Cristiana Bernardi

Integrated reporting: A structured literature review

Abstract This paper reviews the field of integrated reporting () to develop insights into how research is developing, offer a critique of the research to date, and outline future research opportunities. We find that most published research presents normative arguments for and there is little research examining practice. Thus, we call for more research that critiques ’s rhetoric and practice. To frame future research we refer to parallels from intellectual capital research that identifies four distinct research stages to outline how research might emerge. Thus, this paper offers an insightful critique into an emerging accounting practice.

Barriers to implementing the international integrated reporting framework: a contemporary academic perspective

Purpose This paper is motivated by the call for feedback by the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) from all stakeholders with knowledge of the International Integrated Reporting Framework ( ) and specifically of the enablers, incentives and barriers to its implementation. The paper synthesises insights from contemporary accounting research into integrated reporting (IR) as a general concept and as espoused by the IIRC in the (IIRC, 2013). The authors specifically focus on possible barriers and emphasise the specific issues the authors feel could be rectified to advance the , along with the areas that may potentially hinder its wider adoption and implementation. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws upon and synthesises academic analysis and insights provided in the IR and academic literature as well as various directives, policy and framework pronouncements. Findings The flexibility and lack of prescription concerning actual disclosures and metrics in the could allow it to be used for compliance, regardless of the other benefits lauded by the IIRC. Thus the authors see forces, both external and internal, driving adoption, with one prominent example being the European Union Directive on non-financial reporting. Because of the different ways in which IR is understood and enacted, there are numerous theoretical and empirical challenges for academics. The authors paper highlights potential areas for further robust academic research and the need to contribute to policy and practice. Research limitations/implications The paper provides the IIRC, academics, regulators and reporting organisations with insights into current practice and the . The authors highlight the need for further development and evidence to help inform improvements both from a policy and a practice perspective. A key limitation of the authors’ work is that the authors draw upon a synthesis of the existing literature which is still in an early stage of development. Originality/value The paper provides the IIRC with several insights into the current and specifically with the enablers, incentives and barriers to its implementation. Also, it provides academic researchers with a number of important observations and an agenda upon which the authors can build their future research.

Managerial Integrated Reporting Evidence from practice

This study concerns a global player company operating within the Aerospace and Defence field which has first developed and then deployed a managerial integrated reporting, which attempts to combine traditional financial metrics with Intellectual Capital (IC) and Sustainability performance indicators. The qualitative research approach underlying our investigation is Interpretivism. More specifically, the study was conducted in the light of action research. Data were gathered from in-depth interviews with managers as well as from group discussions. The assumption underlying the present research is that intangibles are the mediating variables which allow to better understand the link between sustainable management and corporate financial performance.

Integrated Reporting and Integrating Thinking: Practical Challenges

Integrated reporting ( ) is currently a hot topic for academic research because of the practical challenges businesses encounter when implementing it. Motivated by the results from the IIRC’s call for feedback on the International Framework ( ) implementation, this chapter focuses on the challenges of integrated thinking and examines the extant academic literature to offer contributions for future research based on practice. We find that integrated thinking suffers from significant conceptual, theoretical and practical challenges, which obstruct the claimed benefits deriving from the adoption of . Therefore, this chapter contributes to rethinking the paradigm of integrated thinking as an internal managerial practice, and calls for pragmatic research investigating internal practices and integrated thinking. Within third-stage research, that provides a critical and performative assessment of in action, we advocate that researchers need to shift the focus from reporting to internal practices. Accordingly, we claim that managers need to abandon the compliance-driven logic underpinning external reporting to foster integrated thinking and unlock its potential in practice.

On the Relationship Between Analyst Following and Environmental and Social Disclosures

Motivated by the requirements of the UK Companies Act 2006 and the subsequent Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, we investigate the relationship between environmental and social disclosures (analyst following) and analyst following (environmental and social disclosures). We do so to investigate the value relevance of information about environmental and social performance, in a context where corporate managers have to gauge the level of disclosures necessary to satisfy the requirements of the Act. Our analysis provides support for the requirements of the UK and EU with respect to disclosures concerning environmental and social performance – the evidence is consistent with their value relevance and an associated demand for such disclosures from informed market participants. It further is consistent with the assumption that corporate managers take into account the demand for such value relevant, environmental and social disclosures in gauging the appropriate amount of such disclosures. Stepping outside the policy dimension to our work, we can also argue that our results also suggest positive links between analyst following and the quality of environmental and social disclosure.