Search results

Know your customer (KYC), accounting standards, issuance, clearing, and trade settlement became the major barrier to implement accounting, accountability and assurance process in supply chain finance (SCF). Blockchain technology features have the potential to solve accounting problems. This research focuses on exploring how blockchain technology provides solutions to overcome the barriers of accounting process in SCF. The benefits, opportunities, costs and risks related to blockchain adoption are also explored.

Multi-case study and qualitative methods are used with a framework based on blockchain role to overcome the accounting process barriers. Ten blockchain projects in SCF and 29 interviews of participants as a unit of analysis are considered.

The findings indicate that blockchain technology offers solutions to solve accounting, accountability and assurance problems in SCF. Validity, verification, smart contracts, automation and enduring data on trade transactions potentially solve those barriers. However, it is also necessary to consider costs such as implementation, technology, education and integration costs. Then there are possible risks such as regulatory compliance, operational, code development and scalability risk. This finding reflects the current status of blockchain technology roles in SCF.

This study unveils blockchain's SCF accounting potential, emphasizing multi-case method limitations and future research prospects. Diverse contexts challenge findings' applicability, warranting cross-industry studies for deeper insights. Addressing selection bias and integrating quantitative measures can enhance understanding of blockchain's accounting impact.

Accounting professionals can get an idea of the future direction and impact of blockchain technology on accounting, accountability and assurance processes.

This study provides initial findings on the potential, costs and risks of blockchain that is beneficial for parties involved in SCF, especially for banks and insurance underwriters. In addition, the findings also provide direction for the contribution of blockchain technology to accounting theory in the future.

Exploiting a novel measure of hostile takeover exposure primarily based on the staggered adoption of state legislations, we explore a crucial, albeit largely overlooked, aspect of corporate social responsibility (CSR). In particular, we investigate CSR inequality, which is the inequality across different CSR categories. Higher inequality suggests a less balanced, more lopsided, CSR policy.

In addition to the standard regression analysis, we perform several robustness checks including propensity score matching, entropy balancing and an instrumental-variable analysis.

Our results show that more takeover exposure exacerbates CSR inequality. Specifically, a rise in takeover vulnerability by one standard deviation results in an increase in CSR inequality by 4.53–5.40%. The findings support the managerial myopia hypothesis, where myopic managers promote some CSR activities that are useful to them in the short run more than others, leading to higher CSR inequality.

Our study is the first to exploit a unique measure of takeover vulnerability to investigate the impact of takeover threats on CSR inequality, which is an important aspect of CSR that is largely overlooked in the literature. We aptly fill this void in the literature.

This paper provides insights into Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Accounting and Reporting for the Other Sector, defined as organisations that are not corporations and do not have profitability as their overriding success criterion.

This is a conceptual paper that addresses the impact of SDGs on the Other Sector and the accounting and reporting of them by these organisations.

There are a number of implications for research in relation to theories, research approaches and the crossing over of disciplines in relation to the Other Sector’s SDGs accounting and reporting.

The research insights from this paper can be applied to inform the SDGs accounting and reporting practice of the Other Sector.

This paper addresses the impact of the recent sustainability development, the SDGs, on a sector that is very different from the corporate sector and highlights the benefit of accounting and reporting of these goals for the Other Sector.

This chapter explores the gap between social expectations and actual sustainability performance in the business world and identifies the root causes of this discrepancy. The author reviews corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability, and their relationship with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This chapter also compares the connections and differences between the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the SDGs. The author analyzes possible solutions to bridge the gap, including renewing the social contract between businesses, society and institutions. This involves rethinking the role of businesses and institutions in promoting sustainability and creating new systems and structures that incentivize sustainable practices. This chapter concludes by discussing the pathway to a sustainable and inclusive world through systems innovation and change. When embracing a systems thinking approach, individuals and organizations can identify and address the root causes of unsustainability, and create more resilient and sustainable systems that benefit both people and the planet.

The study emphasizes the importance of human perception in engaging stakeholders and sheds light on the way the often “disregarded” actors (i.e. local communities) make sense of an organization's behavior at the corporate, project and individual level.

Departing from the normative stance of stakeholder theory, this conceptual paper aims to unfold the benefits of a more holistic and inclusive organizational approach to stakeholders. The conceptual framework is elucidated through the lens of attribution theory, which points to communication as the source of stakeholders' attributional processes and thus their perception of fairness.

Focusing the authors’ attention on construction and infrastructure projects, this research suggests that early transparent and informative communication with local community stakeholders motivates them to perceive fairness, from both the process of decision-making (distributive) and the outcome of decisions (procedural), as well as the way in which they are treated (interactional). Such communications lead to less biased attributions as they reduce the influence of personal beliefs in achieving a conscious and non-biased attribution mode.

In this paper, the authors adopt attribution theory as their lens with which to interpret the process whereby individuals attempt to make sense of an organization's behavior. Focusing on secondary stakeholder engagement such as local community, the authors’ conceptualization shapes both a framework highlighting communication as the mediator for shaping human perceptions, and a process model to guide project organizations and practitioners to embrace an inclusive approach toward the often-disregarded stakeholders, which is aimed at enhancing their perception of fairness at the corporate, project and individual levels. The authors highlight the need for organization to provide clear and transparent communication to a broader range of stakeholders, such as those that have had little to say in the decision-making process (the often-disregarded voices). By seeking collaboration rather than manipulation, a project organization might promote stakeholders' non-biased perception of fairness, in terms of both the process and outcome of the project.

Stakeholder capitalism has gained attention among business practitioners and academia, often discussed within the context of corporate social responsibility, ethical practices and values-based leadership. Many societal institutions, including businesses and higher education institutions, have a role to play in the transition toward stakeholder capitalism. This study aims to discuss insights gained from a multiyear research and pedagogical project coordinated among a group of academics and an Israel-based holding company to study the implementation of a values-based leadership process focused on establishing a stakeholder-oriented model in a variety of organizations.

Conducted over a decadal period, this project relied on a qualitative case study methodology. The project was conceived as an exploratory and inductive study examining organizations that implemented a values-based leadership model and a university that used this model for curriculum and pedagogy. Semi-structured interviews, observations of leadership practices and operations, and substantive reviews of organizational documents informed the study’s iterative methodology.

The case studies presented explore the benefits of a stakeholder capitalism and values-based leadership transformation in organizations and highlight the importance of senior leadership engagement at the outset to set the tone and direction of implementation while also role modeling values-based behaviors for the organization. The utility of aligning the new values-based approach with existing elements of the organizational culture and priorities was also identified in addition to the benefit of individuals linking the new values initiative to their personal values and life. These practices, and a broader stakeholder dialogue on values, helped establish a transition that was inclusive within the organizational hierarchy and in its connections to the larger society. The cases also explored how stakeholder principles and values-based leadership models can be integrated into management education based on the outcomes of the organizational investigations.

These case studies offer insight into the implementation of a values-based leadership framework, which draws on stakeholder theory, in diverse organizations across a for-profit to non-profit spectrum. These studies also provide a unique opportunity to evaluate the implementation of a common values framework in different sectors. The cases further highlight the potential role of business-education sectoral partnerships in educating a workforce that is dedicated to business for good.

The case examines the development and launch of an exchange-traded fund (ETF) based on JUST Capital's socially responsible corporate ranking methodologies. The case provides a market overview of Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) and socially responsible investing (SRI), what has driven growth in those areas worldwide, and several best-practice investment approaches. Following the overview, the case describes the founding and development of JUST Capital, explores JUST Capital's ranking methodologies, and presents the decision point faced by the CEO: requisite selection of one of three strategies in order for JUST Capital to generate “self-sustaining” revenue.

Many corporations engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities voluntarily, but there is an ongoing debate about whether the government should intervene in CSR, particularly in countries with challenging institutional contexts. While some have argued that CSR should remain a discretionary exercise, as any attempt to make CSR mandatory through any form of state intervention will negate the meaning and objectives of CSR. However, drawing on the institutional theory, this chapter argues for the need to have some form of legislated CSR for banks operating in countries with challenging institutional contexts. The chapter further acknowledges that a universal CSR framework would be difficult to achieve due to differences in institutional contexts between countries; consequently, the nature, scope, and application of CSR legislation would vary significantly amongst countries as CSR is context dependent. Nonetheless, given the crucial role banks plays in society besides acting as the country's payment system, banks also transform illiquid liabilities into liquid assets, therefore making the banks the drivers of national economic developments globally. Governments in developing and emerging markets (DEMs) should ensure that banks' CSR initiatives are not only meaningful but also impactful by implementing a limited legislated CSR framework. This framework would require banks to establish a CSR committee of the board, make mandatory non-financial disclosures on their CSR activities in their Annual Reports, provide mandatory CSR continuous professional development (CPD) training for bankers, and mandate banks to contribute a certain percentage of their yearly profits before tax to agreed CSR initiatives, among other requirements.