Search results

This paper explores the communication of legitimacy in the annual reports of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), focusing specifically on the function of images. The visual mode of discourse and meaning construction has to date only scarcely been explored in legitimacy research, especially in the NGO context.

Distinguishing between normative, regulatory, cognitive and outcome legitimacy, the paper inquires into the kinds of legitimacy that NGOs communicate to their constituents and the claims that predominate. Turning to research on impression management, the paper explores whether and how organizations use images as symbolic mechanisms of legitimacy. Finally, the paper considers the socio-cultural implications of these legitimation strategies for beneficiary groups, donor communities and the organizations themselves.

A qualitative content analysis of images in the reports of the eight influential members of the US-based Global Emergency Response Coalition confirms the widespread presence of legitimacy claims in NGO visual communications, with normative (especially need) and output (especially implementation) categories predominating. However, these practices are potentially contradictory; measures to increase legitimacy to and of donors result in forms of beneficiary exclusion and reduction. Strategies of impression management, namely self-promotion, ingratiation and exemplification, appear to shape these NGO representative logics.

The results of this study extend prior research into legitimacy, legitimation and impression management in and beyond the non-governmental sector by differentiating among categories of legitimacy and incorporating images as the object of analysis. In this capacity, they also support and augment the emerging literature on imagery use in NGO annual reports.

The purpose of this paper is to examine motivations underlying UK repurchase activity. Specifically, the paper inquires into the relevance of a range of different explanations for repurchases and perceptions of regulation surrounding them. Emphasis of the paper is, however, on motives linked specifically to repurchases rather than income distribution, more generally.

The study uses a survey approach to capture the views on repurchases of corporate managers and investors. It supplements the survey data with secondary information about the companies to better understand repurchase behaviour.

Results indicate that repurchase use is influenced by motives linked specifically to this tool rather than those associated with income distribution, more generally. In particular, repurchases are used to return surplus cash to investors, signal undervaluation and influence gearing and earnings per share levels. In the latter case, companies appear to use repurchases to perform a value added role, alongside manipulating the EPS level and thus the latter may simply be a by-product of the former. Private investors may nevertheless be vulnerable to such manipulation, given their limited financial literacy.

The study relied on a survey of managers and investors and univariate analysis. In the former case, respondent numbers, particularly for the investor community were low, raising questions as to the generalisability of the data. In the latter, the results may be mis-stated owing to the simplicity of the analysis.

Overall, the survey results suggest that firms use repurchase programmes in different contexts to dividend payments and in appropriate circumstances. While managers and investors broadly share similar views, private shareholders may be in a vulnerable position given their limited financial literacy.

This is the first UK study on repurchases that examines the relative importance of a range of motives underlying repurchases. Moreover, it assesses in detail the core hypotheses that are linked specifically to repurchase programmes to better understand UK repurchase behaviour. It does so by supplementing the survey data with additional company information and comparing the views of the different audiences surveyed.

This paper examines the efforts of National Health Service (England) (NHSE) to respond to employee-based racial inequalities via its Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). The WRES constitutes a hybridised accountability initiative with characteristics of the moral and imposed regimes of accountability.

The study conceptualises the notion of responsive race accountability with recourse to Favotto et al.’s (2022) moral accountability model and critical race theory (CRT), and through it, examines the enactment of WRES at 40 NHSE trusts using qualitative content analysis.

Despite the progressive nature of the WRES that seeks to nurture corrective actions, results suggest that trusts tend to adopt an instrumental approach to the exercise. Whilst there is some evidence of good practice, the instrumental approach prevails across both the metric reporting that trusts engage in to guide their actions, and the planned actions for progress. These planned actions not only often fail to coalesce with the trust-specific data but also include generic NHSE or equality, diversity and inclusion initiatives and mimetic adoptions of best practice guidance that only superficially address racial concerns.

Whilst the WRES is a laudable voluntary achievement, its moral imperative does not appear to have translated into a moral accountability within individual trusts.

Responding to calls for more research at the accounting-race nexus, this study uniquely draws on CRT to conceptualise and examine race accountability.

This paper introduces the special issue on Race and Accounting and Accountability. In so doing, it explores racism in its historical and contemporary forms, the role of accounting and accountability in enabling racism and racial discrimination and also efforts of redress and resistance.

We reflect on several critical themes to demonstrate the pervasive and insidious nature of racism and, review the literature on race and racism in accounting, focusing on studies that followed the seminal work by Annisette and Prasad (2017) who called for more research. We also review the six papers included in this special issue.

While many overt systems of racial domination experienced throughout history have subsided, racism is engrained in our everyday lives and in broader societal structures in more covert and nuanced forms. Yet, in accounting, as Annisette and Prasad noted, the focus has continued to be on the former. This special issue shifts this imbalance – five of the six papers focus on contemporary racism. Moreover, it demonstrates that although accounting technologies can and do facilitate racism and racist practices, accountability and counter accounts offer avenues for calling out and disrupting the powers and privileges that underlie racial discrimination and, resistance by un-silencing minority groups subjected to discrimination and injustice.

This introduction and the papers in the special issue offer rich empirical and theoretical contributions to accounting and accountability research on race and racial discrimination. We hope they inspire future race research to nurture progress towards a true post-racial society.

Editorial boards of academic journals represent a key institutional mechanism in the governance and functioning of the academic community. Board members play an important role in knowledge production and development of the discipline. The purpose of this paper is to enquire into the diversity characteristics of boards of accounting journals.

Drawing on a diversity framework that distinguishes between societal diversity and value of diversity, the paper examines two board characteristics: gender diversity and internationalisation. Moreover, it examines the influence of three journal and two editor characteristics on board diversity and analyses trends over time.

On gender, overall board trends are consistent with societal diversity and value of diversity: boards reflect the gender profile of senior academics. Further, female representation on boards is broadly consistent across the different journal nationalities; has improved over time; has experienced a convergence in “gender sensitive” sub-disciplines; and is influenced by female editorship. However, inequities appear to be present at the highest level: women appear to be less well represented than men as editors and women also have a lower representation on boards of higher ranked journals than on those of lower ranked journals. On internationalisation, once again, overall trends broadly reflect societal diversity and value at diversity. However, international scholars are less well represented on 4* boards than on 2* and 3* boards and on US boards than on Australian and UK boards. Further, there are signs of weakening US dominance in non-US journals.

Drawing on the diversity framework, this is the first study to comprehensively examine gender diversity and internationalisation of accounting boards.

According to academics, the translation form of exchange rate risk does not affect the market value of a firm and as a result should not be managed by corporate managers. Research to date, however, suggests that many multinational companies (MNCs) actively monitor and manage their translation exchange risk. Thus, either corporate management fail to understand the irrelevant nature of this risk or there are other factors that need to be considered. This paper extends the current literature by examining these issues; in particular, it examines whether MNCs continue to manage their translation exchange rate risk and if so what their reasons are for the specific practices. Results suggest that the gearing ratio, itself a measure of risk, is largely responsible for the management of the translation process. Further, some companies seek to manage their ‘profit and loss translation exchange risk,’ a ‘risk’ resulting from the impact of the translation process on the profit and loss account. Preferred management strategies include the currency denomination of debt and use of financial instruments such as forward contracts. Capital market imperfections reflected in binding loan covenants, agency theory problems and the assumption of inefficient market behaviour explain the observed corporate management behaviour.

This paper aims to examine the interest rate risk management (IRRM) practices of UK‐listed companies. In particular, it examines the significance of interest rate risk (IRR) to these companies as well as the risk management practices adopted, including: the methods used to assess the level of IRR and the types of interest rate forecasts used in the process; derivatives activity; and corporate governance, reporting and control.

A series of semi‐structured interviews was conducted with the treasurers of ten UK companies in order to provide an in‐depth analysis of IRRM.

The results of this research suggest that IRR is important to UK companies and that their IRR hedging strategies are geared towards managing shareholder considerations and protecting banking covenants and corporate credit ratings. Moreover, companies rely extensively on financial derivatives to manage their IRR although their corporate governance practices relating to derivatives usage, in some instances, are lacking. Finally, there was a mixed response in relation to the implications of International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39; while some companies fear that the new standard may curb managerial practices, others are in favour of the more stringent reporting requirements.

The research indicates that IRRM is important to UK companies, and especially so for firms that have loan covenants in place. Thus, the interest rate decisions of the Bank of England will have a major effect on UK industry. The study also suggests that the implementation of IAS 39 may have unanticipated consequences on the risk management behaviour of UK firms as the possible reduction in the use of options and exchange‐traded products may result in less efficient IRRM within companies. Finally, the research suggests that corporate governance practices relating to financial risk management need to be improved.

The use of an interview‐based approach facilitates an investigation of the IRRM practices of companies on an individual basis rather than the aggregated analysis offered by most studies in the area. In addition, the paper addresses the more qualitative aspects of IRRM, such as the form and significance of IRR, IRR policy and strategy, and the use of derivative instruments.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the interest rate risk management (IRRM) practices of UK companies. In particular, the study examines five theories that have been advanced in the literature to explain why companies hedge: tax and regulatory arbitrage; under‐investment, volatility of earnings and future planning; financial distress; managerial self‐interest; and economies of scale.

The paper uses a questionnaire survey to examine the importance of hedging theories and to look at the detailed risk management practices of companies.

The research findings confirm that all five theories of financial risk management have some support in practice. However, while the responses to some questions supported the theories, other information elicited from the questionnaires did not. This finding demonstrates that studies which employ large disaggregated datasets that result in generalised conclusions often miss the dynamic nature of corporate affairs and that, as such, more qualitative research is needed in this area.

The use of a questionnaire survey facilitates an investigation of the IRRM practices of companies on an individual basis rather than the aggregated analysis afforded by most quantitative studies in finance. In addition, the qualitative approach adopted here permits an examination of many factors that relate to risk management practices, rather than just a limited number of financial ratios or factors that are typically used in studies of large datasets.

This paper aims to examine the accountability practices of large United Kingdom (UK) charities through public discourse.

Based on the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the paper develops a framework for classifying not‐for‐profit (NFP) accountability and analyzes the content of the annual reports and annual reviews of a sample of large UK charities using this framework.

The results suggest that contrary to the ethical model of stakeholder theory, the sample charities' accountability practices are motivated by a desire to legitimize their activities and present their organizations' activities in a positive light. These results contradict the raison d'être of NFP organizations (NFPOs) and the values that they espouse.

Understanding the nature of accountability reporting in NFPOs has important implications for preparers and policy makers involved in furthering the NFP agenda. New research needs to examine shifts in accountability practices over time and assess the impact of the recent self‐regulation developed to enhance sector accountability.

This paper contributes to the NFP accountability literature by: first, developing a framework of NFP accountability through public discourse using the ethical model of stakeholder theory; and second, advancing the understanding of the accountability practices of large UK charities.

This research explores the use of the internet, a mechanism that provides the opportunity to reach vast audiences efficiently and cost effectively, by United Kingdom (UK) charities to discharge accountability.

This research combines a content analysis of the web sites of large UK charities and semi-structured interviews with key charity personnel responsible for the formulation and dissemination of information to stakeholders.

The results indicate that, in most cases, charity web sites, as accountability mechanisms, appear to play a wide role, being directed at both upward and downward stakeholders. However, while the web sites are usually professionally created with appropriate web site presentation and page design, the discharge of fiduciary accountability via the internet is not universal.

This research focuses on large UK charities. This, together with the nature of the items captured by the content analysis checklist and the semi-structured interviews, inevitably affects its generalisability.

Accepting that charities have a duty to account to their stakeholders, and that the input of accounting practitioners is vital in this process, this research extends our understanding of how the internet is employed by charities to fulfil this duty.

The charity sector has grown extensively in size and prominence in recent years and policymakers have come to embrace the role that charities play in societal development. This paper provides a crucial insight into the discharge of accountability by charities through the internet.