Search

Purpose – The authors expect major shifts in thinking about the transnational regulation of accounting and how it will develop. This is a time for ideas as well as action. The global accounting profession must take a leading role in developing and presenting the case for the transnational regulation of accounting, in identifying new regulations, new ways of regulating, and new compacts between regulators and other stakeholders, and in framing the debate on the transnational regulation of accounting into the future. The academic community must bring intellectual rigor to thinking on the issues. The purpose of this paper is to put the case that there is a new research agenda to be formed by taking a view that combines existing work on the transnational regulation of accounting with a contemporaneous understanding of the forces for regulatory and professional change, and insight into the roles that various actors have assumed historically and will likely play going forward, so as to develop workable and sust...

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to offer an empirical account of how a group of financial professionals uses intellectual capital (IC) information, and the value that the group imputes to IC reporting. The paper also aims to understand the group's ability to privately access information that might help them determine the value of a company's IC in support of their decision‐making.Design/methodology/approachSurvey administered to a group of financial professionals in Hong Kong.FindingsRespondents would like companies to be more transparent and provide more information on their IC. Respondents believe that greater IC disclosure would be rewarded with an increase in the company's share price – even though few respondents thought that they would pay more themselves for enhanced disclosure. Further, most respondents seem to be currently addressing their IC information needs through private information channels, and rate the publicly provided information as poorly suited to their needs.Practical implicationsGreater regulatory control may be needed to ensure that information being communicated privately also enters the public domain in a timely fashion. It is also suggested that making market participants more aware of the positive effects of voluntary disclosure on stock prices may lead to an increase in voluntary disclosure.Originality/valueThe paper provides empirical evidence on the value relevance of IC information from a user's perspective.

This paper investigates voluntary intellectual capital disclosure (ICD) by listed Hong Kong companies. It uses data taken from the years 1992, 1998 and 2002 to give a longitudinal account of voluntary ICD. Company size and industry effects on voluntary ICD are tested, as are the effects of time and level of disclosure on the financial success of a company. We find that levels of voluntary ICD are low but increase over time. Size and industry effects are found, while company financial success is positively correlated with the voluntary disclosure. These findings have implications for policy formulation and practice in relation to the reporting of intellectual capital.

There are two aims of this introductory article: first, to draw attention to the gaps in the research literature; and second to stimulate further accounting and management research regarding intellectual capital by posing several possible research questions. Suggests that critical and social accounting academics have a vital role to play in making visible a number of important social issues that stem from understanding better the value of intellectual capital within both organisations and the wider social fabric. Also looks to possible new ways of accounting for intangibles within public and private sector organisations.

This study reports the results of an empirical examination of Australian annual reporting of intellectual capital. The findings suggest that the development of a model for reporting intangibles is piecemeal and not widely spread. The outcomes of our exploratory investigation are threefold. First, the key components of intellectual capital are poorly understood, inadequately identified, inefficiently managed, and not reported within a consistent framework when reported at all. Second, the main areas of intellectual capital reporting focus on human resources; technology and intellectual property rights; and organisational and workplace structure. Third, even in an Australian enterprise thought of as “best practice” in this regard, a comprehensive management framework for intellectual capital is yet to be developed, especially for collecting and reporting intellectual capital formation. In conclusion, Australian companies do not compare favourably with several European firms in their ability to measure and report their intellectual capital in the annual report.

Explores the possibilities that accounting could become a resource in a movement towards fairer and more just societies. Considers specifically the ways in which mainstream management accounting textbooks, as tools of management accounting education, have the effect of encouraging students of the discipline to be unaware, unquestioning and uncritical of the social and organizational effects of management accounting practice. Aims to explore, through illustrations from a leading mainstream management accounting text, both the obvious and the more subtle ways in which such texts can inculcate these future practitioners with norms of practice that preclude management accounting’s emancipatory role in society. Considers in the course of this analysis the described purpose of management accounting; the assumptions made about human behaviour; the presentation of class structures and interests; and the importance of cultural specificity when considering management accounting. Counter‐illustrations are offered of how accounting educators might move towards encouraging students to consider accounting’s enabling possibilities. Finally, suggests areas for further investigation and effort which are material to the development of an enabling accounting.

Multinational organizations operate across a variety of complex competitive environments. Achieving the right balance of global alignment and local flexibility is central to competitive success for these organizations. Viewed from an intellectual capital perspective, multinational organizations need to: design and execute appropriate structures and systems (structural capital); engage and align its international workforce (human capital); and, generate favourable relationships across the multitude of stakeholders it interacts with globally (relational capital). But in pursuing these goals, a number of issues and challenges are faced: How to make sense of intellectual capital investment decisions? How are they to communicate intellectual capital priorities throughout the multinational business? And, with what tools are they to measure and monitor investments and initiatives such that refinements and corrective action can be made? In dealing with these issues, intellectual capital measurement and reporting practices can help. This chapter presents the conceptual framework underpinning intellectual capital, discusses limitations with traditional financial reporting models, outlines the benefits of intellectual measurement, and reports and presents research on the perspective of finance professionals evaluating global companies.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the voluntary reporting of intellectual capital (IC) by listed companies in Australia and Hong Kong and to evaluate size, industry and time effects on IC disclosure levels.Design/methodology/approachThe study is an empirical one conducted in two stages. Stage one is an exploratory study of voluntary IC disclosure for the 20 largest listed Australian companies in 1998. Stage two, using 2002 data, examines voluntary disclosure of IC attributes for 50 listed entities in Australia and 100 in Hong Kong. Content analysis is used to collect data.FindingsLevels of voluntary IC disclosure are found to be low and in qualitative rather than quantitative form in both locations. Disclosure level is positively related to company size, a finding that is consistent with the previous literature on voluntary reporting.Research limitations/implicationsExternal validity may be compromised somewhat by the relatively small sample size. Managers are not observed in the process of making decisions, so management intent is inferred.Practical implicationsDocumenting variations in types of reporting and in reporting frequency enables a greater understanding of why some companies voluntarily report whilst others do not. Such an understanding holds the potential to guide policy‐makers, creditors and investors in giving prescriptions to firms over whom they have control or with whom they have dealings.Originality/valueThis study is the first to comparatively examine the voluntary reporting of IC in a longitudinal setting using Australasian data.

The field of intellectual capital (IC) has witnessed rapid growth in recent times, with a range of IC measurement and reporting models being developed by academics, consultants and practitioners. Despite widespread pronouncements that businesses report their IC, and increasingly regulatory requirements for organisations to do so, surveys of practice indicate limited IC reporting practice. In addition, there are limited empirically-validated insights in to the reasons for this apparent 'disconnect' between theory and practice, with important questions remaining unresolved: do users of corporate disclosure information find this adequate? Is there demand for IC reporting? If so, how is this best provided? Given these questions, this study examines the need of decision makers for IC information.