پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,240 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,871 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,465,066 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,235,053 |
شناسایی شاخص‌های گزارشگری یکپارچه در دانشگاه‌ها | ||
| بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی | ||
| دوره 30، شماره 1، 1402، صفحه 114-148 اصل مقاله (745.31 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/acctgrev.2023.351165.1008752 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| فاطمه گرامی راد1؛ مهناز ملانظری* 2؛ علی رحمانی3؛ سعید همایون4 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 2دانشیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 3استاد، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 4دانشیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه گاوله، سوئد. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف: هدف این پژوهش شناخت شاخص‌های گزارش‌های یکپارچه در آموزش عالی است. این گزارش‌ها می‌تواند برای ارتباط مؤثرتر با ذی‌نفعان و شناخت فرصت‌ها و چالش‌های آموزش عالی و بهبود تصمیم‌گیری استفاده شود. روش: در جهت تحلیل محتوای کیفی، ۵۸ گزارش از ۳۴ دانشگاه خارجی و ۱۴ دانشگاه داخلی با روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند انتخاب شد. گزارش‌های مذکور دارای بالاترین امتیاز تأثیر در رتبه‌بندی تایمز، جی‌آرآی، وبگاه گزارشگری یکپارچه و وبگاه وزارت علوم تحقیقات و فناوری ایران بودند. یافته‌ها: یافته‌های پژوهش حاکی از این است که مؤلفه‌های گزارشگری یکپارچه در دانشگاه‌ها، در مجموع به تعداد 130 شاخص است که به 7 دسته طبقه‌بندی شده است: 1. توصیف سازمان و محیط فعالیت آن (34 شاخص)؛ 2. راهبری (7 شاخص)؛ 3. مدل کسب‌وکار (58 شاخص)؛ 4. ریسک‌ها و فرصت‌ها (17 شاخص)؛ 5. استراتژی (8 شاخص)؛ 6. عملکرد (3 شاخص)؛ 7. مبنای تهیه و ارائه گزارش (3 شاخص). نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج این مطالعه شاخص‌های گزارش یکپارچه‌ای را معرفی می‌کند که در زمان حاضر، از اقبال مطلوبی برخوردار است. این نوع گزارش از نظر میزان افشای شاخص‌ها و محتوای اطلاعاتی، می‌تواند گزارش‌های مسئولیت اجتماعی، پایداری و سایر گزارش‌ها را با گزارش‌های مالی یکپارچه کند و در نتیجه، فرصت‌های بیشتری برای تقویت پاسخ‌گویی دانشگاه‌های بخش عمومی و بهبود تصمیم‌گیری فراهم آورد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| چارچوب بین‌المللی گزارشگری یکپارچه؛ گزارش یکپارچه؛ تحلیل محتوای کیفی؛ گزارش‌های مالی و غیرمالی دانشگاه‌ها | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Identification of Integrated Reporting Indicators in Universities | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Fatemeh Geramirad1؛ Mahnaz Mollanazari2؛ Ali Rahmani3؛ Saeid Homayoun4 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 3Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 4Associate Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Education and Business, University of Gavle, Sweden. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Objective: This study aims to detect the indicators of integrated reports to identify the specific challenges of higher education. This research examines the content of the reports provided by the universities. It is based on the analysis of report contents provided by several pioneer universities in this field. It seeks to identify types of reports prepared in the universities and to designate the types of reports with more informational content to create an important base for moving towards effective integrated reporting. This study uses content analysis to investigate the disclosure of accounting and non-accounting information. Content analysis is empirically valid in corporate, social, ethical, and environmental reports. The study seeks to identify the framework of integrated reporting in universities and the research questions include 1. In general, what kind of reports are prepared in universities? 2. What is the most complete and comprehensive type of report in terms of disclosure of indicators and information content? 3. What are the components and indicators of integrated reporting in universities? 4. Which indicators have the highest frequency among the reviewed reports? The results of this research can be useful for policymakers and legislators who decide to implement and standardize sustainability or integrated reporting in higher education centers. In addition, the results can be valuable for managers and financial managers in universities who wish to follow such new trends. Also, the findings can serve as a learning process for institutions interested in implementing integrated reporting. In addition, the results of the present study are important for other stakeholders, such as students, academics, etc., to encourage universities to address integrated reporting issues in their reporting because this will increase their impact on society. Methods: This study was implemented in two phases. Firstly, the texts related to reporting in universities were searched and reviewed, and then a thematic content analysis was done to identify the main topics and themes hidden in the search. This research is designed by exploring the reports submitted by 48 top universities in the field of reporting. These universities prepared 58 different reports based on their needs. The reports include annual, social, impact, financial, and sustainability reports. Purposive sampling was used to select the reports of higher education centers. Therefore, at least 5 top universities from each continent were selected based on the Times Higher Education Impact Ranking Score. In addition, a number of the top universities in the field of reporting, indexed in the GRI database, as well as the reports of universities indexed in the integrated reporting database, were also used to complete the work. Results: The findings indicated that the components of integrated reporting in universities include 130 indicators: 1) an overview of the organization and the environment in which it operates (34 indicators), 2) Governance (7 indicators), 3) Business model (58 indicators), 4) Risks and opportunities (17 indicators), 5) Strategy (8 indicators), 6) Performance (3 indicators), and 7) Basis for preparing and presenting reports (3 indicators). Conclusion: The findings confirmed that universities can officially accept an integrated report by combining and integrating different documents into a comprehensive document and creating a single accountability tool. Also, the results showed that some key elements of the international integrated reporting framework are included in university reports, but often in a scattered and non-homogeneous way. Therefore, the findings can be a good basis for developing integrated reporting to improve the reporting methods of universities and strengthen their accountability. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| International integrated reporting framework, Integrated reporting, Qualitative content analysis, Financial and non-financial reports of Universities | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
باباخانی، جعفر و عدل زاده، مرتضی (1399). تحلیل ساختاری پیشرانهای مؤثر برآینده گزارشگری شرکتی در ایران. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 27(4)، 523-545.
پیری سقرلو، مهدی؛ تحریری، آرش؛ حجازی، رضوان (1400). توسعه حسابداری در دانشگاه‌های ایران. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 28(3)، 398-434.
تقیزاده، رضا؛ عبدزاده کنفی، محمد؛ کردآبادی، فاطمه؛ حیدری اشکذری، فاطمه (1400). تحلیل شبکه روابط گروههای حسابداری دانشگاه‌های دولتی ایران. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 28(2 )، 274-295.
حیاتی، نهاله؛ حجازی، رضوان؛ حسینی، سیدعلی؛ باستانی، سوسن (1396). استخراج مؤلفه‌های زیست محیطی از گزارشات فعالیت هیئت مدیره شرکتها با استفاده از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی. پژوهشهای تجربی حسابداری، 7(4)، 43-70.
رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون؛ نیکومرام، هاشم؛ نونهال نهر، علی اکبر. (1391). ارزیابی تأثیر رویکردهای قضاوتی و شناختی زبان در گزارش‌های توضیحی حسابداری. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 19(68)، 47-72.
زارعی، محمد امین؛ افجه، سید علی‌اکبر؛ خاشعی، وحید؛ دلشاد تهرانی، مصطفی (1398). طراحی الگوی رهبری استراتژیک اسلامی در سازمان: بر اساس تحلیل محتوای عهدنامۀ مالک‌اشتر. اندیشه مدیریت راهبردی (اندیشه مدیریت)، 13(2)، 73-94.
کریپندروف، کلوس (1378). تحلیل محتوا: مبانی روش‌شناسی. (هوشنگ نایب، مترجم)، تهران: روش
مومنی راد (1392). تحلیل محتوای کیفی در آیین پژوهش: ماهیت، مراحل و اعتبار نتایج. فصلنامه اندازه‌گیری تربیتی، 4(14)، 187-222.
References Adams, C. A. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: a call to action. Critical perspectives on accounting, 27, 23-28. Adams, S., & Simnett, R. (2011). Integrated Reporting: An opportunity for Australia's not-for-profit sector. Australian Accounting Review, 21(3), 292-301. Adhikariparajuli, M., Hassan, A., Fletcher, M., & Elamer, A. A. (2020). Integrated reporting in higher education: Insights from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Social Responsibility Journal. Agyemang, G., & Broadbent, J. (2015). Management control systems and research management in universities: An empirical and conceptual exploration. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28(7), 1018-1046. Amiano Bonatxea, I., Gutierrez-Goiria, J., Vazquez-De Francisco, M. J., & Sianes, A. (2022). Is the global reporting initiative suitable to account for university social responsibility? Evidence from European institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(4), 831-847. Ashwin, P. (2017). What is the Teaching Excellence Framework in the United Kingdom, and will it work? International higher education(88), 10-11. Babajani, J., & Adlzadeh, M. (2021). Structural Analysis of the Drivers Affecting the Future of Corporate Reporting in Iran. Accounting and Auditing Review, 27(4), 523-545. doi: 10.22059/acctgrev.2021.80472 (in Persian) Bartocci, L., & Picciaia, F. (2013). Towards integrated reporting in the public sector Integrated reporting (pp. 191-204): Springer. Biondi, L., & Bracci, E. (2018). Sustainability, popular and integrated reporting in the public sector: A fad and fashion perspective. Sustainability, 10(9), 3112. Bonatxea, I. A., Gutiérrez-Goiria, J., Vazquez-De Francisco, M. J., & Sianes, A. (2021). Is the global reporting initiative suitable to account for university social responsibility? Evidence from European institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. Brusca, I., Labrador, M., & Larran, M. (2018). The challenge of sustainability and integrated reporting at universities: A case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 347-354. Cavicchi, C., Oppi, C., & Vagnoni, E. (2019). On the feasibility of integrated reporting in healthcare: a context analysis starting from a management commentary. Journal of Management and Governance, 23, 345-371. Calder, W., & Clugston, R. M. (2003). International efforts to promote higher education for sustainable development. Planning for higher education, 31(3), 30-44. Churchman, D. (2002). Voices of the academy: academics’ responses to the corporatizing of academia. Critical perspectives on accounting, 13(5-6), 643-656. Cinquini, L., Passetti, E., Tenucci, A., & Frey, M. (2012). Analyzing intellectual capital information in sustainability reports: some empirical evidence. Journal of Intellectual Capital. De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated Reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Deegan, C., & Blomquist, C. (2006). Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting, organizations and society, 31(4-5), 343-372. Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American journal of sociology, 113(1), 1-40. Fernando, S., & Lawrence, S. (2014). A theoretical framework for CSR practices: Integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory. Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, 10(1), 149-178. Grau, F. X., Goddard, J., Hall, B., Hazelkorn, E., & Tandon, R. (2017). Higher education in the world 6. Towards a socially responsible university: Balancing the global with the local. Girona: Global University Network for Innovation. Guthrie, J., Manes-Rossi, F., & Orelli, R. L. (2017). Integrated reporting and integrated thinking in Italian public sector organisations. Meditari Accountancy Research, 25(4), 553-573. Hassan, A., Adhikariparajuli, M., Fletcher, M. and Elamer, A. (2019), Integrated reporting in UK higher education institutions, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, ISSN: 2040-8021 Hayati, N., Hejazi, R., Hosseini, S. A., & Bastani, S. (2018). Extraction of environmental indicators from the board of directors'report, using qualitative content analysis. Hayes, A. (2019). Inclusion, epistemic democracy and international students: The teaching excellence framework and education policy: Springer. Higgins, C., Stubbs, W., & Love, T. (2014). Walking the talk (s): Organisational narratives of integrated reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Kräusche, K., & Pilz, S. (2017). Integrated sustainability reporting at HNE Eberswalde–a practice report. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. Krippendorff, K. (1998). Content analysis: the basics of methodology. Translated by Hoshang Naib, Tehran: Ravesh. (in Persian) Leitner, K.-H. (2004). Intellectual capital reporting for universities: conceptual background and application for Austrian universities. Research evaluation, 13(2), 129-140. Lodhia, S. (2015). Exploring the transition to integrated reporting through a practice lens: an Australian customer owned bank perspective. Journal of business ethics, 129(3), 585-598. Low, M., Samkin, G., & Li, Y. (2015). Voluntary reporting of intellectual capital: Comparing the quality of disclosures from New Zealand, Australian and United Kingdom universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(4), 779-808. Maroun, W. (2018). Modifying assurance practices to meet the needs of integrated reporting: The case for “interpretive assurance”. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Mauro, S. G., Cinquini, L., Simonini, E., & Tenucci, A. (2020). Moving from social and sustainability reporting to integrated reporting: Exploring the potential of Italian public-funded universities’ reports. Sustainability, 12(8), 3172. Mio, C. (2013). Towards a sustainable university: the Ca’Foscari experience: Springer. Mio, C., Marco, F., & Pauluzzo, R. (2016). Internal application of IR principles: Generali's internal integrated reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 204-218. Momeni Rad, A. (2013). Qualitative content analysis in research tradition: nature, stages and validity of the results. Quarterly of Educational Measurement, 4(14), 187-222. Montecalvo, M., Farneti, F., & De Villiers, C. (2018). The potential of integrated reporting to enhance sustainability reporting in the public sector. Public Money & Management, 38(5), 365-374. Ntim, C. G., Soobaroyen, T., & Broad, M. J. (2017). Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability: The case of UK higher education institutions. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Parker, L. D. (2002). It’s been a pleasure doing business with you: a strategic analysis and critique of university change management. Critical perspectives on accounting, 13(5-6), 603-619. Petcharat, N., & Zaman, M. (2019). Sustainability reporting and integrated reporting perspectives of Thai-listed companies. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting. Piri Sagharloo, M., Tahriri, A., & Hejazi, R. (2021). Development of Accounting in Iranian Universities. Accounting and Auditing Review, 28(3), 398-434. (in Persian) Rahnamay Roodposhti, F., Nikoomaram, H., & Nonahal Nahr, A. A. (2012). Evaluating the Effects of Language Judgmental and Cognitive Approaches in Accounting Narratives. Accounting and Auditing Review, 19(2), 47-72. (in Persian) Rinaldi, L., Unerman, J., & De Villiers, C. (2018). Evaluating the integrated reporting journey: insights, gaps and agendas for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Sangiorgi, D., Mazzara, L., & Siboni, B. (2017). Do European recommendations impact on sustainability policies by Italian local governments? Public Money & Management, 37(7), 491-498. Siboni, B., Del Sordo, C., & Pazzi, S. (2013). Sustainability reporting in state universities: An investigation of Italian pioneering practices. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), 4(2), 1-15. Stacchezzini, R., Florio, C., Sproviero, A. F., & Corbella, S. (2018). An intellectual capital ontology in an integrated reporting context. Journal of Intellectual Capital. Stiglitz, J. E., & Greenwald, B. C. (2015). Creating a learning society: a new approach to growth, development, and social progress: Columbia University Press. Stubbs, W., & Higgins, C. (2014). Integrated reporting and internal mechanisms of change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Taghizadeh, R., Abdzadeh Kanafi, M., Kordabadi, F., & Heidari Ashkezari, F. (2021). Network Analysis of Accounting Departments of Iranian Governmental Universities. Accounting and Auditing Review, 28(2 ), 274-295. (in Persian) Tirado-Valencia, P., Cordobés-Madueño, M., Ruiz-Lozano, M., & De Vicente-Lama, M. (2020). Integrated thinking in the reporting of public sector enterprises: a proposal of contents. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(3), 435-453. Veltri, S., & Silvestri, A. (2015). The Free State University integrated reporting: a critical consideration. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(2), 443-462. Zarei, M. A., Afjahi, S. A. A., Khashei, V., & Delshad Tehrani, M. (2019). Designing a Strategic Islamic Leadership Model in the Organization: Based on content analysis of Malek Ashtar Treaty. Strategic Management Thought, 13(2), 73-94. (in Persian) | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 406 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 409 |
||