Jeffrey Unerman

Reflections on quantification in corporate social reporting content analysis

A key assumption underlying many corporate social reporting content analysis studies is that volume of disclosure signifies the relative importance of disclosures. Most of these studies have only quantified disclosures in annual reports, and there is disagreement within the literature regarding the best way to measure each individual disclosure. Based on observations made during the conduct of a 100‐year content analysis study, which examined a broad range of Shell’s corporate reports, this paper argues that an exclusive focus on annual reports is likely to result in an incomplete picture of reporting practices. It also contributes further insights to the debate on measurement techniques, arguing that while measurement in sentences may be carried out with greater accuracy than measurement in proportions of a page, the former is likely to give less relevant results than the latter.

Theorising Accountability for NGO Advocacy

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a staged theoretical argument regarding whether non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can be considered responsible and accountable for the direct and indirect consequences, on a wide range of stakeholders, flowing from their advocacy activities. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is primarily theoretical and conceptual, developing a structured, conditional and staged model illustrated with empirical examples. Findings – The paper finds depending upon the theoretical arguments accepted at each stage of the model, the advocacy activities of an NGO may be considered to cause a widespread and often unintended negative impact upon the lives of many stakeholders who are either close to, or remote from, the NGO. Also, that depending upon the theoretical position taken regarding the scope of accountability, all entities – including NGOs – may be regarded as responsible and accountable for the impacts which their activities directly and indirectly cause to a broad range of stakeholders. Research limitations/implications – The model is primarily theoretical, so it can benefit from empirical studies to assess its applicability in practice. It also has the scope to be applied in assessing the responsibility and accountability of a range of other entities for their advocacy – such as businesses, religious bodies, political parties, and academics. Practical implications – The paper presents a ontribution to the growing debate on NGO accountability. Originality/value – The paper uses the synthesis of various philosophical positions to develop a conditional, staged model which may be used to establish whether NGOs (and other organisations) can be regarded as having responsibilities and accountabilities for the direct and indirect impacts of their advocacy activities on a broad range of stakeholders.

Integrated reporting : insights, gaps and an agenda for future research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to synthesise insights from accounting and accountability research into the rapidly emerging field of integrated reporting and proposes a comprehensive agenda for future research in this area. In so doing, it draws upon insights from other papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal on the theme of integrated reporting. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws upon and synthesises academic analysis and insights provided in the embryonic integrated reporting academic literature in conjunction with policy pronouncements. Findings – The paper shows that the rapid development of integrated reporting policy, and early developments of practice, present theoretical and empirical challenges because of the different ways in which integrated reporting is understood and enacted within institutions. It highlights many areas where further robust academic research is needed to guide developments in policy and practice. Research limitations/...

From functional to social accountability: Transforming the accountability relationship between funders and non-governmental development organisations

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the evolving nature of the accountability relationship between a group of Irish non-governmental development organisations (NGDOs) and their primary governmental funder. Design/methodology/approach - The examination is undertaken in the context of a unique funder-led initiative to instil a broad social accountability focus among NGDOs while re-orienting the NGDO-funder accountability dynamic towards a partnership-based approach – whereby the accountability entity would effectively be a supra-organisation comprising the funder and the NGDOs. The empirical content of the paper is derived from a series of in-depth interviews with senior individuals working within the Irish NGDO sector, along with a comprehensive analysis of documentary sources. Findings - The partnership rhetoric central to promoting the enhanced focus on social accountability across the “virtual” accountability supra-organisation has not been transformed into reality, and the NGDO-funder accountability relationship within the supra-organisation remains centred on control and justification. A lack of resources, organisational commitment, guidance, and expertise from the governmental funder has contributed to an attitude of scepticism among many NGDOs towards both the partnership rhetoric and the accompanying adoption of the central tenets of social accountability, particularly downward accountability to beneficiaries. Research limitations/implications - The research is based on a detailed analysis in a specific context which may limit its wider applicability. Nevertheless, it adds insights to the developing academic literature on NGO accountability, with particular reference to their broader social accountabilities. Practical implications - Although highly context-specific, the findings of the study will be useful to researchers and policy makers interested in understanding how NGDO-funder accountability relationships can move towards mutual accountability and genuine partnerships focused on promoting social accountability. Originality/value - Very few in-depth academic examinations of the evolving nature of NGDO-funder accountability relationships in specific NGO contexts have emerged in the accountability literature. Many of the insights in this paper are derived from individuals inside organisations in the NGDO sector who are regularly addressing issues of accountability, both social and otherwise. This provides in-depth, highly-informed insider perspectives on the evolving nature of these relationships, especially in the context of attempts to promote more partnership-based approaches to the delivery of development aid.

On James Bond and the importance of NGO accountability

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to set out key issues in the academic study of non-governmental organisation (NGO) accountability, and to introduce papers appearing in this special issue on NGO accountability. Design/methodology/approach – This is a discussion paper exploring key issues theoretically. Findings – The paper finds that there are many aspects of NGO accountability which should be explored in greater depth in future studies. Several other issues have been examined in the papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Research limitations/implications – There is a possibility that the issues explored in this paper, and the other papers in this special issue, will lead to a considerable growth in academic studies in this area. Practical implications – The paper is a contribution to the growing debate on NGO accountability. Originality/value – The paper sets an agenda for research into NGO accountability.

Strategic reputation risk management and corporate social responsibility reporting

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on “Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management”, by Bebbington, Larrinaga-Gonzales and Moneva, published in Design/methodology/approach - A personal viewpoint is articulated on the potential contribution and importance of Bebbington Findings - This commentary reinforces the importance of Bebbington Originality/value - Makes suggestions for three areas where Bebbington

The business case for regulation of corporate social responsibility and accountability

Abstract This paper develops an alternative (or supplementary) theoretical justification for the regulation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social and environmental accounting and reporting (SEAR) to the justification contained in the extant academic literature. It does this by demonstrating how, contrary to the dominant business discourse, increased regulation designed to protect the social and environmental interests of a range of stakeholders can also serve to enhance corporate economic performance and shareholder value.

Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights of beneficiaries of development NGOs

Abstract This paper identifies and assesses the extent to which downward accountability mechanisms in nongovernmental development organisations (NGDOs) have had the potential in practice to contribute to the effectiveness of rights‐based approaches to development. The paper draws on evidence gathered from a detailed documentary analysis and a series of in‐depth interviews undertaken with senior individuals working in the Irish NGDO sector. The analysis indicates variations in practice with regard to the substantive implementation of key downward accountability mechanisms. The accountability‐in‐practice revealed suggests that challenges to substantive implementation have arisen due to: insufficient Irish NGDO attention to oversight of downward accountability within locally based partner NGDOs; a reluctance and/or inability to transfer influence to locally based partner NGDOs by allowing them some influence on Irish NGDO governance and strategy; the perceived control of locally based partner NGDOs by local elites who may be distant from, and unrepresentative of, local communities; and a perception that locally based partner NGDOs may not require downward accountability. Drawing on these findings, the paper makes some suggestions aimed at helping to transform the rhetorical NGDO commitment to downward accountability into real practices that can contribute substantively to the realisation of the key elements of the rights‐based approach to development.

NGO accountability and sustainability issues in the changing global environment

Abstract This article, based on a plenary lecture given at the First International Conference on Sustainable Management of Public and Not for Profit Organizations held at the University of Bologna, Forli Campus, Italy in July 2009, provides an overview of issues in non-governmental organization (NGO) accountability that are of particular relevance in the current changing global context – in particular, a context combining economic slowdown and global warming.

Developing the relevance of the accounting academy: The importance of drawing from the diversity of research approaches

Purpose – One of the most important considerations in any research project is a compelling research question, the addressing of which will produce socially and/or economically relevant and beneficial insights based on high-quality evidence. The purpose of this paper is to explain that each possible research question requires use of the particular research methods that will produce the high-quality evidence relevant to that question, with the nature of the evidence and the methods required varying from research question to research question. Design/methodology/approach – This discussion paper explores and explains the role and function of interpretive accounting research advocates its adoption. Findings – As the research method needs to be suited to the research question, any restriction imposed on the credible research methods that are considered acceptable severely limits the ability of the accounting academy to serve the needs of society and the economy by addressing the broadest possible range of research questions. From this perspective it is vital for academics to recognize that both positivist/quantitative and interpretive/qualitative methods produce high-quality credible research evidence. Research limitations/implications – Any preconceptions within a nations accounting academy over the unacceptability of either positivist or interpretive research will damage the health and relevance of that academy in the longer term. Originality/value – The paper argues that both positivist and interpretivist research are needed, drawing on notions of subjectivity, objectivity and inter-subjectivity in the context of the social construction of both accounting information and research data, and in the context of the socially constructing nature of research evidence.