|
Dòng
|
Nội dung
|
|
1
|
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.
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
The expansion of non-financial reporting: an exploratory study / Herve Stolowy, Luc Paugam.
// Accounting and Business Research Vol.48, No.5 2018.p. 525-548. We investigate how non-financial reporting (NFR) is defined and has expanded in recent years. First, we explore the heterogeneity in definitions and current NFR practices. We find a lack of convergence between regulators and standard-setters, as well as leading sustainable firms. Second, we examine the changes in the extent and type of NFR reported by firms over the period 2006–2016. Based on a sample of firms in South Africa, we document a significant increase in the amount of NFR, particularly between 2006 and 2011. This change appears to be driven by new environmental, human capital, performance and strategic disclosures. The relative importance of financial information in corporate reporting decreased substantially over the same period. Third, we compare reporting practices for corporate social responsibility (CSR)/sustainability information between constituents of the S&P 500 index and the EuroStoxx 600 index. We find that overall, the percentage of firms issuing CSR/sustainability reports increased dramatically between 2002 and 2015. Constituents of the U.S. stock index and growth firms are less likely to report CSR/sustainability information, whereas firms in the European stock index in environmentally sensitive industries, with high capital intensity and good CSR performance, larger and with better financial performance, are more likely to report CSR/sustainability information.
|
|
|
|
|