Search results

This study aims to develop an index to evaluate the extent to which key performance indicators (KPIs) align with the principles of integrated thinking.

Prior academic research, complemented by reporting and governance standards, is used to develop an index to gauge the extent to which KPIs take an integrated approach to performance evaluation. A mixed methods approach is adopted. A qualitative content analysis of organisations’ extra-financial reports is used to gain insights into the level of integrated thinking in performance evaluation structures using the index. Results are then calibrated using well-established integrated thinking proxies.

Ten indicators are identified, which point to an integrated approach to performance evaluation or the application of an underlying integrated thinking logic. The index is applied to a sample of companies from 2013 to 2021. The results point to companies increasingly incorporating integrated thinking into their KPIs. KPIs, which used to address only financial dimensions, are becoming more pluralistic and may be better described as “integrated performance indicators” (IPIs).

The index is applied to KPI disclosures of a sample of companies in a single jurisdiction only.

Those charged with governance and management can use the index to structure, implement and evaluate IPIs. Investors can use the index to gauge the operationalisation of integrated thinking. Assurance providers may find the index useful when conducting risk assessments, particularly given the increased focus on the assurance of extra-financial information.

Regulators can use the index for benchmarking organisations, compliance monitoring and identifying gaps between regulatory expectations and corporate behaviour. More broadly, the index could be used to promote alignment with sustainability frameworks and sustainable development goals at the national level.

This study outlines the dimensions of integrated thinking, which can be applied in the context of performance evaluation structures.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of combined assurance on tax avoidance in South Africa.

This study is founded on a sample of 76 South African firms listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange over the 2014–2022 period. The authors used the feasible generalized least squares regression estimation technique to test the hypothesis. To address endogeneity issues, this study conducted a difference-in-differences (DID) analysis based on propensity score matching.

The results reveal that combined assurance negatively impacts tax avoidance. Implementing combined assurance, as an integrated risk management approach, significantly minimizes tax risk. The DID analysis provides well-founded evidence attributing the decline in tax avoidance levels to the availability of combined assurance. The inferences are robust to using alternative measures of tax avoidance, testing combined assurance impact across various tax avoidance levels and controlling for the COVID-19 effect.

This study presents valuable insights for firms, managers and policymakers. The findings encourage companies to bolster their risk management practices, opting for combined assurance over a sole risk monitoring mechanism. This approach enables the company to ensure better compliance with tax regulations, thereby enhancing overall efficiency. Besides, the disciplining effect of combined assurance motivates managers to make informed decisions, avoid tax avoidance strategies and safeguard corporate reputation. Moreover, this research calls upon policymakers to promote effective global regulatory frameworks for combined assurance practices.

The research brings original insights by exploring the influence of combined assurance on tax avoidance. This addresses a gap in the current literature that has predominantly focused on the relationship between tax avoidance and individual lines of defense.