Search results
1 – 2 of 2Giovanni Fiori, Francesca di Donato and Maria Federica Izzo
The chapter builds on the literature of Agency and Signalling Theories to analyse the corporate governance factors associated with the voluntary decision to prepare an Integrated…
Abstract
Purpose
The chapter builds on the literature of Agency and Signalling Theories to analyse the corporate governance factors associated with the voluntary decision to prepare an Integrated Report according to the <IR> International Framework promoted by the IIRC.
Methodology/approach
The chapter is based on the results of a probit regression run with regard to a sample of 35 companies that joined the Pilot Programme in 2011 and 137 similar companies that did not.
Findings
The analysis of two samples of European companies reveals that adhesion to the IR Pilot Programme is positively related to the gender diversity and size of the board.
Research limitations
Further research is required in order to study the differences between listed and non-listed companies in terms of variables affecting the adoption of the <IR> Framework and to increase the time range of our study. In addition, it would be interesting to include other variables capturing different aspects other than corporate governance, since the decision to join the Programme, as the results of our analysis have shown, may also be influenced by other factors, such as strategy decisions and communication policies.
Originality/value
The chapter adds to the existing literature by showing the main governance characteristics that impact the decision to adhere to the IR Pilot Programme. It is also important to the existing literature regarding the role played by gender diversity in corporate governance mechanisms and CSR policies.
Details
Keywords
Jill Hooks, David Coy and Howard Davey
At any time, there will be differing views on what needs to be done to be properly accountable, because accountees are likely to be in favour of more accountability, and…
Abstract
At any time, there will be differing views on what needs to be done to be properly accountable, because accountees are likely to be in favour of more accountability, and accountors, of less (Perks, 1993). This leads to a tension between these two groups (Ijiri, 1983).