Search results

Financial and nonfinancial disclosures are still anchored to conventional notions of transparency, whereby corporations “push” information out to various stakeholders. Such information is now “pulled” from various sources and addresses aspects of corporate behavior that go well beyond those envisioned by the disclosure framework. This shift makes notions of values, measurement and accountability more fragmented, complex and difficult. The paper aims to bring the accounting scholarly debate back to what and how transparency can be achieved especially in relation to issues of social inequality and sustainability.

After an analysis of the limitations of current approaches to disclosure, the paper proposes a shift toward normative policies that profit of years of critique of positivism.

Drawing on the notion of value-added, the paper ends with a new income statement design, labeled as Value-Added Statement for Nature, which recognizes Nature as a further stakeholder and forces human stakeholders to give voice, or at least acknowledge the lack of voice, for non-human actors.

The author proposes a shift in the perspective, practice and institutional arrangements in which disclosure occurs. Measurement and transparency need to happen in communication exercises, which do not presuppose what needs to be made transparent once and for good but define procedures on how to make fragmented, complex, multiple and volatile notions of value transparent. Income statements and accounting more in general is to be reconceived as a platform where stakeholders will have to continuously negotiate what counts as the common good in the interest of all, including Nature.

The purpose of this paper is to study, mainly from the point of view of methodological accounting principles, the value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC), introduced by Pulic as a measure of intellectual capital efficiency (ICE). More specifically, the aim of the analysis is to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of the VAIC, primarily from the accounting theory perspective.

The approach to the study of Pulic's contribution is as follows: first the authors submitted Pulic's methodology to a “conceptual” test, in order to check whether it contradicts any basic accounting principles. Then the results of this methodological test were compared to those obtained by the authors who have criticized Pulic's proposal, in order to check for any concordance or discordance with the literature.

Several authors have discussed the crucial aspects of the VAIC. In this paper the focus is primarily on Andriessen's concerns, since they relate to the theoretical accounting aspects of Pulic's proposal, which is the topic of the paper. First of all, the authors have found that the suggestion of Pulic, centered on the Value Added Income Statement, does not modify or contradict any of the fundamental accounting principles. Therefore the criticisms made by Professor Andriessen should be subject to future research. Furthermore the performance measure proposed by Pulic (VAIC) is not a genuine rival to the traditional methodologies (e.g. the Economic Value Added (EVA)), as instead emerges from Pulic's papers. VAIC and EVA measure different aspects of the performance and therefore may usefully live together in a context in which the performance is measured through multicriteria methodologies, such as the Balanced Scorecard, Skandia Navigator or Intangible Asset Monitor.

The practical implications of the results are: the correct placing of Pulic's contribution into the accounting principles theory; and the manner for using the VAIC methodology in a multicriteria performance evaluation. The authors believe that both aspects have relevant implications for business accounting practice.

The paper shows that almost all of the misunderstandings of the literature debate, regarding Pulic's proposal, arise from a “semantic shift” generated by the fact that Pulic uses the terms human capital and structural capital with a completely different meaning from that of the Skandia Navigator. Authors’ hope is that the study described in the paper will contribute to a better understanding of: the way to calculate and to interpret the efficiency of intellectual capital (IC) in a correct manner; and the role of IC on firm multicriteria performances.

This study proposes a comparison between Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC) and one of the most important performance evaluation methods, the Economic Value Added (EVA), starting from a re-interpretation of the VAIC.

The empirical data were gathered from AMADEUS Bureau van Dijk and consist of 2,596 companies operating in Northern Italy, from six different economic sectors, observed for the year 2011. A correlation analysis was carried out in order to highlight whether there is a relationship between the two concepts of VAIC and EVA.

Results show that EVA and VAIC have no significant relationships; as a matter of fact, EVA is based on financial theory, whereas VAIC is focalised on the assessment of Intellectual Capital Efficiency (ICE).

Managers could be misled due to the fact that they often make decisions by taking into account only financial indicators such as EBIT, EVA, etc. Although methods like EVA have improved modern accounting systems, they do not take into account information linked to ICE. Therefore, these two perspectives can be useful in a context in which firms' performances are measured through multi-criteria methodologies (i.e. Balanced scorecard).

The proposal describes the differences between VAIC and EVA considering these two concepts as not contrasting. In fact, in order to better measure firms' performances, it could be useful to consider VAIC and EVA as an integrated vision in order to develop multi-criteria evaluation systems, rather than consider them separately.

The purpose of this paper is to place the value creation process within sustainable growth strategies. Building on Drucker (1968, 1999a, b), Pulic (2000, 2004, 2008) and other papers by the same authors (Iazzolino and Laise, 2013) the specific aim of this research is to propose an accounting-based framework able to: distinguish between knowledge-intensive firms (KIFs) and nonknowledge intensive firms (nonKIFs); and investigate the contribution of the two sets of firms (KIFs and nonKIFs) to overall sustainability, from a social point of view, of the economic system.

The paper uses the notion of value added (VA) (Pulic, 2000, 2004, 2008) as the main indicator to measure the value creation in a knowledge economy context. As regard the first point of the framework, the approach is based on the analysis of VA and its components, starting from a reinterpretation of the concept of value added intellectual coefficient made by the same authors of this paper. An empirical analysis based on the composition of VA in ten Italian industries, by using an overall sample of 1,000 firms, has been carried out and is described in the paper. As regards the second point, the paper analyses, from a theoretical point of view, the necessary conditions to set up a sustainable value creation strategy in social terms, using the conceptual categories introduced by Drucker (1968, 1999a, b) and Pulic (2000, 2004, 2008).

From results of the empirical analysis it emerges that: first, in traditional industries the weight of the cost of employees on VA (human capital investments) is less than the other sectors (low human capital intensity). In these sectors the value creation strategy is mainly based on “dead knowledge,” embedded in machines (physical capital); and second, in nontraditional industries (consulting, advertising, research, etc.) the economic value creation is mainly based on “living knowledge,” embedded in human resources (high human capital intensity). In these sectors we have lower productivity of work (VA/human capital) and higher employment.

The framework proposed makes it possible to reduce the risk of myopic valuation of economic performance. Through this methodology it is possible to highlight the effects of sustainable strategies based on knowledge investments oriented toward the stakeholder value theory and corporate social responsibility. The approach can be very useful for top managers and for accountants, as it underlines the importance of the VA income statement and constructs a strong link to the themes of knowledge management.

The originality and the value of this methodological proposal can be appreciated by taking into account that in the literature there is no accounting-based methodology that is able to identify: the knowledge-intensive firms; and the firms that can contribute to overall social sustainability, within the set of all firms.

The aim of the paper is to provide some guidelines for using and not using knowledge-based strategies (KS) and for understanding the sustainability of such kinds of strategy. The paper proposes an accounting-based framework that can be used for this aim. The meaning of the guidelines is illustrated with reference to a specific case of a company that implements a KS: the Italian Loccioni Group. The work continues and develops a research already started by the same authors (Iazzolino and Laise, 2013, 2016; Iazzolino et al., 2014).

Building on previous works by the same authors (Iazzolino and Laise, 2013, 2016; Iazzolino et al., 2014), the proposed framework starts from the analysis of the value added (VA) created by the firm. To characterize a KS, the VA and its components are analyzed. To evaluate the sustainability of a strategy (from the economic and social point of view), the time trend of the VA and its composition are also analyzed. The research is theoretical and empirical: a case study has been carried out to apply the framework. Specific key performance indicators were identified to describe the context analyzed.

From a theoretical point of view, an inter-theory relationship (not existing in the literature) between P. Drucker’s approach of economic/social sustainable strategies (ESS) based on knowledge and Pulic’s theory of human capital efficiency (HCE) has been constructed. From results of application of the framework on the case study, it emerges that the Loccioni Group implements a KS. It can be considered a “win-win” strategy.

The case study (Loccioni Group) is described to highlight that an ESS is achievable. The case study has to be understood as the description of a best practice (a benchmark) and not as a statistical test of hypothesis (a theory test). The description of the case is useful to show that companies which adopt KS are not a utopia. There are concrete examples that show that it is possible to implement such strategies. In other words, the set of companies that adopt a ESS is not “empty”.

Managers underestimate the importance of a performance measurement that takes into account advantages in terms of intangibles. The approach analyzed in this paper makes it possible to highlight the effects of sustainable strategies based on knowledge investments oriented toward the stakeholder value theory and corporate social responsibility.

The main purpose of this paper is the construction of an inter-theory relationship (not existing in the literature) between P. Drucker’s approach of ESS based on knowledge and Pulic’s theory of HCE. The existence of such a relation, in the authors’ opinion, is necessary to provide a theoretical foundation of an accounting framework useful for evaluating KS and that a KS (in Drucker’s sense) is adopted when it creates value for all the stakeholders. That is, it is adopted when it has a high VA (in Pulic’s sense).

The purpose of this study is to determine whether intellectual capital (IC) creates value in the Serbian hotel industry. Specifically, this paper examines to what degree IC and its key components affect the financial performance of hotels compared to physical and financial capital.

The sample included all of the hotels that operated as independent entities in Serbia during 2009–2012. value-added intellectual coefficient was used to measure the level of IC contribution to value creation, which was linked to various measures of financial performance, including operating profit, return on equity, return on assets, profitability and employee productivity.

Results indicate that after controlling for firm size and leverage, employee productivity and, to some extent, profitability were affected by human and structural capital. The research confirms that the financial performance of hotels in Serbia remains predominantly influenced by efficient use of physical capital.

The study’s generalizability is limited to the hotel sector within Serbia.

Senior managers in the hotel industry must recognize the importance of managing both the physical aspects of their hotels and the intangible resources embedded in their employees and processes.

The findings will aid recognition of the importance of investing in IC in hotel industry as a crucial element of achieving competitive advantage in the information age. Moreover, the findings suggest that long-term growth should not rely solely on physical and financial assets.

Purpose – Previous reviews of Corporate Social Reporting (CSR) literature have tended to focus on developed economies. The aim of this study is to extend reviews of CSR literature to emerging economies.

Design/methodology/approach – A desk-based research method, using a classification framework of three categories.

Findings – Most CSR studies in emerging economies have concentrated on the Asia-Pacific and African regions and are descriptive in nature, used content analysis methods and measured the extent and volume of disclosures contained within the annual reports. Such studies provide indirect explanation of the reasons behind CSR adoption, but of late, a handful of studies have started to probe managerial motivations behind CSR directly through in-depth interviews finding that CSR agendas in emerging economies are largely driven by external forces, namely pressures from parent companies, international market and international agencies.

Originality/value – This is the first review and analysis of CSR studies from the emerging economy perspective. Following this analysis, the authors have identified some important future research questions.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).