Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the state of S&P 500 companies’ transparency by analyzing their Bloomberg ESG (Environmental-Social-Governance) disclosure scores. Additionally, the effects of industry sector, firm size, and governance practices on transparency are examined. Design/methodology/approach Data were retrieved from Bloomberg using the financial analysis environmental, social and governance function for companies comprising the S&P 500 index. Descriptive statistics are provided on each of the three components separately (ESG). Nonparametric procedures are used to test for significant differences in transparency within each of these three areas based on industry sector. Additionally, nonparametric tests are used to determine the impact of firm size (market capitalization) and governance factors (board size, board gender diversity, chief executive officer (CEO) duality, and linking executive compensation to ESG disclosure) on the composite ESG score. Findings Descriptive statistics reveal that S&P 500 companies differ in their level of disclosure across the three areas (ESG). The highest level of transparency is found on Governance and the lowest on Environmental. Moreover, there is much variability in the percentage of S&P 500 companies disclosing information about specific Social policies (e.g. child labor). Significant differences in transparency on both the Social and Governance dimensions are found between certain industry sectors. The results also reveal that large-cap companies have significantly higher ESG disclosure scores than mid-cap companies and that governance factors impact ESG disclosure. Significantly, higher ESG disclosure scores are observed for S&P 500 firms with larger boards of directors, with boards that are more gender diverse, that allow CEO duality, and that link executive compensation to ESG scores. Originality/value This study focuses on corporate transparency through a granular analysis of ESG disclosure scores when most other studies have been primarily conducted at the macro level. Stakeholders, analysts, and shareholders are increasingly scrutinizing firms’ sustainability disclosures in their assessment of management quality, as it reflects on the practices/policies that are employed to improve firms’ environmental and social footprints.

The authors examined how six factors related to content and interaction affect students' perceptions of learning, satisfaction, and quality in online master of business administration (MBA) courses. They developed three scale items to measure each factor. Using survey data from MBA students at a private university, the authors estimated structural equation models to explore these relationships empirically. The findings suggest that course content is the strongest predictor of all three outcomes (perceived learning, satisfaction, and quality); it is the only significant factor affecting perceived learning. They also found that professorstudent interaction had a significant positive impact on satisfaction, but not on perceptions of quality. Perceptions of quality were influenced significantly by student-student interaction and mentoring-support.

Uses survey results from a national sample of quality managers to examine the relationship between how a firm defines quality and what product quality dimensions it considers important to its competitive strategy. Garvin proposed a well-known framework for thinking about product quality based on eight dimensions: performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality. Alternative definitions of quality have evolved from five different approaches: transcendent, productbased, user-based, manufacturing-based, and value-based. Of the five approaches to defining quality, the manufacturing firms in our sample subscribed most often to the user-based definition. Using regression analysis within a factor analytic framework, some empirical support was found for hypothesized linkages between the product quality dimensions and the alternative definitions of quality. Specifically, the user-based definition was related significantly to aesthetics and perceived quality, the manufacturing-based definition to conformance, and the productbased definition to performance and features.

No abstract

Dimensions of critical factors that impact online retailing (e‐quality) are synthesized from the literature and organized along the four phases of a consumer’s online shopping experience: encountering the online retailer’s home page, selecting a product from the online catalog, completing the order form and accessing customer service and support. Using a random sample of 55 online retailers, the study benchmarks real online transactions against these e‐quality dimensions. Findings suggest several areas that e‐retailers should target for improvement. These areas include increasing the speed of home page loading, providing the ability to translate into multiple languages, enhancing the capabilities of search engines, displaying security policies more conspicuously, offering multiple payment options, and reducing the minimum number of clicks to complete a transaction. The final phase of the online shopping experience, customer service and support, seems to offer the most room for improvement in the areas of instant automated merchant notification of orders and on time delivery.