Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Sustainability reporter classification matrix: explaining variations in disclosure quality

Sustainability reporter classification matrix: explaining variations in disclosure quality The purpose of this study is to develop a sustainability reporter classification matrix (hereafter referred to as the “matrix”) to explain why some reporters publish better-quality sustainability reports than others and why some reporters experience improvements in the quality of their sustainability reports while others experience no improvement or a decline in sustainability report quality.Design/methodology/approachThe study draws on the existing literature, which is analysed using a combination of legitimacy theory (i.e. commitment to sustainability reporting) and resource-based view (RBV, i.e. competencies in sustainability reporting).FindingsA two-dimensional matrix is developed representing organisations’ competencies in (explained using the RBV) and commitment to (explained using legitimacy theory) sustainability reporting. Based on these two dimensions the matrix identifies four reporter classifications: incompetent uncommitted reporters (who publish low-quality reports); competent uncommitted reporters (who publish average-quality reports); incompetent committed reporters (who publish average-quality reports); and competent committed reporters (who publish high-quality reports). The matrix explains how reporters can transition from one quadrant/classification to another and how this transition can be either forward (moving from a lower quadrant to a higher quadrant), resulting in improvements in report quality, or backward (moving from a higher quadrant to a lower quadrant), leading to a deterioration in disclosure quality.Originality/valueThe study builds on the extant literature, combining legitimacy theory with the RBV, to provide a more complete explanation for why organisations publish sustainability reports of varying quality and why this quality varies over time. These insights can also be used to explain variations in the quality of integrated reports. The matrix may prove useful to practitioners as a tool for classifying reporters, identifying issues, assessing risk and tracking progress made. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Meditari Accountancy Research Emerald Publishing

Sustainability reporter classification matrix: explaining variations in disclosure quality

Download PDF
19 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/sustainability-reporter-classification-matrix-explaining-variations-in-ODtBecGn4T
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
2049-372X
DOI
10.1108/medar-09-2017-0218
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to develop a sustainability reporter classification matrix (hereafter referred to as the “matrix”) to explain why some reporters publish better-quality sustainability reports than others and why some reporters experience improvements in the quality of their sustainability reports while others experience no improvement or a decline in sustainability report quality.Design/methodology/approachThe study draws on the existing literature, which is analysed using a combination of legitimacy theory (i.e. commitment to sustainability reporting) and resource-based view (RBV, i.e. competencies in sustainability reporting).FindingsA two-dimensional matrix is developed representing organisations’ competencies in (explained using the RBV) and commitment to (explained using legitimacy theory) sustainability reporting. Based on these two dimensions the matrix identifies four reporter classifications: incompetent uncommitted reporters (who publish low-quality reports); competent uncommitted reporters (who publish average-quality reports); incompetent committed reporters (who publish average-quality reports); and competent committed reporters (who publish high-quality reports). The matrix explains how reporters can transition from one quadrant/classification to another and how this transition can be either forward (moving from a lower quadrant to a higher quadrant), resulting in improvements in report quality, or backward (moving from a higher quadrant to a lower quadrant), leading to a deterioration in disclosure quality.Originality/valueThe study builds on the extant literature, combining legitimacy theory with the RBV, to provide a more complete explanation for why organisations publish sustainability reports of varying quality and why this quality varies over time. These insights can also be used to explain variations in the quality of integrated reports. The matrix may prove useful to practitioners as a tool for classifying reporters, identifying issues, assessing risk and tracking progress made.

Journal

Meditari Accountancy Research – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 25, 2018

Keywords: Disclosure quality; Legitimacy theory; Resource-based view; Sustainability reporting; Integrated reporting

References

  • The UN Global Compact-Accenture CEO study on sustainability 2013: architects of a better world
  • Corporate social responsibility assurance: How do South African publicly listed companies compare?
    Ackers, B.
  • Internal organizational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting
    Adams, C.A.
  • The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap
    Adams, C.A.
  • Integrating sustainability reporting into management practices
    Adams, C.A.; Frost, G.R.
  • A comparative analysis of corporate reporting on ethical issues by UK and German chemical and pharmaceutical companies
    Adams, C.A.; Kausirikun, N.
  • Making a difference: Sustainability reporting
    Adams, C.A.; McNicholas, P.
  • Corporate equal opportunities (non-) disclosure
    Adams, C.A.; Coutts, A.; Harte, G.
  • A comprehensive literature review on, and the construction of a framework for, environmental legitimacy, accountability and proactivity
    Alrazi, B.; de Villiers, C.; Van Staden, C.J.
  • Environmental accounting as workplace activism
    Ball, A.
  • Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage
    Barney, J.
  • The absence of corporate social responsibility reporting in Bangladesh
    Belal, A.R.; Cooper, S.
  • The views of corporate managers on the current state of, and future prospects for, social reporting in Bangladesh: an engagement-based study
    Belal, A.R.; Owen, D.L.
  • Reasons for sustainability reporting by New Zealand local governments
    Bellringer, A.; Ball, A.; Craig, R.
  • The ‘macro’ and the ‘micro’ of legitimacy: toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process
    Bitektine, A.; Haack, P.
  • Sustainability reports as simulacra? A counter-account of a and a+ GRI reports
    Boiral, O.
  • Corporate social responsibility reporting: a comprehensive picture?
    Bouten, L.; Everaert, P.; Van Liedekerke, L.; De Moor, L.; Christiaens, J.
  • The public disclosure of environmental performance information – a dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory
    Brown, N.; Deegan, C.
  • A structuration view on the initiation of environmental reports
    Buhr, N.
  • Legitimacy theory of managerial reality construction? Corporate social disclosure in marks and spencer PLC corporate reports, 1969-1997
    Campbell, D.J.
  • The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: a research note
    Cho, C.H.; Patten, D.M.
  • The language of US corporate environmental disclosure
    Cho, C.H.; Roberts, R.W.; Patten, D.M.
  • Organized hypocrisy, organizational façades, and sustainability reporting
    Cho, C.H.; Laine, M.; Roberts, R.W.; Rodrigue, M.
  • Environmental reporting and its relation to corporate environmental performance
    Clarkson, P.M.; Overell, M.B.; Chapple, L.
  • The legitimizing effect of social and environmental disclosures - a theoretical foundation
    Deegan, C.
  • Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: an exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry
    Deegan, C.; Blomquist, C.
  • A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations
    Deegan, C.; Gordon, B.
  • Do Australian companies report environmental news objectively? An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted successfully by the environmental protection authority
    Deegan, C.; Rankin, M.
  • An investigation of TBL report assurance statements: Australian evidence
    Deegan, C.; Cooper, B.J.; Shelly, M.
  • Can less environmental disclosure have a legitimising effect? Evidence from Africa
    De Villiers, C.; Van Staden, C.J.
  • Developing a conceptual model of influences around integrated reporting, new insights, and directions for future research
    De Villiers, C.; Hsiao, K.; Maroun, W.
  • The institutionalisation of mining company sustainability disclosures
    De Villiers, C.; Low, M.; Samkin, G.
  • Organizational legitimacy: social values and organizational behavior
    Dowling, J.; Pfeffer, J.
  • Barriers to implementing the international integrated reporting framework: a contemporary academic perspective
    Dumay, J.; Bernardi, C.; Guthrie, J.; La Torre, M.
  • Sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organisations: why they report
    Farneti, F.; Guthrie, J.
  • The market for sustainability assurance services: a comprehensive literature review and future avenues for research
    Farooq, M.B.; de Villiers, C.
  • The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation
    Grant, R.M.
  • Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation?: Whose value? Whose creation?
    Gray, R.
  • Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability […] and how would we know? an exploration of narratives of organizational and the planet
    Gray, R.
  • The influence of stakeholder engagement on sustainability reporting: evidence from Italian local councils
    Greco, G.; Sciulli, N.; D’Onza, G.
  • About sustainability reporting
  • Social and environmental report assurance: Some interview evidence
    Jones, M.; Solomon, J.
  • Sustainability reporting and assurance: a historical analysis on a world-wide phenomenon
    Junior, R.M.; Best, P.J.; Cotter, J.
  • The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2013
  • The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2015
  • Exploring the challenges of preparing an integrated report
    McNally, M.A.; Cerbone, D.; Maroun, W.
  • Securing organizational legitimacy: an experimental decision case examining the impact of environmental disclosures
    Milne, M.J.; Patten, D.M.
  • Motivations for corporate social responsibility reporting by MNC subsidiaries in an emerging country: the case of Bangladesh
    Momin, M.A.; Parker, L.D.
  • The new institutionalism in organizational analysis
    Meyer, J.W.; Rowan, B.; Powell, W.W.; DiMaggio, P.J.
  • Does intellectual Capital efficiency improve firm performance in BRICS economies? A dynamic panel estimation
    Nadeem, M.; Gan, C.; Nguyen, C.
  • The importance of intellectual Capital for firm performance: evidence from Australia
    Nadeem, M.; Gan, C.; Nguyen, C.
  • Chronicles of wasted time? A personal reflection on the current state of, and future prospects for, social and environmental accounting research
    Owen, D.
  • Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: a note on legitimacy theory
    Patten, D.M.
  • The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: a research note
    Patten, D.M.
  • Media exposure, public policy pressure, and environmental disclosure: an examination of the impact of tri data availability
    Patten, D.M.
  • Competitive strategy, structure and firm performance: a comparison of the resource-based view and the contingency approach
    Pertusa-Ortega, E.M.; Molina-Azorín, J.F.; Claver-Cortés, E.
  • The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource‐based view
    Peteraf, M.A.
  • The core competence of the corporation
    Prahalad, C.K.; Hamel, G.
  • Symbolic and substantive legitimation in professional practice
    Richardson, A.J.
  • A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability
    Russo, M.V.; Fouts, P.A.
  • An approach to developing societal preferences in developing corporate action strategies
    Shocker, A.D.; Sethi, S.P.
  • Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches
    Suchman, M.C.
  • Oil company annual report disclosure responses to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill
    Summerhays, K.; De Villier, C.
  • Social and environmental reporting in the UK: a pedagogic evaluation
    Thomson, I.; Bebbington, J.
  • Some thoughts on legitimacy theory in social and environmental accounting
    Tilling, M.V.
  • Firm resources, quality signals and the determinants of corporate environmental reputation: some UK evidence
    Toms, J.S.
  • (Re)presenting sustainable organizations
    Tregida, H.; Mine, M.; Kearins, K.
  • Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure
    Walden, W.D.; Schwartz, B.N.
  • Reporting on sustainability by Australian councils – a communication perspective
    Williams, B.R.
  • The changing portrayal of the employment of women in British banks’ and retail companies’ corporate annual reports
    Adams, C.A.; Harte, G.