Matthew V. Tilling and Carol A. Tilt
The purpose of this paper is to examine the voluntary social and environmental disclosures made in the annual reports of Rothmans Ltd between the years of 1955 and 1999. The first…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine the voluntary social and environmental disclosures made in the annual reports of Rothmans Ltd between the years of 1955 and 1999. The first part of the paper focuses on defining legitimacy theory as it has been used in accounting research, extending the current model of legitimacy that predominates, and discussing the potential of a resource‐based approach to testing the theory.
Design/methodology/approach
A qualitative and quantitative approach to analysing annual report disclosures is presented, and this is one of the few studies to operationalise the variables under study as measures of resource flows.
Findings
The paper considers legitimacy theory in light of disclosures made by Rothmans. An initial analysis provides qualitative examples of expected attempts to legitimatise the corporation given the threat posed by the smoking and health debate. Further analysis conducted using a quantitative measure of resource flows controlled by one stakeholder group, contradicts those expected when compared with previous studies, and as a result of this an alternative conceptualisation of legitimacy theory is proposed.
Research limitations/implications
The paper considers one company in one industry and provides evidence from limited stakeholders groups. The results have implications for further research on social and environmental reporting that use a legitimacy framework.
Originality/value
The paper provides one of the few studies to attempt to measure resource flows in order to proxy stakeholder influence on reporting. This therefore provides an alternative to the more common measures of legitimacy used in previous studies. These have predominantly been based on researcher judgement of the categorised text to determine whether they fit certain “legitimacy” criteria.
Details
Keywords
President, Charles S. Goldman, M.P.; Chairman, Charles Bathurst, M.P.; Vice‐Presidents: Christopher Addison, M.D., M.P., Waldorf Astor, M.P., Charles Bathurst, M.P., Hilaire…
Abstract
President, Charles S. Goldman, M.P.; Chairman, Charles Bathurst, M.P.; Vice‐Presidents: Christopher Addison, M.D., M.P., Waldorf Astor, M.P., Charles Bathurst, M.P., Hilaire Belloc, Ralph D. Blumenfeld, Lord Blyth, J.P., Colonel Charles E. Cassal, V.D., F.I.C., the Bishop of Chichester, Sir Arthur H. Church, K.C.V.O., M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S., Sir Wm. Earnshaw Cooper, C.I.E., E. Crawshay‐Williams, M.P., Sir Anderson Critchett, Bart., C.V.O., F.R.C.S.E., William Ewart, M.D., F.R.C.P., Lieut.‐Colonel Sir Joseph Fayrer, Bart., M.A., M.D., Sir Alfred D. Fripp, K.C.V.O., C.B., M.B., M.S., Sir Harold Harmsworth, Bart., Arnold F. Hills, Sir Victor Horsley, M.D., F.R.C.S., F.R.S., O. Gutekunst, Sir H. Seymour King, K.C.I.E., M.A., the Duke of Manchester, P.C., Professor Sir Wm. Osler, Bart., M.D., F.R.S., Sir Gilbert Parker, D.C.L., M.P., Sir Wm. Ramsay, K.C.B., LL.D., M.D., F.R.S., Harrington Sainsbury, M.D., F.R.C.P., W. G. Savage, M.D., B.Sc., R. H. Scanes Spicer, M.D., M.R.C.S., the Hon. Lionel Walrond, M.P., Hugh Walsham, M.D., F.R.C.P., Harvey W. Wiley, M.D., Evelyn Wrench.
Oliver James Bradley and Gloria Oforiwaa Botchway
The purpose of this paper is to identify the sustainability indicators disclosed by ten British Coffee Association corporate members in their sustainability reporting and examine…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to identify the sustainability indicators disclosed by ten British Coffee Association corporate members in their sustainability reporting and examine whether the indicators correspond to the sustainability challenges faced by the coffee industry, as identified in the literature.
Design/methodology/approach
A normative account of sustainability challenges was developed based on a review of extant literature. A content analysis of the sustainability reports and/or Webpages of the companies was conducted to identify quantitative and qualitative sustainability indicators. Frequency and thematic analysis enabled the subsequent examination.
Findings
A total of 94 sustainability indicators (44 environmental, 30 social and 20 economic) were identified in company reporting. The indicators correspond to the sustainability challenges identified in the literature. In addition to broad challenges, indicators are used to communicate specific issues. A significant number (47) of single-use indicators were identified, communicating less frequently reported challenges. Some companies account for sustainability from bean to cup, attributed to crucial differences in organisational characteristics (degree of vertical integration). Furthermore, the findings highlight the discretionary nature of sustainability reporting, finding considerable variance in indicators disclosed.
Research limitations/implications
As this paper relies on self-reported corporate disclosures, it critically examines the reporting practices of organisations, as opposed to verifying the activities associated with their claims. The authors minimised subjectivity by reducing the interpretation of what constituted “an indicator” using a clearly agreed definition and multiple rounds of coding.
Practical implications
This paper examines the reporting practices of organisations, providing a useful insight and a competitor benchmark. By comprehensively examining the sustainability challenges faced by the coffee industry, it offers “sustainability context” that can be used by organisations to improve their accounting and reporting practices.
Social implications
This paper acknowledges and addresses social initiatives that call for the systematic development of practical and appropriate sustainability indicators that can become embedded in policy and decision-making, affecting the measurement of progress and responses to important sustainability challenges.
Originality/value
This paper presents the first systematic review of sustainability indicator disclosure in an industry that faces significant sustainability challenges.
Details
Keywords
Matthew Bamber and Kevin McMeeking
The purpose of this paper is to address “the existing literature gap on the information content of derivatives reporting”. Prior work finds failings in compliance with mandatory…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to address “the existing literature gap on the information content of derivatives reporting”. Prior work finds failings in compliance with mandatory reporting requirements in respect of financial instruments and derivative financial instruments. Instead of identifying weaknesses in compliance the paper identifies where firms over‐comply or in other words, where firms voluntarily disclose more than they are required and whether this is incremental information or serves another purpose.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper reviews the financial instruments disclosures of the FTSE 100 non‐financial IFRS 7 compliant firms. Based on these results, on a case‐by‐case basis the authors address potential causes and rationale for this extra disclosure.
Findings
Prior research suggests that it is counter intuitive to argue that firms will provide voluntary disclosure in a mandatory reporting environment because information of this sort tends to be proprietary and competition sensitive, not to mention costly to prepare. However, it is found that firms have voluntarily published information in excess of the requirements and the authors suggest that this extra detail is most commonly associated with a legitimation strategy.
Originality/value
In spite of the importance of derivatives usage and management in addition to the increased and often complex reporting requirements, the authors are not aware of any previous study of this type.
Details
Keywords
Despite over two decades of crack use in the UK, there is little UK‐focused research and little understanding of the social context of crack use and health‐related risks. This is…
Abstract
Despite over two decades of crack use in the UK, there is little UK‐focused research and little understanding of the social context of crack use and health‐related risks. This is of concern because research in the UK suggests that service provision for crack users is inadequate. Research also suggests that there are high attrition rates of crack users in drug support services. Based on data collected in 2004/2005, this paper will examine how crack cocaine users start using crack, what happens over time, and where they end up as a consequence ‐ the crack scene. Many become mistrustful because of the manipulative and violent interactions that take place in these spaces. This is not helped when crack users reflect on past mistakes, which only results in increased crack use. As practical and health issues become too problematic, ways out, too, become more difficult. In addition, many find it difficult to place trust in welfare and drug support services because of negative past experiences, and feel ashamed about past failures in treatment. Taken together, I will also show how this is not helped by the configuration of drug support services.
Details
Keywords
Lesego Tladinyane, Lungelo Gumede and Geoff Bick
This case study is intended to supplement postgraduate business learning with the facilitation of an academic practitioner. The case draws on a culmination of subjects, and the…
Abstract
Subject area of the teaching case:
This case study is intended to supplement postgraduate business learning with the facilitation of an academic practitioner. The case draws on a culmination of subjects, and the participants are encouraged to juxtapose the case information with their professional experiences; however, the primary focus of the case material will be centred on strategy, innovation, and entrepreneurship.
Student level:
The primary audience for the teaching case is management education programmes including: Master of Business Administration (MBA), Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip), specialist Masters in Management, and certain Executive Education programmes.
Brief overview of the teaching case:
This case is about protagonist Ndabenhle Junior Ngulube, the cofounder of an innovative technology-enabled insurance intermediary company called Pineapple. The company has identified an opportunity to resolve the inherent conflict of interest within the insurance industry, as well as the grudge association of non-life insurance purchases. While the competitive landscape of the sector is traditionally dominated by a few large incumbent market participants, Pineapple's digital distribution strategy is more effective at converting ‘clicks-to-clients’, at a fraction of the typical customer acquisition cost. The peer-to-peer business model also allows for superior risk-selection, greater affinity, and lower incidents of fraudulent claims. Ndabenhle and the team develop the company's customer acquisition strategy by drawing on technological trends, reputation drivers, and a concentrated social media approach that focusses on trust, access, product, and value. But, as 2020 begins, Ndabenhle faces choices about the means and methods of scaling the business operation. The case documents the first few years of Pineapple's operations, with a strong focus on business model innovation, distribution, scalability, and technological integration.
Expected learning outcomes:
To analyse the role disruptive technologies play within sectoral business model innovation
To evaluate the industry-specific competitive business landscape and complexities of building and maintaining a sustainable competitive advantage within a niche market segment
To assess the strategic growth opportunities for an emerging market Insurtech disruptor
To critically appraise the entrepreneurial complexities faced by decision-makers when looking to challenge incumbent market leaders
Details
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cf3da/cf3da6493241c01c1b18863864b9175f846ced05" alt="The Case Writing Centre, University of Cape Town, Graduate School of Business"
Keywords
Serge Svizzero and Clement A. Tisdell
Possible reasons for using kites to kill gazelles are comprehensively reviewed in this article. Even though they are now well inventoried and documented, desert kites are still…
Abstract
Possible reasons for using kites to kill gazelles are comprehensively reviewed in this article. Even though they are now well inventoried and documented, desert kites are still not well understood, as exemplified by the recurrent controversies about their function and dating. According to the dominant view, kites were hunting structures used to drive and to mass kill large herds of wild ungulates, particularly gazelles. Although kites were intensively used during the Early Bronze Age, some of them could have been built and used before that. Beyond these issues, the cultural and socioeconomic aspects of the kites phenomenon are even less understood, and therefore, we focus on changing reasons for the long-lasting use of kites as hunting devices. We contend that the reasons why they were used during the period of utilization for hunting gazelles changed, in most cases, in response to socioeconomic development. It is hypothesized, for example, that, as a result of urban development, kites may have been increasingly (but not exclusively) used to kill gazelles to trade their products with urban communities and farmers, even though they had other uses as well which are also considered. The main hypothesis presented in this article enables diverse opinions about the types of uses and reasons for utilizing desert kites to be reconciled, including in particular varied reasons given in the literature about why they were used for killing gazelles.
Details
Keywords
Giacomo Boesso and Kamalesh Kumar
Following the line of thinking that a firm is a nexus of contracts between stakeholders, with managers as “the central node,” the purpose of this paper is to examine how managers…
Abstract
Purpose
Following the line of thinking that a firm is a nexus of contracts between stakeholders, with managers as “the central node,” the purpose of this paper is to examine how managers prioritize stakeholder relationships and to what extent firms engage in disclosures with the stakeholder groups they deem to be important.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were simultaneously collected from two different national business contexts, Italy and the USA. The sample for this study consisted of 244 managers.
Findings
Results of the study show that the power and legitimacy that managers associate with a stakeholder group cumulatively are the most important determinant of how managers go about prioritizing competing claims. The results also provide some evidence to the effect that the greater the priority accorded to a stakeholder group, the greater the efforts aimed at engaging the stakeholder groups (as evidenced by the voluntary disclosures made in the annual report).
Research limitations/implications
Use of self‐report measures, although widely used in behavioral and strategy research, may raise some concerns about the findings. Also, examining annual report's voluntary disclosures as the single source of assessing the stakeholder engagement efforts creates a potential limitation on the findings of the study.
Practical implications
The stakeholder salience framework as examined in this study offers some practical insights into the understanding of which stakeholders do really matter and why. Furthermore, in attempting to relate stakeholder salience accorded to engagement/disclosure efforts, this study shows some potential limitations that managers may face because of prevalent social values and the need to maintain organizational legitimacy.
Originality/value
The main contribution of this paper lies in testing and extending an inferential theory of stakeholder management. The research highlights the unique role that managers play in managing firm‐stakeholder relationships.