Integrated reporting as a cross-border communication tool for business - a fad or a sign of times?

• Authors: Justyna Fijałkowska , Monika Sobczyk
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

A model of business communication currently used by companies, based on the financial statements and a number of satellite different themed reports, turns out to be unsatisfying towards high stakeholders’ demands for information. Stakeholders expect environmental, social and corporate governance indicators enclosed in the financial and non-financial information, in a form that provides a complete, consistent, clear, comparable and reliable picture of the corporates’ achievements. Therefore, in this article we analyze whether the Integrated Report (IR) could become a cross-border communication tool of business, which would satisfy the internal and external global environment needs. For this purpose, in the light of the differences in understanding of business responsibility for society between countries on each side of the Atlantic, the “pros” and “cons” of Integrated Reports are considered and the willingness of the business environment on this new form of communication is examined.

Keywords

EN

Business communication; Integrated Report; implications of integrated reporting

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Journal of Intercultural Management
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 5
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 35-47

Dates

published

2013-12-01

online

2014-03-27

Contributors

author

Justyna Fijałkowska

• University of Social Sciences

author

Monika Sobczyk

• University of Social Sciences

References

• Bowen, H.R. (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, New York: Harper &Row.
• Cordazzo, M. (2007) ‘IC Statement vs. Environmental and Social Reports: An Empirical Analysis of their Convergence in the Italian Context’, in Zambon, S. and Marzo, G. (eds.) Visualising Intangibles: Measuring and Reporting in the Knowledge Economy, ASHGATE.
• Deegan, C. and Rankin, M. (1997) ‘The materiality of environmental information to users of annual reports’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10:4, pp. 562-583.
• DiPiazza, S.A. and Eccles, R.G. (2002) Building Public Trust: The Future of CorporateReporting, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Eccles, R.G. (2011) ‘Perspective: the academic’, Accounting Futures, Edition 03, ACCA, p. 14.
• Eccles, R.G. and Krzus, M.P. (2010) One Report: Integrated Reporting for a SustainableStrategy, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
• Eccles, R.G. and Mavrinac, S. (1995) ‘Improving the Corporate Disclosure Process’, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 11-25.
• Eccles, R.G. and Serafeim, G. (2011) Leading and Lagging Countries in Contributing toa Sustainable Society, 23 May 2011, [Online], Available: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/ item/6716.html [7 Dec 2012].
• Eccles, R.G., Herz, R.H., Keegan, E.M. and Phillips, D.M.H. (2001) The ValueReportingRevolution: Moving Beyond the Earnings Game, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Elkington, J. (1997) Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Oxford: Capstone.
• Epstein, M., Flamholtz, E. and McDonough, J. (1977) Corporate Social Performance, New York: National Association of Accountants.
• Fijałkowska, J. (2012) ‘Społeczna odpowiedzialność wyzwaniem dla rachunkowości’, Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie, Vol. XIII, Issue 1, pp. 141-154.
• Gordon, L.A. (ed.) (1978) Accounting and Corporate Social Responsibility, The University of Kansas, Kansas: Lawrence.
• Gray, R. (1990) The Greening of Accountancy: The Profession After Pearce, Certified Record Report 17, London: ACCA.
• Gray, R., Bebbington, J. and Walters, D. (1993) Accounting for the Environment, London: Chapman.
• Guthrie, J. and Parker, L.D. (1989) ‘Corporate Social Reporting: A Rebuttal of Legitimacy Theory’, Accounting and Business Research, 9:76, pp. 343-352.
• Guthrie, J. and Parker, L.D. (1990) ‘Corporate Social Disclosure Practice: A Comparative International Analysis’, Advances in Public Interest Accounting, JAI Press, Vol. 3, pp. 159-175.
• Ijiri, Y. (1975) ‘Theory of Accounting Measurement’, Studies in accounting research, No. 10, Sarasota Fl., American Accounting Association.
• International Integrated Reporting Committee, (2011) Towards Integrated Reporting. Communicating Value In the 21st Century.
• KPMG International, (2011) International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2011.
• Mathews, M.R. (1997) ‘Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting research. Is there a silver jubilee to celebrate?’, Accounting, Auditing & AccountabilityJournal, 10:4, pp. 481-531.
• Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2008) ‘“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 404-424.
• Roberts, R.W. (1992) ‘Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholders theory’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17:6, pp. 595-612.
• Sobczyk, M. (2013) ‘Koncepcja społecznej odpowiedzialności a praktyka polskich przedsiębiorstw’, Zarządzanie i Finanse. Journal of Management and Finance, Rok 11, Nr 1, Część 3, pp. 349-361.
• Stevenson, N. (2011) ‘New Dawn for Reporting’, Accountancy Futures, ACCA, Edition 03, February, p. 11.
• Sułkowski, Ł., The problems of epistemology of corporate culture, Journal of Intercultural Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 2009.
• Wensen, K. van, Wijnand, B., Klein, J. and Knopf, J. (2011) The state of play insustainability reporting in the EU.
• Whitley, R. 1997 ‘Business systems’, In Sorge, A. and Warner M. (eds.) The IEBM handbook of organizational behavior, London: International Thomson Business Press, pp. 173-186.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/joim-2013-0025