Search results

This study aims to test whether the perceptions of graduates of accounting-related degrees on the implications of companies’ commitment to sustainable development strategies can be influenced by certain factors associated with their previous training and characteristics.

The study is based on measuring and analyzing the assessment carried out by a sample of students graduating in degrees that include accounting subjects for five consecutive years, from 2016–2017 to 2020–2021, both inclusive. Nonparametric statistical tests are used to determine the type of association between the factors that characterize the graduates and their degree of agreement with the training they received and its relationship with their role in implementing corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability strategies in the company.

The study’s significant findings reveal that the respondents’ perception of the training they received and their opinion of certain benefits provided by sustainable development and CSR strategies in organizations are positively related. This insight is crucial, as it suggests that the training graduates receive plays a pivotal role in shaping their understanding and support for sustainability. The respondents’ opinions do not vary depending on their personal and/or work characteristics, except in the type of contract, as significant differences are observed between the self-employed and temporary or nonworking workers and between those with a permanent contract and those who are linked to the company with a temporary contract.

In a field where most studies focus on employee–employer relationships and human resource management policies, this research stands out. It delves deeper, not just into employees’ perception of sustainability but also into the causes of this perception. It explores what factors may be influencing employees’ opinions on sustainability, and importantly, it extends this analysis to graduates who will be in charge of these issues. This work covers a significant gap in the research, incorporating the study of variables such as personal characteristics and work-related aspects of employees and the training received in accounting matters.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between a firm's internal audit function (IAF) and the quality of its financial reporting. Since regulations on corporate governance were introduced, numerous national and international bodies have emphasized the fundamental role of the IAF in the financial reporting process, especially since it generally leads to higher quality reporting.

The paper uses questionnaires sent to internal audit directors of Spanish banks.

Banks with high quality financial reporting have greater collaboration between internal and external auditors in the annual audit. Greater involvement of internal audit in reviewing financial reporting leads to improved quality financial reporting.

Besides the usual caveats of survey research, there are limitations to this study. First, the problem of response bias may exist. Second, the 66 per cent survey response rate may mean that respondents have larger or better‐developed internal audit functions, affording them more opportunity or motivation to respond to the survey. Hence, the results obtained through the survey may not be generalizable to non‐respondents.

The findings are relevant for bank regulators, management, boards of directors, and investors. In the current discussion on transparency, integrity and quality of financial reporting, these findings help define the issues.

Previous empirical studies analyse the quality of financial reporting with actors in the corporate governance mosaic (board of directors, audit committee and external audit), but they do not do so directly with the IAF. This paper extends prior banking literature that analyses quality financial reporting along with other variables, but not internal audit.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight how the basic binomial option pricing model (BOPM) might be used by regulators to help formulate rules, prior to financial crisis, that help prevent loan overstatement by banks in emerging market economies undergoing financial crises.

The paper draws on the theory of soft budget constraints (SBC) to construct a simple model in which banks overstate loans to minimize losses. The model is used to illustrate how guarantees of bailout assistance (BA) (to banks) by crisis stricken countries’ financial authorities may encourage banks to overstate loans and delay the implementation of IFRS for loan valuation. However, the model also illustrates how promises of BA may be depicted as binomial put options which provide banks with the option of either: reporting loan values on poor projects accurately and receiving the loans’ liquidation values; or, overstating loans and receiving the guaranteed BA. An illustration is also provided of how authorities may use this representation to help minimize bank loan overstatement in periods of financial crisis. In order to provide an illustration of how the option value of binomial assistance may evolve during a financial crisis, the model is generalized to the Mexican financial crisis of the late 1990s. During this period, Mexican authorities’ guarantees of BA to the nation’s largest banks encouraged those institutions to overstate loans and delay the implementation of (previously adopted) international “best practices” based loan valuation standards.

Application of the model to the Mexican financial crisis provides evidence that, in spite of Mexico’s “official” 1997 adoption of international “best accounting practices” for banks, “iron clad” guarantees of BA by the country’s financial authorities to Mexico’s largest banks provided those institutions with an incentive to knowingly overstate loans in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

The model is compared against only one country in which the BA was directly infused into banks’ loan portfolios. Thus, as conceived, it is directly applicable to crisis countries in which the bailout took this form. However, the many quantitative variations of SBC models as well as recent studies which have applied the binomial model to other forms of bailout (e.g. direct purchases of bank shares by authorities) suggest that the model could be modified to accommodate different bailout scenarios.

The model and application show that guaranteed BA can be viewed as a put option and that ex-ante regulatory policies based on the correct valuation of the BA as a binomial option might prevent banks from overstating loans.

Use of the binomial or similar approaches to valuing BA may help regulators to determine the level of BA that will not encourage banks to overstate the value of their loans.

Recent research has used the BOPM to value, on an ex-post basis, the BA which appears on the balance sheet of institutions which have been rescued. However, little research has advocated the use of this type of model to help prevent, on an ex-ante basis, the overstatement of loans on poor projects.