Search results

Negative disclosure tone in 10-K annual reports has economic consequences, yet relatively little is known about how it is generated. Boards of directors play an important governance role with respect to mandatory disclosures and personally sign off on Form 10-K, leading us to expect directors to influence financial reporting narratives. This study investigates whether the negative tone of firms' narrative annual report disclosures is associated with the human and social capital of its board of directors.

Multivariate regression analyses of negative disclosure tone (Loughran and McDonald, 2011) on board members' average age, gender, education, financial expertise and turnover is performed. A host of supplemental tests to corroborate our primary analysis, including using Sarbanes-Oxley's financial expert mandate as an exogenous shock to board composition, impact threshold for a confounding variable, placebo analysis, portfolio tests of more and less negative disclosing firms and portfolio tests of “loud” versus “quiet” boards are conducted.

Evidence that directors' gender, education, financial expertise and board turnover are associated with more negative disclosure tone, while directors' age is associated with less negative disclosure tone is found. The study also looked within the board to differentiate whether these findings are driven by characteristics of inside directors or outside directors serving on the audit committee, or both, as these are the specific groups of directors we would expect to play a role in disclosure. It was found that negative disclosure tone is associated with a lower bid-ask spread, so this study interpreted more negative tone as containing more descriptive information.

This study helps decode the “black box” of annual report disclosure tone, which Loughran and McDonald (2011) show has important economic implications. The results help inform stakeholders such as policymakers, executives and capital market participants as to how board member traits are associated with disclosure. The findings are particularly important as this study bears witness to the increasing prominence of gender/diversity mandates (e.g. Israel, Norway, California) and financial expertise mandates (e.g. Sarbanes-Oxley).

Social return on investment (SROI) has received increasing attention, both academically and professionally, since it was initially developed by the Roberts Enterprise Development Fund in the USA in the mid-1990s. Based on a systematic review of the literature that highlights the potential and limitations related to the academic and professional development of the SROI model, the purpose of this study is to systematize the academic debate and contribute to the future research agenda of blended value accounting.

Relying on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses approach, this study endeavors to provide reliable academic insights into the factors driving the usage of the SROI model and its further development.

A systematic literature review produced a final data set of 284 studies. The results reveal that despite the procedural accuracy characterizing the description of the model, bias-driven methodological implications, availability of resources and sector specificities can influence the type of approach taken by scholars and practitioners.

To dispel the conceptual and practical haze, this study discusses the results found, especially regarding the potential solutions offered to overcome the SROI limitations presented, as well as offers suggestions for future research.

This study aims to fill a gap in the literature and enhance a conceptual debate on the future of accounting when it concerns a blended value proposition.

Since introducing the UK start-up loan (SUL) Scheme in 2012, 82,809 new start-ups have been supported with loans totalling £759m. Even during the Covid-19 crisis, new business start-ups supported by SUL did not abate. The authors ask whether the entrepreneurs starting businesses during the Covid-19 crisis were different from those becoming entrepreneurs before the pandemic. This paper aims to discuss the aforementioned question.

The authors model the differences between pre-Covid-19 business start-ups and Covid-19 start-ups. The administrative data obtained from the UK Government Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) represent information about individual loan records for 82,798 individuals and total lending of £759m between 2012 and 2021. The probit regression model with dependent variable coded one if the start occurred after February 2020 and zero between 2012 and February 2020, was estimated.

The study’s findings show that both groups of entrepreneurs differ in many facets. The new Covid-19 entrepreneurs are older, more likely to have a graduate-level education and are significantly more likely to make this transition from full-time waged employment or inactivity. Furthermore, they are more likely to set up in manufacturing industries at the business level than their pre-Covid-19 counterparts who favoured service sectors. Finally, their initial lending to support the start-up is much higher.

This study provides value for the policymakers responsible for the administration of the SUL scheme, and it also contributes to the body of knowledge on the effects of the global Covid-19 pandemic.