In this paper, we examine the full disclosure issue of corporate reporting from the various perspectives of the constituent groups. The full disclosure issue is significant for the accounting profession since it is the linchpin between the corporation and its constituencies. Our approach is to provide an overview of corporate reporting by relating our ideas regarding the information needs of constituency groups to those in the existing literature. Our over-riding orientation is pluralistic; managers, workers, and other special interest groups compete for influence and accounting system information resources. Through their influence, the constituency groups are presumed to be able to obtain the accounting information they desire.
The constituency groups we define are: the owners, government, employees, creditors, customers, and general society. We provide an overview of corporate reporting to some of these groups, holding in abeyance the current balance of power and influence among the various interest groups. Throughout the paper, we appraise the efforts of the accounting profession in helping the individual constituency groups obtain corporate information in their quest for optimal decisions. We conclude the profession will have to either rise to the challenges created by the explosion in information technology or contend with imposed regulations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Banker, “The Week Ahead—Accounting Standards,”June 23, 1986.
2.
AndersonJohn C.FrankleAlan W., “Voluntary Social Reporting: An Iso-Beta Portfolio Analysis,”The Accounting Review, vol. LV. no. 3, pp. 467–479, July 1980.
3.
AnshenMelvin, Corporate Strategies for Social Performance, (Macmillan, 1980).
BaimanStanley, “Agency Research in Managerial Accounting: A Survey,”Journal of Accounting Literature, pp. 164–213, 1982.
9.
BarrettMichael F.Jr., “The SEC and the Accounting Profession: Issues for Congress,” in The SEC and Accounting: The First 50 Years, 1984 Proceedings of the Arthur Young Professors Roundtable, MundheimRobert H.LeechNoyes E., eds. (North-Holland: 1986.).
10.
BelkaouiAhmed“The Impact of Socio-Economic Accounting Statement on the Investment Decision: An Empirical Study,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 263–283, 1980.
11.
BenstonGeorge J., “Accounting and Corporate Accountability,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 87–105, 1982.
12.
BertonLee, “Price Waterhouse Head Recommends Expanded Audits,”The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, June 4, 1986.
13.
BertonLee, “Investors Call CPAs to Account,”The Wall Street Journal, Monday, January 28, 1985A, p. 30.
14.
BertonLee, “Ethics—A Financial Journalist's Perspective,” Ethics in the Accounting Profession, Proceedings of a conference sponsored by the School of Accounting and the Program in Business Ethics in the School of Religion, University of Southern California, May 10, 1984. (Touche Ross & Co., New York, 1985B).
15.
BirnbergJacob G.“The Role of Accounting in Financial Disclosure”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 5, no. 1, 1980 pp. 71–80.
16.
BowieNorman E., “Ethics, Full Disclosure, and Accountants.” Ethics in the Accounting Profession, Proceedings of a conference sponsored by the School of Accounting and the Program in Business Ethics in the School of Religion, University of Southern California, May 10, 1984. (Touche Ross & Co., New York, 1985).
17.
BradshawThornton F., “One Corporation's View of Social Responsibility,”Journal of Contemporary Business, vol. 7, no. 1, Winter 1978, pp. 19–24.
18.
BrummetLeeR., in private correspondence with the authors.
19.
BurchellStuartClubbColinHopwoodAnthonyHughesJohnNahapietJanine, “The Roles of Accounting in Organizations and Society,”Accounting Organizations and Society, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 5–27, 1980.
20.
BurtonJohn C., quoted in The Week in Review, Deloitte, Haskins, and Sells, October 26, 1984.
21.
BurtonJohn C.DavidsonSidney M., “The Impact of Technology on Corporate Reporting,” Technological Change: Its Impact on Accounting, 1982 Proceedings of the Arthur Young Professors' Roundtable, SummersEdward L., ed., (The Council of Arthur Young Professors, 1983), pp. 57–68.
22.
ChatovRobert, quoted in The New York Times, February 21, 1985.
23.
ChowChee W., “The Demand for External Auditing: Size, Debt and Ownership Influences,”The Accounting Review, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 272–291, April 1982.
24.
ChowChee W., “The Impacts of Accounting Regulation on Bondholder and Shareholder Wealth: The Case of the Securities Acts,”The Accounting Review, vol. 58, no. 3, July 1983, pp. 485–520.
25.
ChuaWai Fong, “Radical Developments in Accounting Thought,”The Accounting Review, vol. 61, no. 4, October 1986, pp. 601–632.
26.
Coopers & Lybrand, “Executive Briefing, Accounting and Auditing Developments,”May 1986.
27.
CooperDavid J.ShererMichael J., “The Value of Corporate Accounting Reports: Arguments for a Political Economy of Accounting”. Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 9, no. 34, 1984, pp. 207–232.
28.
CoxCharles C., “Public Accounting at the Crossroads,” Remarks to 1986 Accounting Conference Sponsored by the New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants, November 13, 1986.
29.
CraftJames A., “A Reply to Maunders and Foley,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 9, no. 1, 1984, pp. 107–108.
30.
DaveyH. B., “Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure in New Zealand: an Empirical Investigation,” (Faculty of Business, Massey University), Occasional Paper No. 52, 1985.
31.
DeloitteHaskinsSells, “A Report for Congress and the Public,”September 1985.
32.
DierkesMeinholfAntalBerthoin, “The Usefulness and Use of Social Reporting Information,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 10, no. 1, 1985, pp. 29–34.
33.
DykxhoornHansSinningKathleen E., “Perceptions of Auditor Independence: Its Perceived Effects on the Loan and Investment Decisions of German Financial Statement Users,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 337–347.
34.
ElliottRobert K., “Accounting's New Horizons,”World, Peat Marwick, vol. 18, no. 4, 1984, pp. 18–21.
35.
Ernst & Whinney, Financial Reporting Developments, October 1986.
36.
RalphEstes W., Corporate Social Accounting, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1975.
37.
RalphEstes W., Accounting and Society, Melville Publishing Company, Los Angeles, CA, 1973.
38.
GotlobDavid, Investor and Creditor Perceptions of Corporate Performance: A Multidimensional Scaling Approach, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, May 1985.
39.
HarrisonR. B., “The Corporate Report: A Critique,”CA Magazine, January 1976, pp. 27–33.
40.
HermanEdward S., Corporate Control, Corporate Power (Cambridge University Press, 1981).
41.
HopwoodAnthony G., “The Tale of Committee That Never Reported,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 10, no. 3, 1985, pp. 361–377.
42.
Jackson-CoxJackyThirkellJohn E. M.McQueenyJohn, “The Disclosure of Company Information to Trade Unions: The Relevance of the ACAs Code of Practice on Disclosure,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 9, no. 34, 1984, pp. 253–273.
43.
JaggiBikki, “An Analysis of Corporate Reporting in Germany,”The International Journal of Accounting Education and Research, vol. 15, no. 2, 1980.
44.
JenningsMarianneKneerDan C.ReckersPhillip M. J., “A Reexamination of the Concept of Materiality: Views of Auditors, Users and Officers of the Court,” Working Paper, Arizona State University, 1986.
45.
JohnsonOraceGunnSanford, “Conflict Resolution: The Market and/or Accounting?”The Accounting Review, vo. XLIX, no. 4, pp. 649–663, October 1974.
46.
LambertRichard A., “Income Smoothing as Rational Equilibrium Behavior,”The Accounting Review, vol. 59, no. 4, October 1984, pp. 607–618.
47.
LewisN.ParkerL. D.SurcliffeP., “Financial Reporting to Employees: The Pattern of Development 1919 to 1979,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 9, no. 3/4, 1984, pp. 275–289.
48.
MacintoshNorman B., “A ‘Multiple Paradigm’ Analysis of IBM's Annual Reports: The Role of Women in the Workplace,” Working Paper, School of Business, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada, 1986.
49.
MathewsM. R., “Towards Multiple Justification for Social Accounting and Strategies for Acceptance,” American Accounting Association, Public Interest Working Paper No. 11, 1985.
50.
MaundersK. T.FoleyB. J., “Information Disclosure and the Role of the Accountant in Collective Bargaining-Some Comments,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 9, no. 1, 1984, pp. 99–106.
51.
McDonaldDenysPuxtyAnthony G., “An Inducement-Contribution Approach to Corporate Financial Reporting,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 4, no. 42, 1979, pp. 53–65.
52.
MoritaAkio, Made in Japan, E.P. Dutton, New York, 1986.
53.
MostKenneth S., “Corporate Social Reporting: ‘Model’ Report by Deutsche Shell,”The Accountant, February 10, 1977, pp. 164–167.
54.
OganPekin, “A Human Resource Value Model for Profession Service Organizations,”The Accounting Review, April 1976, pp. 306–320.
55.
OwenDavidL., “Social Accountability: A Role for Accountants,”Accountants' Record, July 1982.
56.
PetersAulena L., “A Time of Crisis: Current Issues Facing the Accounting Profession,” Address to National Association of Accountants Annual International Conference, Nashville, Tennessee, June 25, 1986.
57.
PfefferJeffreyGeraldSalancik R., The External Control of Organizations, New York: Harper & Row, 1978.
58.
PomerantzFelix, “Auditors' Sensitivity to Fraud,”Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, Winter 1980, pp. 178–184.
59.
RobertsonJohn, “Corporate Social Reporting By New Zealand Companies,”Journal of Contemporary Business, vol. 7, no. 1, Winter 1978, pp. 113–133.
60.
SchreuderHein, “Employees and the Corporate Social Report,”The Accounting Review, vol. 56, no. 2, April 1981, pp. 294–308.
61.
SchreuderHein, “Corporate Social Reporting in the Federal Republic of Germany: An Overview,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, 1979, pp. 109–122.
62.
SchreuderHein, “Facts and Speculations on Corporate Social Reporting in France, Germany and Holland,” unpublished working paper (Free University of Amsterdam), 1978.
63.
Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC and Corporate Audits (Part 1). Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1986.
64.
SpicerBarry H., “Investors, Corporate Social Performance and Information Disclosure: An Empirical Study,”The Accounting ReviewJanuary 1978, pp. 94–111.
65.
Touche Ross & Co., Ethics in the Accounting Profession, Proceedings of a conference sponsored by The School of Accounting and the Program in Business Ethics in the School of Religion, University of Southern California, May 10, 1984, New York, May 1, 1985.
66.
TrotmanKen T.BradleyGraham W., “Association between Social Responsibility Disclosure and Characteristics of Companies,”Accounting, Organization and Society, vol. 6, no. 4, 1981, pp. 355–362.
67.
UllmanArieh, A., “Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships Among Social Performance, Social Disclosure, and Economic Performance of U.S. Firms,”Academy of Management Review, vol. 10, no. 3, 1985, pp. 540–557.
68.
WilliamsHarold M., “Auditors' Responsibilities and the Public Interest,”An Address, Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants, Dallas, Texas. September 18, 1979.
69.
WilliamsPaul F., “The Evaluative Relevance of Social Data,”The Accounting Review, vol. 55, no. 1, January 1980, pp. 62–77.
70.
WisemanJoann, “An Evaluation of Environmental Disclosures Made in Corporate Annual Reports,”Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 52–63, 1982.
