varying the precision of accounting guidance and measure all other variables of interest. Participants are 82 part-time executive MBA program students at a major public university in the USA. Most participants work full-time (94 percent), own or have owned stocks either directly or through retirement plans (84 percent), indicate general investment knowledge (97 percent), and report high levels of familiarity with corporate financial statements, including balance sheets and income statements (92 percent). Thus, the authors conclude that these executive MBA students are reasonable surrogates for investors.

Consistent with the predictions, perceived management reporting flexibility affects investors’ propensity to pursue litigation against management. The authors find that the assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events such as investor losses, employee job losses, and economic losses suffered by a community mediates the relationship between reporting flexibility and investors’ intention to litigate. The authors also find that the relationship between reporting flexibility and assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events is not direct but instead works through the effect of reporting flexibility on perceived management self-interested behavior. As predicted, assessed management responsibility for the harmful event is positively related to investors’ propensity to litigate against management, and this relation is only partially mediated by investors’ perceptions that the litigation will be successful. This result suggests that the litigation decision is driven at least in part by corporate governance goals such as the desire for retribution or punishment of management. The second experiment provides additional support for the theory that the desire to punish management is an important component of investors’ litigation decisions.

The research makes important contributions to the literature on investor litigation and to the ongoing debate regarding principles- vs rules-based accounting standards. While some archival research addresses the conditions under which securities litigation occurs, little empirical research has directly addressed the investor decision to litigate. The paper provides additional evidence to address the question of why investors litigate. By doing so, the authors add to the debate on the desirability of shifting from more rules-based to more principles-based accounting standards.

The theory tested in this study could be used to design mechanisms to mitigate the differential propensity for investors to litigate under differing accounting regimes. As standard setters discuss a move to more principles-based standards in the USA, some observers have expressed concern that investor litigation will increase. The theory suggests that if the standard-setting body can control perceptions of management reporting flexibility such that investors believe principles-based standards provide no more flexibility than rules-based standards, they can limit an increase in the amount of investor litigation.

The authors contribute to theory by providing evidence regarding why investors desire to pursue litigation against management. The authors find that the assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events mediates the relationship between reporting flexibility and investors’ intention to litigate. The authors also find that the relationship between reporting flexibility and assignment of responsibility to management for harmful events is not direct but instead works through the effect of reporting flexibility on perceived management self-interested behavior. Furthermore, assessed management responsibility for the harmful event is positively related to investors’ propensity to litigate against management, and this relation is only partially mediated by investors’ perceptions that the litigation will be successful. Those findings provide theoretical contributions to the literature.

This paper aims to investigate the moderating effect of sustainability reporting on the relationship between the independent variables of board diversity, and earnings management and the dependent variable of readability of financial statements.

The study panel data regression analysis involved 36 Kenyan-listed companies from 2016 to 2020.

Key findings were that increased board diversity was found to significantly improve the readability of financial statements. Discretionary earnings management was found to significantly reduce the readability of financial statements. Sustainability reporting was found to significantly increase the readability of financial statements, and it moderated the relationship between board diversity, earnings management and financial statements readability in Kenya.

The study sample of 36 non-financial listed in the Nairobi Securities Exchange was very small and was affected by the problem of thin trading; hence, caution should be adopted when interpreting the findings.

The Capital Markets Authorities (CMA) as a policymaker should enforce sustainability reporting by Kenyan listed firms as there is evidence that the reporting enhances the readability of financial statements. The Institute of Certified Public Accountants as a policymaker should closely monitor the published financial statements of firms for earnings management and punish the perpetrators, as there is empirical evidence that the practice reduces the readability of financial statements.

Sustainability reporting is successful as a moderating variable between readability of financial statements and determinants of readability of financial statements.

This study contributes to knowledge by studying sustainability reporting as a moderating variable between the independent variables of board diversity and earnings management and the dependent variable of readability of financial statements and measured sustainability reporting using a dummy variable for the period before and after the enactment and release of CMA code of 2016 on corporate governance that required sustainability reporting by Kenyan listed companies.

This study explores the extent of environmental management and reporting regulations in Nigeria, highlighting areas of inadequacies in regulatory enforcement and companies’ compliance. We approach the review within the context of the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda (SDA).

This chapter is based on a systematic review of extant environmental regulations and academic literature.

The results show several inadequacies with respect to Nigeria’s environmental management and reporting regulations. We specifically note the changing environmental management and reporting landscape in Nigeria birthing several emerging mandatory reporting codes. We find that fragmented reporting regulations and inappropriate sanctions are responsible for the unsatisfactory compliance and disclosure level noted among firms in the country. Additionally, weak enforcement, funding limitations, unrealistic financial penalties, and general implementation deficits remain factors impeding effective environmental management practice in Nigeria.

This research provides insight into environmental management and reporting inadequacies in Nigeria, and the actions regulators and firm managers need to take on board to help the country actualize the UN 2030 SDA.

The main goal of the current research was to investigate whether and how leaders in health care organizations can stimulate incident reporting and error management by “walking the safety talk” (enacted priority of safety).

Open interviews (N=26) and a cross-sectional questionnaire (N=183) were conducted at the Rotterdam Eye Hospital (REH) in The Netherlands.

As hypothesized, leaders’ enacted priority of safety was positively related to incident reporting and error management, and the relation between leaders’ enacted priority of safety and error management was mediated by incident reporting. The interviews yielded rich data on (near) incidents, the leaders’ role in (non)reporting, and error management, grounding quantitative findings in concrete case descriptions.

We support previous theorizing by providing empirical evidence showing that (1) enacted priority of safety has a stronger relationship with incident reporting than espoused priority of safety and (2) the previously implied positive link between incident reporting and error management indeed exists. Moreover, our findings extend our understanding of behavioral integrity for safety and the mechanisms through which it operates in medical settings.

Our findings indicate that for the promotion of incident reporting and error management, active reinforcement of priority of safety by leaders is crucial.

Social sciences researchers, health care researchers and health care practitioners can utilize the findings of the current paper in order to help leaders create health care systems characterized by higher incident reporting and more constructive error handling.

The current paper aims at exploring the audit committee characteristics’ effect on impression management.

The methodology is based on the use of the content analysis of financial annual reports, as data of a 69-company sample study from 2015 to 2019 attained from “Amman Stock Exchange” has been analyzed. Moreover, multiple regression analysis on panel data was employed.

The results show that the independence of the audit committee, the financial expertise of the audit committee and female members negatively affect impression management, implying that these characteristics mitigate financial reporting manipulation and decrease the practices of impression management. However, the findings detect no significant influence for committee meetings on impression management.

Notably, the current work is applicable and useful for understanding the audit committee’s role in enhancing the financial reporting’s quality, along with the significance of the audit committee in growing the stakeholder’s confidence in financial reporting. In light of these results, regulatory bodies’ efforts are encouraged to create additional strategies and instructions to ensure the trustiness and credibility of financial reporting.

This paper will be useful to companies that want to improve the quality of financial reporting and decrease the impression of management’s effect on financial reporting’s readers. Moreover, this paper contributes to the literature on impression management by exploring the effect of audit committees on impression management of annual financial reports of the users in the context of emerging markets and Middle East countries, particularly Jordan.