Boards are exploring ways to report the value of intangible assets to investors. This paper explores human capital reporting and notes human capital is not reported within or between industry sectors in a standardised way. As a further development in a suite of models, we propose a framework, the Star Model, as a step in the standardisation of interpreting and reporting on human capital to investors. In developing this model, the authors question whether human capital reports should be industry specific, given that the human capital drivers of value vary across industry groups. For the knowledge-intensive biotechnology industry in particular, there may be a case for parallel forms of news flow from Boards to markets: technical news, financial news and human capital news. We conclude that more empirical research into human capital analysis and reporting in other industry sectors will be needed.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify the challenges in adding a critical realist epistemological perspective to a positivist approach in research on listed companies by equity researchers and other financial services professionals.Design/methodology/approachA purposive sample of publicly available equity research reports was examined to assess the dominant epistemological approach to investment analysis.FindingsIt was found that there is an absence of a critical realist epistemological approach to investment analysis, confirming the dominance of a positivist approach to obtaining and analysing investment information.Research limitations/implicationsThis research drew on a small, purposive sample, and could be followed by more wide‐scale research. Taking a critical realist approach may create a clash of “institutional logics” which will need to be considered by a range of stakeholders.Originality/valueEquity research reports are examined through the lens of critical realism. This exploration allows for an additional epistemological perspective on analysis of firm value.