Search results

The absence of clear guidelines as to how materiality should be judged has created problems for accountants and auditors, and resulted in risks to users of financial statements. Results of past research indicate a great lack of consensus within a judgement group (e.g. auditors) and a large degree of diversity between groups (e.g. auditors v. statement preparers), with respect to the appropriate materiality threshold. Based on past research concludes that industry, an important contextual variable in materiality judgements, may be responsible for the inconsistencies in judgements in the past. The close relationship between materiality and audit risk suggests that the type of industry may have a similar impact on risk assessments. Proposes that industry effects on materiality judgements and risk assessments be further investigated. Also suggests the need for industry‐specific guidelines for materiality and audit risk.

This paper aims to investigate materiality judgement providing insights, critiques and future research paths in light of the open debate on the role of materiality in corporate financial disclosure, highlighting potential connections and implications with sustainability and intellectual capital (IC) reporting.

The research presents an overview of the analysis of financial materiality, including new stimuli from recent studies and regulatory requirements for financial and non-financial reporting. Accordingly, this study used a systematic literature review (SLR) based on a combination of content, text and bibliometric analysis of materiality in accounting research studies, collecting data from the Scopus database as one of the most relevant repositories.

The SLR identified four relevant research trends, concerning: (1) the relevance of materiality principles in corporate disclosure; (2) financial reporting practices and materiality; (3) theories and approaches in defining financial materiality and (4) the existence of quantitative and qualitative thresholds in the materiality judgement.

The results provide theoretical and practical implications when comprehending the development of the concept of financial materiality in financial statements and whether they can be appropriate in reporting IC as well. We identified future research paths.

From a practical perspective, this study is useful for companies implementing financial materiality based on stakeholder engagement and improving their transparency in financial and non-financial reporting practices.

The research investigates if the process for assessing materiality is in line with the expectations of all stakeholders involved in financial and non-financial reporting.

This research is the first to investigate the scientific basis and applicability of the concept of financial materiality to sustainability and IC reporting.

The study aims to explore the role of stakeholder engagement for the sustainability materiality assessment process.

The study develops a qualitative research approach based on a single case study. Triangulated data was collected from semi-structured interviews, sustainability reports and archival materials, and was analysed with a combined top-down and bottom-up coding procedure to generate explanatory categories.

The findings show that stakeholder engagement and sustainability materiality assessment are interconnected. Furthermore, the study highlights a circular perspective facilitated by three iterative mechanisms: sustainability interdisciplinarity, sense of belonging and cultural mindset.

Despite the extensive knowledge of stakeholder engagement regarding the practices and advantages, the understanding of its interplay with sustainability materiality assessment over time remains limited. Consequently, the research analyses the reciprocal relationship between stakeholder engagement and sustainability materiality in a circular way.

The materiality principle is one of the top trends in sustainability reporting globally. Stakeholders have focused on the principle of materiality because of its vital importance in the context of sustainability. Materiality serves as a content-selection principle for determining the most significant sustainability matters to be included in sustainability reports. This has made reports more relevant for various stakeholders. Using the resource-based view and stakeholder theory, this paper aims to examine and uncover the antecedents and outcome of materiality disclosure in sustainability reporting.

To measure the extent of materiality disclosure, a content analysis was performed on the corporate reports of the largest listed companies in Malaysia. The relationships among the variables under investigation were examined using the partial least squares structural equation modelling technique.

While the results show that board activity, board independence and board size play significant roles as antecedents of materiality disclosure, this is not so with nationality diversity and gender diversity. In addition, the results have shown that the outcome of materiality disclosure is not significantly linked to corporate financial performance. The results show that normative stakeholder considerations are the primary motivating factor behind corporate sustainability reporting in Malaysia.

These results are of great interest to regulators, stakeholders, investors and companies alike. Enhancing materiality disclosure in sustainability reports can help in the transition to sustainable development and the successful achievement of the United Nations sustainable development goals.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first empirical study to examine the interplay between board diversity and materiality disclosure, along with their connections to corporate financial performance.

Part VII highlights certain accounting pronouncements that call for a specific application of materiality to certain financial statement items.

After reviewing the general debate of whether the same concept of materiality should apply evenly to financial statements or it should be standard-, entity-, or topic-specific, it considers the use of a specific unit of account for materiality considerations in revenue recognition, the object of materiality in related-party transactions, and specific items or circumstances that trigger materiality judgments,

The part includes a checklist of accounting pronouncements relating to specific materiality decisions. It also lists where, according to the IASB, each specific standard indicates the need for a specific attention of users to materiality.

To investigate possibilities for integrating recent interdisciplinary research on materiality with basic issues in consumer culture theory, this chapter discusses understandings of materiality-based concerns and concepts in consumer research and maps possibilities for the future.

A review focuses on concepts of materiality, agency, and intention that mark a shift to a relational metaphysics in consumption contexts. Drawing from design theory, digital humanities, and philosophy, notions of flickering and witnessing evoke models of relations and interactions between consumers and consumption objects.

In this chapter, a disciplinary proposition emerges: consumer research is a form of materiality studies wherein the consumer is designated an element of interest in the relationships and interactions that bring forth the world.

An awareness of the fundamental role played in consumer research by materiality-related assumptions may inspire concomitant animation and explication of a relational metaphysics, opening opportunities to recognize processes and practices at the core of consumer behavior previously obscured by prevailing interpretations governed by a singularly agentic, autonomous, and effective human subject. Power relations must not be ignored.

The chapter makes several contributions: organizes and explicates often taken for granted concepts such as materiality, materialism, and agency, connects consumer research to high-level theorizations of materiality, and synthesizes diverse discussions in consumer culture theory with the possibilities of new materialities.

Academics, practitioners, and standard setters have highlighted the importance of focusing on the relevance of nonfinancial reporting disclosures, calling for a debate on how best to develop corporative communicative skills with different stakeholders to conduct proper materiality analysis. To this end, the need for an inclusive process is widely acknowledged, where engagement and close relationships between an organization and its various stakeholders are crucial to identifying the main issues that the company should consider in a materiality analysis. In this chapter, an analysis of integrated reporting (IR) will be performed as an innovative corporate communication instrument that offers a complete picture of corporate performance and the important role of the concept of materiality. Then, the concept of the materiality process will be explored in a set of Spanish early adopters of IR, which will help us understand IR technology within the organizational realm and will shed some light on the materiality determination process as a communicative tool. The study revealed five main themes connected to the materiality determination process: materiality conceptualization, sources of evidence on materiality, prioritization of stakeholder engagement, the perceived advantages of the process, and its problems. The final section will set out the future challenges of IR engagement and the research opportunities that are associated with this innovative form of communicative reporting.

This paper aims to contribute to existing academic work and business practice by presenting original empirical findings and by providing insights into priority setting on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in organizations. From an academic viewpoint, it not only adds to previous work on the topic of SDG materiality (e.g. Van Tulder and Lucht, 2019) but also aims to contribute new insights into the steps that are crucial and influence the adoption of the SDGs in materiality assessments. It may also add to the literature by providing new knowledge on the strategic considerations that organizations may make and institutional dynamics that encourage organizations to implement the SDG materiality method.

By executing a national survey research in Belgium through a collaboration between academics of Antwerp Management School, Louvain School of Management (UCLouvain) and the University of Antwerp, and supported by Belgium’s Federal Institute of Sustainable Development, the authors have obtained several insights into the SDG landscape in Belgium for various types of organizations, including companies, governmental and nongovernmental organizations and educational institutions. This research builds further on a first national survey (SDG Barometer Belgium, 2018) on the adoption and implementation of the SDGs. However, an important aim of this research is to shift the emphasis to more prominent new elements, such as whether or not organizations use the SDGs in materiality assessments. While the main part of the data for this research were collected through an online questionnaire, document analyses were conducted based on the sustainability reports of BEL 20 companies, the benchmark stock market index of Euronext Brussels consisting of 20 companies traded at the Brussels Stock Exchange, and seven interviews were held to obtain additional insights.

A total of 386 organizations across sectors responded to the question “Does your organization perform a materiality analysis”, of which 210 organizations completed the question “Does your organization align the materiality analysis with the SDGs,”after an “exit route” based on a positive answer to the first question. When diving into the survey results, the authors see that no more than 12% of the 210 organizations performing a materiality analysis align their materiality analysis with the SDGs, while 14% indicate that they do not account for the SDGs at all in their materiality analyses. The results show that 41% of the organizations take into account the SDGs to a certain degree when performing their materiality analysis. Speculating on an explanation for these results, it may be the case that organizations do not yet think about coupling the SDGs to their materiality assessment, experience difficulties in practice or generally lack the knowledge for relating the SDGs to the sustainability topics that are relevant to them. This seems in line with other research (e.g. Van Tulder and Lucht, 2019), as the results of this study indicate that it seems to be difficult for organizations to relate the SDGs to the existing sustainability priorities or materiality analyses of companies.

The real contribution of this paper essentially lies in the description of the Janssen Pharmaceuticals case. The company recognized that today’s internally focused approach to goal setting is not enough to address global challenges. Hence, looking at what is needed externally from a global perspective, taking into account sustainability thresholds and setting ambitions accordingly, is needed to bridge the gap between current performance and required performance. From the Janssen Pharmaceuticals case, the authors learned that external stakeholders are an extremely useful source of information to address the required performance by using the SDG framework. For sure, SDG materiality analyses are still in an early phase of development and knowledge on how to conduct such an analysis may be lacking. Future efforts – or the lack thereof – may indicate whether or not companies consider such analyses as sufficiently relevant. Although the uptake of the SDGs is in progress, it remains to be seen which, if any, materiality method will eventually turn out as a new dominant way of defining material issues. The findings presented in this study hopefully serve as a basis for further investigation of the topic.

Materiality is a critical and challenging auditing concept. To help auditors improve their materiality judgments, the authors provide examples from Judaism, primarily due to its longevity and the richness and variety of its stories. The authors show how Judaism interprets and applies materiality in many contexts. For each, the authors provide guidance on how auditors might apply these lessons to improve their materiality judgments. The authors examine five areas where Judaic examples can inform modern auditing including: (1) considering both quantitative and qualitative measures; (2) recognizing that small quantitative changes can lead to material qualitative effects; (3) understanding that ignoring small issues can become a slippery slope; (4) considering the importance of financial statement users’ needs in developing materiality criteria; and (5) prioritizing substance over form. In all examples, context is a critical factor to consider when applying materiality. These results should be of interest to auditors, financial statement users and others.