|
Dòng
|
Nội dung
|
|
1
|
Do firms effectively communicate with financial stakeholders? A conceptual model of corporate communication in a capital market context / Niamh M. Brennan, Doris M. Mekki-Davies.
// Accounting and Business Research Vol. 48-No. 5 2018.p. 553-577. We identify what constitutes effective communication between firms and their financial stakeholders in a capital market context and establish criteria against which effectiveness can be evaluated. To do this, we introduce the concept of connectivity from the communication studies literature. We conceptualise connectivity as comprising three components: textual connectivity, intertextual connectivity, and relational connectivity. Connectivity refers to the ability to connect different sections of a text (textual connectivity), to connect texts of different time periods or different genres (intertextual connectivity), and to connect firms with their audiences (relational connectivity). We then propose criteria for judging effective corporate communication in a capital market context. Finally, we assess how digital communication and social media provide opportunities for improving connectivity in corporate communication for a broader range of shareholders.
|
|
2
|
Re-theorizing the configuration of organizational fields: the IIRC and the pursuit of ‘Enlightened’ corporate reporting / Christopher Humphrey, Brendan O’Dwyer, Jeffrey Unerman
// Accounting and Business Research Volume 47, 2017 - Issue 1 2017.p. 30-63. This paper studies the emergence of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and its attempts to institutionalize integrated reporting as a practice that is critical to the relevance and value of corporate reporting. Informed by Suddaby and Viale’s [(2011). Professionals and field-level change: institutional work and the professional project. Current Sociology, 59, 423–442] theorization of how professionals reconfigure organizational fields, the paper delineates the strategies and mechanisms through which the IIRC has sought to enroll the support of a wide range of stakeholder groups for the idea of integrated reporting in order to deliver a fundamental reconfiguration of the corporate reporting field. The paper’s analysis reinforces the significance to any such field reconfiguration of the reciprocal and mutual arrangements between influential professionals and other powerful actors but does so in a way that (a) refines Suddaby and Viale’s theorization of processes of field-level change and (b) pinpoints the fundamental policy challenges facing the IIRC. Gieryn’s [(1983). Boundary work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48 (6), 781–795] notion of boundary work is operationalized to capture some of the complexity and dynamism of the change process that is not sufficiently represented by Suddaby and Viale’s more sequentialist theorization. From a policy perspective, the paper demonstrates just how much the IIRC’s prospects for success in reconfiguring the corporate reporting field depend on its ability to reconfigure the mainstream investment field. Ultimately, this serves to question whether the IIRC’s conceptualization of ‘enlightened’ corporate reporting is sufficiently powerful and persuasive to stimulate ‘enlightened’ investment behavior focused on the medium and long term – and, more generally stresses the theoretical significance of considering connections across related organizational fields in institutional analyses of field reconfiguration efforts.
|
|
3
|
|
|
4
|
The use of intellectual capital information by sell-side analysts in company valuation / Subhash Abhayawansa, Mark Aleksanyan & John Bahtsevanoglou.
// Accounting and Business Research. Volume 45, N3, 2015. London, Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales] Abingdon, UK : Routledge, Taylor & Francis , 2015.pages 279-306. This paper investigates the role of intellectual capital information (ICI) in sell-side analysts’ fundamental analysis and valuation of companies. Using in-depth semi-structured interviews, it penetrates the black box of analysts’ valuation decision-making by identifying and conceptualising the mechanisms and rationales by which ICI is integrated within their valuation decision processes. We find that capital market participants are not ambivalent to ICI, and ICI is used: (1) to form analysts’ perceptions of the overall quality, strengths and future prospects of companies; (2) in deriving valuation model inputs; (3) in setting price targets and making investment recommendations; and (4) as an important and integral element in analyst–client communications. We show that: there is a ‘pecking order’ of mechanisms for incorporating ICI in valuations, based on quantifiability; IC valuation is grounded in valuation theory; there are designated entry points in the valuation process for ICI; and a number of factors affect analysts’ ICI use in valuation. We also identify a need to redefine ‘value-relevant’ ICI to include non-price-sensitive information; acknowledge the boundedness and contextuality of analysts’ rationality and motives of their ICI use; and the important role of analyst–client meetings for ICI communication.
|
|
|
|
|