Early assessments of the gap between integrated reporting and current corporate reporting. Issue 1 (13th April 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stent, Warwick; Dowler, Tuyana
• Is Part Of: Meditari accountancy research. Volume 23:Issue 1(2015)
• Page Start: 92
• Page End: 117
• Publication Date: 2015-04-13
• Subjects: Corporate governance -- Financial reporting -- Corporate social responsibility; Accounting -- Periodicals; Finance -- Periodicals; 657.05
• DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0026
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2049-372X

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to provide early assessments of the changes for corporate reporting processes, which an emerging initiative like integrated reporting (IR) will require. The authors also consider the potential for these changes to contribute towards resolving major problems such as financial and environmental crises. IR is gaining momentum globally, and the implementation of some form of future mandatory requirement in this regard appears likely. Design/methodology/approach: – The authors begin by developing a reporting checklist based on the requirements for IR, which they use to assess the gap between current "best practice" reporting processes and IR. They then propose systems thinking, a widely accepted approach to problem-solving, as a theoretical basis for assessing the IR Framework and for deeper consideration of the gap analysis. They demonstrate, at a paradigm level, how systems thinking can be used to assess IR and find that IR has the potential to offer specific and implementable strategies for operationalising systems thinking principles. Findings: – The authors assess 2011 annual reports and related online reporting practices for four New Zealand "best practice reporting entities", using their reporting checklist. Although none of their sample entities published a full integrated report for 2011, reporting scores range from 70 to 87 per cent. The findings suggest that current reporting processes lack the integration, oversight and due attention to future uncertainties required by IR. While this appears to be a relatively small gap, systems thinking principles indicate that these deficiencies may be critical to sustainability and financial stability, the stated aims of IR. Research limitations/implications: – The normal limitations which apply to small sample studies. Practical implications: – The IR reporting checklist and systems thinking proposal could be used by policymakers, standard setters and firms to assist in assessing IR's potential and the additional requirements it will impose for corporate reporting. Originality/value: – This study answers calls in the literature for a reactivation of the normative research agenda by assessing IR against systems thinking, a widely accepted approach to problem-solving. It contributes further to an understanding of IR through the development of a unique reporting checklist and by offering empirical evidence derived from application of this checklist.