Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe purpose of this paper is to test whether the structure of non‐financial disclosure, defined as the diffusion of financial, social, and environmental information as part of the dialog between a firm and its stakeholders, reduce information asymmetry. We adopt a stakeholder view of the firm to analyze the structure of non‐financial disclosure along three dimensions: non‐financial disclosure depth, breadth, and concentration. To operationalize the variables, we applied content analysis technique to non‐financial reports released by US firms included in S&P500 index over the period 2004–2014. We combined content data and Bid‐Ask spread data to test our hypotheses relying on feasible least squared (FLGS) estimation method. Results show that both the level of non‐financial disclosure and the breadth of stakeholder‐related themes covered in the reports reduce information asymmetry. In addition, firms that are consistent in how information is distributed across the different stakeholder categories benefit from lower opacity and reduced information asymmetry. Our findings contribute to the debate on the need to move beyond a one‐fits‐all approach to the study of non‐financial disclosure and its related impacts.

PurposeExamining a three‐year disclosure experience of a sample of Fortune 100 global companies, the paper aims to propose and test a model that relates the structure of CSR disclosure to corporate social performance. Based on the results obtained, it proposes to draw implications for emerging economies.Design/methodology/approachCombining content analysis of CSR reports and corporate social performance data, the paper built a longitudinal dataset starting from the population of worldwide companies included in the AccountAbility Rating between 2004 and 2007. Longitudinal regression analysis is performed on a final sample size of 114 firm‐year observations involving 38 firms over a three‐year period.FindingsThe paper finds evidence that the level of disclosure does not improve firm ability to manage stakeholders. However, a finer‐grained analysis of the structure of disclosure shows that better social performers are those who increased the breadth of their disclosure to stakeholders and uniformly distributed disclosure across stakeholders.Research limitations/implicationsResults provide an empirical test for the theories describing true responsible economic actors as those who are able to combine high engagement with the social context of reference and balanced coverage of diversified interests. However, the study suffers the usual limitations of content analysis‐based research, as well as exclusively relying on CSR disclosure by large corporations.Practical implicationsFindings suggest not only the importance of structuring the report in a comprehensive way, and extending coverage to multiple stakeholders and related issues, but also the need for balance between informative needs, thus avoiding concentrated structures. Accordingly, companies that report on more themes, presenting a balanced and comprehensive product, develop a better ability to manage their stakeholder network, thus gaining higher corporate social performance.Originality/valueThe study seeks to revisit the relation between CSR disclosure and corporate social performance, answering the request for more rigorous measures. It goes beyond the level of disclosure as a comprehensive proxy of firm‐stakeholder dialogue and demonstrates how a finer‐grained analysis of the structure of disclosure can be a better predictor of superior performance.