External Reporting by Uk Universities: An Exploratory Study of Accounting Change

Gray, Rob; Haslam, Jim

doi:10.1111/j.1468-0408.1990.tb00327.x

Cited by 27 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, and using a modified version of Coy and Dixon's (2004) public accountability index (PAI) we contribute to the literature by providing contemporary evidence on the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs. This extends the findings of prior studies that provide descriptive accounts of the level of disclosure HEIs, particularly in the case of the UK (Gray and Haslam, 1990;Banks et al, 1997). To the best of our knowledge, it also appears that the PAI has never been applied within the UK HEI context and this study will thus provide a relatively robust benchmark to compare with future studies relying on this index or findings from other countries.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…However, the empirical evidence over the last two decades from England, Wales and Northern Ireland (EWNI), New Zealand, Australia, Canada and USA (Gray and Haslam, 1990;Coy et al, 1997;Banks et al, 1997;Gordon et al, 2002;Nelson et al, 2003) has indicated very varied levels, and changes in disclosure with wide variations in the types of disclosures. In particular, Banks et al (1997) found that the sample of EWNI universities had a significantly lower level of disclosure (about 42 per cent) compared to their NZ counterparts (about 95 per cent) with very little change over time (1992)(1993)(1994), whilst the sample of Canadian universities was the lowest performer with an average score of 25 per cent.…”

Section: Case Of Uk Higher Education Institutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Governance and voluntary disclosure in HEIs: prior empirical studies and hypotheses development Informed by insights from previous empirical studies on voluntary disclosure in HEIs (e.g. Gray and Haslam, 1990;Coy et al, 1991Coy et al, , 1994Coy et al, , 1997Coy et al, , 2011Cutt et al, 1993;Dixon et al, 1991;Banks et al, 1997;Coy and Pratt, 1998;Gordon et al, 2002;Nelson et al, 2003;Coy and Dixon, 2004), general voluntary disclosure within the corporate sector (e.g. Eng and Mak, 2003;Collett and Hrasky, 2005;Barako et al, 2006a, b;Cheng and Courtenay, 2006;Chau and Gray, 2010;Adelopo, 2011;Jetty and Beattie, 2012), internal governance (Carter et al, 2003;Gompers et al, 2003;Van der Walt and Ingley, 2003;Beiner et al, 2006;Cheng et al, 2008;Coles et al, 2008;Guest, 2009;Bozec and Bozec, 2012) and the UK HEI setting literature (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability

Ntim

Soobaroyen

Broad

2017

AAAJ

206

362

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent of voluntary disclosures in UK higher education institutions' (HEIs) annual reports and examine whether internal governance structures influence disclosure in the period following major reform and funding constraints. Design/methodology/approach-The authors adopt a modified version of Coy and Dixon's (2004) public accountability index, referred to in this paper as a public accountability and transparency index (PATI), to measure the extent of voluntary disclosures in 130 UK HEIs' annual reports. Informed by a multi-theoretical framework drawn from public accountability, legitimacy, resource dependence and stakeholder perspectives, the authors propose that the characteristics of governing and executive structures in UK universities influence the extent of their voluntary disclosures. Findings-The authors find a large degree of variability in the level of voluntary disclosures by universities and an overall relatively low level of PATI (44 per cent), particularly with regards to the disclosure of teaching/research outcomes. The authors also find that audit committee quality, governing board diversity, governor independence and the presence of a governance committee are associated with the level of disclosure. Finally, the authors find that the interaction between executive team characteristics and governance variables enhances the level of voluntary disclosures, thereby providing support for the continued relevance of a "shared" leadership in the HEIs' sector towards enhancing accountability and transparency in HEIs. Research limitations/implications-In spite of significant funding cuts, regulatory reforms and competitive challenges, the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs remains low. Whilst the role of selected governance mechanisms and "shared leadership" in improving disclosure, is asserted, the varying level and selective basis of the disclosures across the surveyed HEIs suggest that the public accountability motive is weaker relative to the other motives underpinned by stakeholder, legitimacy and resource dependence perspectives. Originality/value-This is the first study which explores the association between HEI governance structures, managerial characteristics and the level of disclosure in UK HEIs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Case Of Uk Higher Education Institutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability

Ntim

Soobaroyen

Broad

2017

AAAJ

206

362

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Estudos anteriores na Inglaterra (GRAY; HASLAM, 1990;FISHER;NELSON, 1997;ANGLUIN;SCAPENS, 2000), na Nova Zelândia (DIXON et al, 1991(DIXON et al, , 1994COY et al, 1993COY et al, , 1994 Os determinantes de transparência das universidades mais comuns são: tamanho (GORDON et al, 2002;LIMA, 2009;GALLEGO et al, 2009;ROSARIO et al, 2011;CATÓLICO, 2012), antiguidade (GALLEGO et al, 2009;ROSARIO et al, 2011;CATÓLICO, 2012) e governança (GORDON et al, 2002;GALLEGO et al, 2009).…”

Section: Hipóteses Dos Determinantes Da Transparência Das Universidadunclassified

Determinantes da Transparência das Universidades Federais Brasileiras

Pessôa

Costa

Canuto

et al. 2018

GϵCont

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este estudo investiga 15 determinantes que podem impactar o grau de transparência das universidades federais brasileiras (UFs). Desse modo, desenvolveu-se um Índice de Divulgação (IndexDUF), baseado em quatro índices estabelecidos na literatura que também foram utilizados para fins de comparação e robustez dos resultados. Os índices foram coletados manualmente, entre abril e agosto de 2013, conforme informações disponibilizadas nos websites (portais eletrônicos) das 59 universidades federais brasileiras. Os resultados descritivos apontam que existem diferenças entre os índices para a mesma universidade e entre elas, enquanto os resultados econométricos indicam que UFs com mais docentes, com maior IGC, maior conceito CAPES, docentes e servidores técnicos mais qualificados são mais transparentes. As evidências podem ser úteis para planejamento das UFs e políticas públicas educacionais.

show abstract

“…Door gebruik te maken van een instrument dat zowel kwalitatieve als kwantitatieve percepties omzet in scores is het mogelijk een indicatie te krijgen van de kwaliteit van de geopenbaarde informatie. Dergelijke disclosure indices worden veelvuldig gehanteerd bij onder zoeken naar informatieverschaffi ng door publieke en private organisaties (Gray en Haslam, 1990;Coy et al, 1993aCoy et al, , 1993bCoy et al, , 1995Fisher et al, 1996;Nelson et al, 2003). Al deze onderzoeken hebben tot nu toe niet geleid tot het ontstaan van één universele disclosure index binnen het vakgebied verslaggeving.…”

Section: De Disclosure Indexunclassified

Jaarverslaggeving van universiteiten: De kwaliteit van de Nederlandse universitaire jaarverslagen gemeten

Volmer¹,

Peelen²,

Poot³

2006

MAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

De jaarverslaggeving van universiteiten staat volop in de belangstelling van zowel publiek als politiek. Uitgangspunt van recente aanpassingen van de richtlijn voor de jaarverslaggeving van universiteiten was om de transparantie en toegankelijkheid van externe verslaggeving te verbeteren. Om kwaliteitsverbeteringen te kunnen bepalen, moet eerst een geschikt meetinstrument ontworpen worden. In dit artikel wordt aan de hand van gangbare disclosure indices en een uitgebreide enquête onder deskundigen en belanghebbenden een op de specifieke situatie van universiteiten toegespitste index ontwikkeld (de UNISTAD-index: UNIversity STakeholder Accoun tability Disclosure-index). Door met deze index de kwaliteit van Nederlandse universitaire jaarverslagen te vergelijken met buitenlandse jaarverslagen blijkt dat de eerstgenoemde bij bepaalde informatie-elementen, bijvoorbeeld de onthulling van informatie over het risicomanagement, achterblijft bij de informatie verstrekking in de jaarverslagen van universiteiten uit andere landen, bijvoorbeeld Nieuw-Zeeland. Als we de kwaliteit van universitaire jaarverslagen over 2002 vergelijken met 2001 blijkt dat de kwaliteit van Nederlandse jaarverslagen echter wel is verbeterd.

show abstract

External Reporting by Uk Universities: An Exploratory Study of Accounting Change

Cited by 27 publications

References 25 publications

Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability

Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability

Determinantes da Transparência das Universidades Federais Brasileiras

Jaarverslaggeving van universiteiten: De kwaliteit van de Nederlandse universitaire jaarverslagen gemeten

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About