Search results

The paper aims to provide companies with a better understanding of the needs of institutional investors to improve the disclosure of sustainability information by companies. The study investigates the changed information needs of institutional investors resulting from the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR).

This study uses an internet-based survey instrument amongst institutional investors to gain insights into their needs regarding sustainability information. The authors received 155 responses in total and use descriptive statistics and t-tests to analyse the survey data.

The results demonstrate that the implementation of the SFDR challenges institutional investors, as it affects their decision process. Additionally, the findings still indicate a lack of available corporate sustainability information, making it even more challenging for institutional investors to make appropriate investment decisions. Respondents suggest that information on climate-related risks is more important than the European Union (EU) Taxonomy metrics for meeting the SFDR requirements.

The findings are mainly restricted to the opinion of European investors. However, the evidence contributes to the existing literature by investigating institutional investors' information needs in the new regulatory landscape.

As the study provides insights into institutional investors' needs, reporting companies recognise the relevance of transparently providing sustainability information to be further considered in the investment process of institutional investors despite the regulation. The findings can help regulators develop uniform and global sustainability reporting standards.

This paper is the first to provide evidence on sustainability information requested on the institutional investors' side. The survey gathers primary data from professional investment members unavailable in databases or reports.

Since the beginning of the 2000s, investors have more frequently invested into professional football clubs, thereby radically changing the industry landscape. This review's purpose is to analyze and synthesize the state of research to understand motives, roles and implications of football club investors, and to provide recommendations for further research.

The paper presents an integrative literature review by identifying relevant English articles based on the search terms investor, owner, investment, ownership, shareholder and stakeholder in combination with soccer or football. Around 2,431 articles were reviewed. A total of 129 relevant articles was analyzed and synthesized within eight subject areas.

Investors in professional club football is a young research stream with a clear European focus. Investor motives and roles are diverse and implications are multidimensional. Investors mostly aim for indirect returns rather than pure profit- or win-maximization.

Football clubs comprise an own investment class for which the identified, unique specifics must be considered to develop a financially successful investment model. Thorough academic research of investors' inherent characteristics, investor-club pairings and the pillars of long-term strategies for successful investor-club liaisons are avenues of future research. Furthermore, the results illustrate the need for research outside of Europe.

The paper is the first systematic, integrative review of existing literature in the domain of equity investments into professional club football. The findings genuinely show that, depending on the investor type and ownership structure, investors have a wide impact in professional club football.

The aim of this paper is to examine the effects of the European Non-financial Reporting Directive (2014/95/EU) on firms' sustainability reporting practices, especially reporting quantity (i.e. availability of information) and quality (i.e. comparability and credibility).

To test the main hypotheses, the authors select 905 treated firms from the EU 28 + 2 countries for a difference-in-differences regression analysis of dependent variables from the Refinitiv ESG database.

The results suggest that the Directive influences sustainability reporting quantity and quality. Treated firms provide around 4 percentage points more sustainability information (i.e. availability) than propensity score matched control firms and are 19 percent more likely to receive external assurance (i.e. credibility). However, we also find that the Directive is not the decisive factor in the adoption of GRI guidelines (i.e. comparability).

The analysis is restricted to large listed firms and does not account for small, mid-sized and private firms. Further, cross-cultural differences which influence sustainability reporting are controlled for but not investigated in detail. The authors derive several suggestions for future research related to the NFR Directive and its revision.

The authors’ findings have practical implications for the future development of sustainability reporting in the EU and for other regulators considering the adoption of sustainability reporting.

This study is the first to provide evidence on the NFR Directive's reporting effects across multiple countries. It adds to the growing literature on the consequences of mandatory sustainability reporting. Additionally, this paper introduces a novel measurement approach sustainability information quantity that could benefit researchers.

Many factors influence success at a professional football club, as each club has an exclusive definition and interpretation of success. Using the Football Management Q-Score as a foundation, the authors set out to prove the framework's robustness in the industry's current environment.

To determine the purpose, the authors conducted interviews with Bundesliga experts. Using the Gioia Method, the authors could condense interview feedback into aggregate themes reflecting the main findings of the analysis process.

From 1,025 codes, three main contributions resulted – the concept of intercorrelation, a more balanced and dynamic framework, and four new key drivers.

Expert feedback validated the framework as robust, and the further main contributions gave the framework a wider application to a larger range of clubs, allowing the users of the framework to infer a greater context. Interview results proved the inclusion of Kaplan and Norton's original framework with vision and strategy.

This study derives a new framework that comprehensively assesses management quality along four dimensions, namely Sporting Success; Financial Performance; Fan Welfare Maximization; and Leadership and Governance. Filled with measurable key performance indicators (KPIs), these dimensions serve the purpose of objectively quantifying the relevant success factors. Ultimately, the performance in all dimensions indicates a football club's management quality.

The study relies first on a review of the literature in the field of both general management and sports. Second, the authors adapt the balanced scorecard framework to the field of professional football and use a set of KPIs to assess the management quality of the Bundesliga teams over the seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18. Third, the authors validate the relative weights of the four dimensions composing the so-called “Football Management Quality score” (i.e. FoMa Q-Score) using expert interviews.

Two movements characterize the score development in 2017/18 compared to 2016/17: first, scores appear more contracted than previously. Second, both average and median scores improved, suggesting a general improvement in the management quality within the Bundesliga.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first exploratory study deriving and measuring relevant key criteria for managing football clubs and illustrating the findings in a ranking. The aim of this study is to establish a model that impacts both academia and practice. By utilizing existing management literature and adjusting it to football particularities, the newfound knowledge begins to close the gap in sport management literature.

The valuation of property companies and fair value accounting for investment properties under IFRS are closely affiliated with each other. This is because property companies are commonly valued using net asset value as a valuation technique. The term net asset value represents the fair value of a property company's assets less its liabilities and therefore can easily be determined, as under IFRS investment property is often reported using a fair value approach. The purpose of this paper is to examine the perception of fair value estimates for many companies' main asset: investment properties. With this it contributes to the stream of real estate finance literature that investigates net asset value deviations from property companies' share prices and to the stream of accounting literature that investigates fair value accounting.

The association between the net asset values of European listed property companies and their market prices are investigated. Observed deviations are related to a wide set of variables using panel (unbalanced) OLS‐regressions.

It is found that net asset value usually departs from the market capitalization of European property companies. It is also found that those deviations are a result of insufficient reliability of fair value estimates of investment properties because of the limitations of appraisals, the diversity of applied approaches in appraising investment properties and the reliability problem for mark‐to‐model approaches usually applied in determining the fair value of investment properties.

This parameter has not been considered before in previous literature.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the choice of the financial reporting system can influence the credit rating of an enterprise. It aims to argue that small‐ and medium‐sized entities (SMEs) reporting according to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) can – in some cases – benefit from better credit conditions in comparison with reporting according to the German Commercial Code (German‐GAAP). Therefore, the analysis focuses on the perceptions of German banks.

The paper uses the results of a written questionnaire which has been sent to more than 1,500 German banks, which makes it the most comprehensive empirical analysis of the perceptions of German banks concerning the granting of loans.

The findings show (amongst others) that bank internal ratings can be a motivation for SMEs to change the system of financial reporting from German‐GAAP to IFRS. Surprisingly, enterprises can in some cases even expect a “rating bonus” in the pricing of the credit, if they provide an IFRS statement instead of a statement prepared in accordance with German‐GAAP.

Owing to the rapidly changing accounting environment (concerning IFRS as well as the German Commercial Code), the findings have to be re‐examined by future research.

This paper draws on the present state of research, complementing it for the first time with representative empirical data from the perspective of the decision makers in German credit institutions.