Search results

This paper aims to investigate the potential influence of managers on sustainability assurance. When the quality of sustainability reporting is questionable because of subsequent restatements, the authors explore whether assurance is used to enhance its credibility as a legitimization tool or as an impression management strategy. Additionally, the authors analyze how capital markets react to this potential managerial capture and, particularly, whether investors penalize this practice through the cost of capital.

Using an international sample from 2012 to 2016 and panel data regressions, this study relies on DICTION’s master variables of optimism and certainty to examine the impact of managers on assurance and the market’s reaction to these practices.

The study shows that some managers might use assurance as a legitimization tool rather than as a means of reinforcing the credibility of sustainability reporting. In such cases, the results reveal that investors penalize (reward) managerial influence (no influence) on assurance.

The new findings help companies understand that they will not improve their financing terms if investors perceive that managers have influenced assurance. Moreover, these findings emphasize the need for standardization to clarify assurance criteria and prevent managerial influence.

Managerial influence on assurance raises doubts about its value in terms of reducing information asymmetry and especially improving investors’ decision-making.

The present study represents the first evidence of the potential use of assurance for non-informative purposes. The authors provide clear evidence of how investors penalize managerial influence on assurance, in contrast to the mainstream literature, which shows that this practice always improves investors’ decision-making and is rewarded.

Sustainability development goals (SDGs) cannot be achieved without a concerted effort from businesses and other organisations, being the corporate level is one of the keys to the achievement of SDGs. This study aims to explore the relationship between firms' adoption of SDG reporting in China and two main corporate-level factors, namely, board characteristics and ownership factors. Also, this study aims to determine which set of drivers – those related to board or ownership factors – exerts a greater influence on this reporting.

This research examines the impact of ownership and board-level factors on the SDG reporting of Chinese firms in the period 2016–2018, with a final sample of 455 firm-year observations operating in 11 activity sectors.

The results support the following: firstly, that board independence and size and the existence of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee favours firms addressing SDGs in their sustainability reporting while greater levels of foreign or institutional ownership are negatively related to a company's adoption of SDG reporting; secondly, two-stage logit regression results revealed that board-level factors exert greater explanatory power in the prediction of this reporting and have bigger weights in affecting the SDGs reporting.

This study focuses on assessing the drivers of SDGs; namely, what internal factors will facilitate companies' better implementation of SDG reporting to bridge the gap in this field, not only extending the investigation of corporate governance factors affecting SDGs but also examining the impact of corporate ownership on SDG reporting.

This study enriches and provides support for previous studies examining the drivers of SDGs in the private sector. In academia, addressing SDGs in business is still an emerging research stream that is still in an embryonic state; the reporting of SDGs in business is quite under-investigated in the sustainability literature. Moreover, literature on the drivers that promote better implementation of SDGs in business is even more scarce and incomplete. Some previous studies have ignored the impact of board size and the CSR committee. At the same time, there is no research to date on the impact of ownership on companies' SDGs reporting, which has been proved to play a large role in firms sustainability reporting.

This paper aims to examine the communicative value of assurance reports by investigating whether the impact on information asymmetries is contingent on the length of the contractual relationship between clients and assurance providers, which can compromise the provider’s independence.

Using a firm-level data set of publicly listed international firms from 2007 to 2016, the authors estimate several regression models for panel data by using the generalized method of moments estimator to address the endogeneity issue.

Results find that the greater the communicative value in assurance statements, the lower the information asymmetries. However, this effect is constrained when the assurance provider’s independence is compromised due to an excessively long-term contractual relationship. In other words, assurance statements with more informative value enhance the firm’s transparency and increase users’ confidence in the sustainability information provided. However, the loss of independence linked to longer tenure jeopardizes the communicative value of the assurance report and contributes to reducing information asymmetries.

The study makes at least three clear contributions to current literature. First, the authors contribute to the limited existing research about the communicative value attributed to assurance statements by stakeholders. Second, the authors indirectly contribute to the literature that analyses whether stakeholders understand the assurance report, a complex statement in a growing market. Addressing the communicative value of assurance is certainly a difficult task, as it is a novel and complex activity. Third, the main contribution is providing initial empirical evidence about the moderating effect that assurance provider tenure has in the relationship between the informational content of the assurance report and the level of information asymmetries. To date, there is no empirical evidence regarding the moderating effect of long assuror’s tenure as an important feature of the assurance market, and beyond that, regarding its impact on the communicative value assigned by stakeholders to assurance statements.

Sustainability assurance services are carried out in a competitive market where a wide range of assurance providers operate without the need for any specific professional qualifications, competencies or skills. Assurance providers have heterogeneous professional backgrounds and experiences that lead to substantial diversity in sustainability assurance quality levels. This paper aims to provide an understanding of sustainability assurance quality. From a legitimacy perspective, the authors focus on the choice of assurance providers by exploring why a company voluntarily chooses an incumbent financial auditor to jointly provide audit and sustainability assurance services. The authors argue that to avoid the legitimacy threats undermining stakeholders’ confidence in the sustainability information disclosed, companies should only choose their incumbent financial auditors to provide sustainability assurance services when these auditors possess the professional attributes associated with sustainability assurance quality.

This study develops regression models for an international sample for 2007–2016, where the authors analyze why a company voluntarily chooses an incumbent auditor to jointly provide audit and sustainability assurance services from a legitimacy theory perspective.

Evidence confirms that the choice of incumbent auditors as assurance providers is more likely when these providers are more specialized in the industry. The authors also find that independence does not play a significant role in this decision. Therefore, an assurance provider’s industry specialization can be understood as an attribute that is associated with sustainability assurance quality and one which limits the legitimacy threats caused by a lack of sufficient sustainability knowledge.

Given that companies have complete freedom when choosing their assurance providers, the selection of a high-quality incumbent auditor is an indirect measure of social commitment and a mechanism to improve public trust. The results confirm that it is fundamental for firms to understand the situations when choosing an incumbent financial auditor to provide sustainability assurance services is the best way to ensure firm legitimacy while obtaining higher sustainability assurance quality due to the spillover effect. This paper provides useful evidence for firms and managers who can become aware that the legitimacy threat associated with the auditing profession’s questionable competence to conduct efficient sustainability assurance engagements can be reduced if they hire an incumbent financial auditor with greater industry specialization. For assurance providers, the results are especially useful, as they should know that companies will be more likely to choose their incumbent financial auditor when that auditor possesses certain professional attributes, like industry specialization. The ability to assimilate and exploit the knowledge gained through auditing activities can be improved even more by specialization, which enhances sustainability assurance quality.

From a social perspective, stakeholders perceive industry specialization as an indicator of the professional skills necessary to increase both the real and perceived quality of sustainability assurance services, thereby limiting the legitimacy threat arising from a lack of sustainability knowledge. The evidence also provides valuable results for regulatory bodies, as it shows that firms are not able to address the legitimacy gap caused by stakeholders’ perceptions that incumbent financial auditors can easily be controlled by companies. Thus, doubts arise as to whether this joint provision undermines auditor independence. Precisely, these doubts about assurance provider independence can erode public confidence in assurance and devalue the quality of the service. The results of this paper highlight the need to strengthen regulation on sustainability reporting and assurance. The advances and relevance of sustainable development in recent years and in future agendas require a firm commitment to sustainability reporting and assurance of quality, reliability, integrity and confidence.

First, this study contributes to recent empirical studies that focus on the role of sustainability assurance services in the legitimation process of corporate sustainability reporting. However, while that research analyzes how the legitimacy theory explains the voluntary adoption of sustainability assurance, this paper adds to the literature by presenting evidence about why certain incumbent auditors are appointed to carry out sustainability assurance services. Second, this paper contributes to the sustainability assurance quality literature. Third, unlike previous studies that have regressed various client-specific and institutional factors that influence firms’ decisions to choose assurance providers, this study contributes to the research by providing knowledge about a set of professional features that may explain the decision model of assurance providers selection from a legitimacy perspective.

This paper aims to analyse the use of level of debt as an external control mechanism against an entrenchment strategy based on corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices.

The authors use a database of 1,916 international companies for the years 2002 to 2010.

The evidence obtained confirms in a context of asymmetric information, bounded rationality and divergent interests, the use of debt as a control mechanism of managers’ discretionary comportment. In other words, CSR practices can be used by managers as an entrenchment strategy and self-defence with the aim of decreasing the possibility of being identified by those shareholders and stakeholders whose interests have been damaged. In this context, the market demands higher debt levels to solve agency frictions, playing an active role in monitoring the management. Moreover, the demand of higher debt as a control mechanism that minimises the expropriation risk by managers through CSR is lower in contexts of greater investor protection.

The findings reveal that CSR engagement can be explained by the hypothesis of being a strategy of entrenchment and self-defence. Overall, this study differs from previous literature in this field by taking an alternative approach to CSR practices, in contrast to the conventional wisdom of the benefits of CSR practices. The authors contribute by empirically testing the theoretical model proposed by Cespa and Cestone (2007) who suggest the discretionary use of CSR from an agency perspective. They also give empirical relief showing the use of CSR as an entrenchment strategy. Moreover, they demonstrate that the capital market of debt decreases in a context with a greater degree of investor protection, likewise under CSR promoted as an entrenchment tool, the demand for debt as a disciplinary mechanism is less necessary to control managers. In addition, the study is enriched by the database analysis.

This study aims to understand whether board diversity has a direct effect on “corporate social responsibility (CSR)” performance of companies or not. In addition, this study also aims to examine the moderation effect of age and education level of female board members on the relationship between board gender diversity and CSR performance.

A “corporate social performance (CSP)” measurement instrument was designed to conduct a content analysis that analyzes the CSR disclosure in the annual reports of Turkish companies listed on the “500 biggest Turkish companies” report of “Istanbul Chamber of Industry (ISO)” in 2015. The data coming from content analysis of 117 company reports were analyzed by using hierarchical regression analysis.

Despite of supporting the increase in CSR performance when there is a greater presence of independent board members in an organization, evidence supports that ratios of female and foreign board members do not have any significant effect on CSR performance.

The study contributes to previous literature on board diversity and CSR performance as follows. First, this paper contributes to previous literature by examining and testing independent, female and foreign board members as a new antecedent of CSR performance in research on Turkey; second, by examining a sample of the “500 biggest Turkish companies” and providing some tips about both Turkey and other developing countries; third, by reopening the debate about the positive impact of a greater presence of independent directors on board on CSR performance and the non-effect of female and foreign board members. Finally, it also offers a partially new CSP measurement instrument based on content analysis.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how family ownership influences the strength of the board’s monitoring function in companies’ decisions regarding the assurance of sustainability reports.

The international sample consists of 536 companies operating in more stakeholder-oriented countries during the period 2007-2014. The paper proposes alternative logit models of analysis using the random-effects estimator.

The results provide evidence that a firm’s sustainability assurance and its choice of accounting professionals as higher quality assurers are positively associated with board size and independence. The main result is the positive impact of family businesses on these assurance issues. The paper evidences the greater orientation toward sustainability issues of family businesses. Furthermore, it verifies the greater impact of board size on family firms’ assurance demand.

This study sheds some light on the unexplored topic of sustainability assurance in family firms. One of the differentiating aspects with respect to previous studies is the consideration of the moderating factor of family property. This study also contributes to the understanding of family firms’ demand for assurance and its practitioners, and the literature’s focus on its determinants.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether gender diversity on board and financial expertise on audit committee affect accounting conservatism in banking sector. Additionally, the authors focus on the effects of board characteristics on bank earnings quality and examine their effects on earnings persistence.

The authors use a large sample of 159 banks from nine different countries from the period 2004-2010. The authors study whether the differences in the timeliness of earnings to bad news and earnings quality across governance structures of banks are driven by differences across investor protection and bank regulation levels in banks.

The findings confirm the monitoring role of both female and financial experts, noting a positive effect of them on accounting conservatism and earnings quality in banks. According to the institutional characteristics, the results suggest the complementary role of banking regulation and investor protection levels in these effects, noting that in contexts of higher regulatory and greater investor protection environments, gender diversity and financial expertise on boards have more influence on the conservatism and earnings quality of banks.

The authors contribute to both the accounting quality literature and the corporate governance literature by identifying board characteristics that are associated with higher conservatism and quality of earnings in banks around the world. In addition, this study also contributes to the ethics literature by highlighting the benefits of gender diversity and financial expertise in upholding the integrity of financial reporting. Moreover, this paper adds to prior literature about board of directors and accounting quality by identifying additional complementary factors – bank regulation and investor protection – and by focusing on a specific industry, the banking industry.

The goal is to investigate the relationship between financial performance and environmental, social and governance (ESG) indicators and disclosures for a sample of Latin American firms.

Dynamic panel data regressions are used to analyze a sample of 114 companies listed on the Latin American Integrated Market, MILA (Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru) for the period 2011–2020. The Altman Z-score and Piotroski F-score are used as indicators of the probability of default and comprehensive financial strength. Models are developed in which the relationship between economic value added (EVA) and Jensen’s alpha are evaluated against firms’ ESG practices.

A direct relationship between ESG strategies and financial performance was found. Better practices and transparency in ESG are related to lower probability of bankruptcy, greater financial strength, greater EVA and superior risk-adjusted returns.

ESG data were obtained from the Bloomberg system based on a methodology that may differ from other sources. The sample covers four Latin American countries and large corporations. Independent variables were selected for their perceived validity, given their frequent use in previous studies.

Evidence for company management regarding the importance of strengthening ESG practices and reporting should be part of their balanced scorecards. For investors, the results support the importance of evaluating ESG practices in asset selection.

The present study is the first research to present empirical evidence on the relationship between ESG scores and disclosures for MILA countries, using a comprehensive set of financial performance indicators (Altman Z-scores, Piotroski F-scores, EVA and Jensen’s alpha).

Based on earnings management (EM) practices, the purpose of this research is to analyze their market social consequences on corporate reputation. Moreover, this paper illustrates this impact in the context of family firms which are led and controlled by family members, whose main interest is the long-run survival through succession.

A sample comprising 1,169 international listed companies for the period 2006-2010 was used.

The empirical evidence shows the negative impact of these discretionary accounting practices on corporate image. However, family firms have more incentives for controlling and monitoring managerial decisions, avoiding information asymmetries and, thus, EM behavior and their subsequent loss of reputation. Therefore, fewer negative effects on corporate reputation are observed in highly concentrated ownership structures as a result of the negative link between family control and EM.

This study presents a number of contributions because of its focus on specific discretionary practices and on family firms. This study contributes to previous literature on family firms, as previous papers do not tend to focus on EM issues. Moreover, in contrast to most of the studies that have focused on only one country, we use an international panel database. This leads to potentially more powerful and generalized results. In addition, this paper is the first attempt (to the authors' knowledge) to study the possible impact of EM on corporate reputation in the family firm context.