Conflicting conceptualizations of human resource accounting

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine the differing perceptions or conceptualizations that have contributed to prevailing views held by accountants on the measurement and reporting of human resources. Design/methodology/approach -The study provides an analysis of extant literature and presents a theoretical framework on the relationship between HR, intellectual capital and goodwill. Findings -The lack of traction in the progress of accounting for people is due to several factors including tension between employees and management, the demands of internal and external stakeholders, and the historic roots of accounting for labour.Research limitations/implications -The paper provides suggestions as to how the debate regarding the valuing and reporting of human resources may be rekindled. Originality/value -This study highlights the historical context for the lack of traction in the area of accounting for people, and the relatively recent development of the Intellectual Capital Statement as a partial but positive development in the area.

A comparative analysis of human capital information opaqueness in South Korea and the UK

“…Furthermore, numerous other studies show that human capital reporting is relatively weak in the UK (Bassi et al, 2015;Li et al, 2008;Steen et al, 2011;Striukova et al, 2008). Critics of the UK system report that following the Second World War, the reason why British organizations have lower human capital reporting quality is because the UK has moved away from a philosophy of being employee focused to be controlled by private equity holders (Metcalf, 1989;Nolan, 2011Nolan, , 2012.…”

“…Second, South Korea and the UK have different philosophical outlooks on human capital. The UK is recognized as having lower levels of human capital information compared to many other developed economies (Bassi et al, 2015;Fincham and Roslender, 2003;Li et al, 2008;Roslender and Stevenson, 2009;Steen et al, 2011;Striukova et al, 2008;Vandemaele, et al, 2005). A potential reason why human capital information is not robust in the UK is because following the Second World War, shareholder profit has superseded employees' wellbeing as an organizational strategy (Koumenta and Williams, 2019;Metcalf, 1989;Nolan, 1989Nolan, , 2012.…”

Human resources accounting and accountability: medical aspects, regulation and economics of burn out in non-financial reporting

“…In general, non-financial reporting complements or rather supplements financial understanding and it is assumed that intellectual capital fulfils the gap in between Market Value (MV) and Booked Value (BV). Bukh, Larsen and Mouritsen (2001) severely criticise the argument, however due to increase subjectivity in human capital valuation it is difficult to construct and capture, and also criticise, the exact value of human resources employed at work (Steen, Welch & McCormack, 2011). Data reported is dry and only indirectly connected like sick leave days, employee turnover, which are rather effects of burnout.…”

Competitive Priorities, Employee Management and Development and Sustainable Manufacturing Performance in Asian Organizations

“…Resources can be either tangible or intangible assets and capabilities are the ability to exploit and combine resources effectively [48]. The human resource capabilities of an organization are commonly accepted to be suitable for RBV research [49,50], and many of its activities can be central to the core competencies of an organization [51]. Within the context of this study, it is suggested that employee management and development is unique to each organization and as such, is considered as a competency that may be leveraged to enable the competitive edge.…”