This study provides an extensive critical review of the theoretical perspectives applied on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure literature. From a CSR standpoint we review and discuss, in detail, legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory, social contract theory, and signalling theory to identify the situations that suit each of these perspectives. The findings show that there is no universal theory applicable on corporate social responsibility disclosure for all situations or societies. While legitimacy theory suggests CSR disclosures are part of a process of legitimation, stakeholder theory offers an explanation of CSR accountability to stakeholders. Legitimacy theory seems to be more suitable for organizations working in developed countries, on the other hand, stakeholder theory appears to be most suitable for organizations working in developing countries; where a corporation can manage its stakeholders and the pressure to comply with existing legislation is less as compared to the developed countries. Social contract theory is appropriate for developed/emerged economies, as CSR disclosure exists due to an implicit social contract between business and society, which implies some indirect obligations of business towards society. Signalling theory will suit a situation where firms are competing for resources. A firm willing to demarcate from other firms will engage in more CSR practices. It is also important that the signal reaches the target audience by reporting on CSR.

PurposeThis study develops a theoretical model of consumption values regarding the technology adoption of mobile banking (m-banking) services, with the financial service sector as the empirical context. This study aims to evaluate whether consumption values influence trust and intention. Furthermore, the authors explore how the consumer type (i.e. urban vs rural) differs in consumption values regarding adopting m-banking services.Design/methodology/approachThe data for this study were gathered from 246 responses collected from individuals living in a country with a developing market, using a survey instrument. The six study hypotheses were tested using partial least squares structural equation modeling.FindingsThe authors found support for effects from functional, epistemic and emotional value on intention. Functional and emotional value significantly influenced trust, while social and epistemic value did not. Social value was a significant moderator between functional value and intention. Consumers who were relatively unconcerned with social value were more motivated by functional value, while consumers who placed great emphasis on social value were motivated by epistemic value. Multigroup analysis showed that the effect from functional value on trust was stronger for urban than rural customers, while the effect from emotional value on trust was stronger for rural than urban customers.Practical implicationsOverall, functional value is the strongest predictor of trust and intention; therefore, bank managers are encouraged to promote m-banking services' functional value to increase trust and attract more users by promoting their companies' m-banking application. M-banking customers can also be classified based on the benefits in which they are most interested.Originality/valueThe study is one of the first attempts to demonstrate empirically how consumption values' dimensions drive m-banking use among different types of customers in a developing market context with a high m-banking penetration rate.

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the influence of board characteristics on triple bottom line (TBL) reporting, both at aggregate and component level (environment, social and economic) for the top 50 companies in New Zealand. Design/methodology/approach Content analysis is used to create reporting indexes for 2016 and 2017, which serve as proxy for TBL reporting. Regression analysis is then used to investigate the association between board characteristics and TBL reporting, along with its separate components. Findings This paper finds significant positive associations of TBL with profitability and firm size; environmental bottom line with board size and profitability; social bottom line with board size, profitability and firm size; and economic bottom line (ECO) with firm size. A significant negative association is found between ECO and leverage. Practical implications This study provides incentives for companies to adopt TBL reporting as the findings show a positive association between the extent of reporting and profitability. This implies that companies should improve their level of reporting while ensuring that voluntary disclosures show a true and fair view to maintain a healthy relationship with their stakeholders. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first attempt to investigate TBL reporting along with its separate dimensions in the NZ context. It takes into account recent changes that occurred in the corporate environment in New Zealand as well as new practices that emerged in the world, especially the diffusion of the Global Reporting Initiative and the International Integrating Reporting Council Framework.

PurposeDrawing upon agency theory, this study analyses the influence of board characteristics on integrated reporting (IR) for the top 50 companies listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX50). Focus is placed on IR at the aggregate level as well as its separate components, namely Future Opportunities and Risks (FOPRI), Governance and Strategy (GOVSTR), Performance (PERF), Overview and Business Model (OBM) and General Preparation and Presentation (GPP).Design/methodology/approachA checklist is devised based on the IIRC (International Integrated Reporting Council) framework to track companies' disclosures for the period from 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2017. Regression analysis is used to investigate the determinants (board size, board independence, activity of the board, gender diversity, firm size, profitability and growth opportunities) of IR and its separate components.FindingsThe findings indicate a significant and positive effect of board independence on the aggregate IR index, FOPRI and GPP. A negative and significant association is found between activity of the board and both the aggregate IR index and its separate components, including GOVSTR, PERF and GPP. Additionally, the aggregate IR index is significantly related to firm size, profitability and growth opportunities.Research limitations/implicationsThe limited sample of 50 companies over three years is the main limitation of the study. The study suffers from an inherent limitation from the use of content analysis in assessing the level of IR. No checklist to measure the level of IR can be fully exhaustive. Furthermore, we focus on whether an item in the checklist is disclosed, using a dichotomous scale, thus ignoring the quality of information disclosed.Practical implicationsThe study has several practical implications. From a managerial perspective, it shows that having more board meetings harms the level of IR. The results can guide regulators, such as the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), when drafting new regulations/guidelines/listing rules. If regulators aim for a higher level of integration in the reports, they know which “triggers to pull” to attain their target. Our results can guide regulators to choose the appropriate trigger among various alternatives. For instance, if a higher level of integrated reporting is desired, size instead of profitability should be chosen. Finally, ASX listed companies can use our checklist as a scorecard for their self-assessment.Originality/valueThis research is the first to investigate IR by devising a checklist based on IIRC (2013) along with an additional GPP component in the ASX context. Using separate models to examine each component of the aggregate IR index is also unique to this study. The study also brings to the fore the role of gender-diverse boards in promoting IR. It reiterates the debate about imposing a quota for better gender representation on boards.

No abstract