Information Content of Financial Reporting and the development of interactive capability with stakeholders: Pygmalion Theory Test

Subject Areas : Journal of Investment Knowledge

Mohsen Heydari ¹ , Mohammadreza abdoli ²

1 - Accounting PhD student, Department of Accounting, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, Shahroud Unit, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran

Received: 2020-03-06 Accepted : 2020-06-15 Published : 2022-12-22

Keywords: Development of Interactive Capability with stakeholders, Information Content of Financial Reporting, Pygmalion Theory Test,

Abstract :

Confidence in the capital market becomes dynamically valuable when interactive strategies with stakeholders are formulated for the long term to reduce the information asymmetry that has become an epidemic among companies. That is, a more responsive response to the level of expectations of this market under the supervision of relevant institutions. By reflecting on timely news content and honestly speaking, one can expect interactive functions and capabilities between companies with stakeholders in the form of theories such as Pygmalion theory that points to the re-formation of expectations in this market. It should be strengthened and the level of satisfaction with investing in this market will increase due to lower risk and higher return. The purpose of this research is Information Content of Financial Reporting and the development of interactive capability with stakeholders by Pygmalion Theory Test. In this study, in order to measure the content of financial reporting information, two criteria of timeliness and Reporting-Lag have been used. To evaluate the development of interactive capability with stakeholders, Delphi's analysis based on Likert-5 formulation has been used. Questionnaire for collecting research data for 142 companies in year 2019 was sent out of which 105 questionnaires were returned with the participation of managers of Tehran Stock Exchange. In order to fit and test the hypothesis, we used the partial least squares analysis. The results showed that Information Content of Financial Reporting had a positive and significant effect on development of interactive capability with stakeholders.

References:

• ابطحی فروشانی، زینت السادات.، فرصتکار، احسان.، خوشنواپور، نادر.، ابطحی فروشانی، سیدتقی. (۱۳۹۴). تحلیل ذینفعان کلیدی با استفاده از ماتریس علاقه_قدرت (مطالعه موردی: طرح‌های توسعه میادین منطقه پارس‌جنوبی). ماهنامه علمی و ترویجی اکتشاف و تولید نفت و گاز، ۱۲(۱۲۷): ۳۲-۳۹


• آزادی، ک.، وزیری، ع. (1397). تأثیر گزارش حسابرسی بر محتوای اطلاعات مالی، فصلنامه علمی تخصصی رویکردهای پژوهشی نوین در مدیریت و حسابداری، 2(10): 1-19.


• ثقفی، فاطمه.، عباسی شاهکوه، کلثوم.، کشتگاری، احسان. (۱۳۹۳). طراحی چارچوب شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی ذینفعان مبتنی بر روش فراتلفیق، فصلنامه مدیریت فردا، سال سیزدهم، ۳۹(۲): ۲۱-۴۲.


• حاجیها، زهره.، بهادری، مالک. (1398). بررسی مقایسه‌ای قابلیت اتکاء اطلاعات مالی براساس تئوری چرخه عمر، حسابداری مدیریت، 12(40): 97-108.


• حیاتی، منوچهر.، مشبکی‌اصفهانی، اصغر.، خورشیدی، عباس.، مرتضوی، مهدی. (۱۳۹۷). ارائه الگوی مدیریت تعامل با ذینفعان راهبردی بانک، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع سازمانی، ۸(۲): ۵۷-۷۲.


• خلیلی، مهدی.، آقائی، محمدعلی. (1397). تاثیر ترکیب منابع اطلاعاتی بر روی محتوای اطلاعات گزارش‌های مالی سالانه، پژوهش‌های کاربردی در گزارشگری مالی، 7(2): 179-204.


• ژولانژاد، فاطمه.، بخردی‌نسب، وحید. (۱۳۹۸). بررسی محتوای اطلاعاتی صورت‌های مالی میان دوره‌ای حسابرسی شده نسبت به صورت‌های مالی میان دوره‌ای حسابرسی نشده، دانش حسابرسی، ۱۹(۷۶): ۳۲۳-۳۵۵.


• عرب‌مازار یزدی، محمد.، جمالیان‌پور، مظفر. (1389). مقایسه محتوای اطلاعاتی و سودمندی صورت سود و زیان میان‌دوره‌ای 3، 6 و 9 ماهه در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران، پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی، 2(4): 45-66.


• کمالی اردکانی، محمود.، ناظمی اردکانی، مهدی.، معین‌الدین، محمود. (1398). شناسایی و رتبه‌بندی عوامل مؤثر بر کیفیت گزارشگری مالی اینترنتی در تارنمای شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران، پژوهش‌های کاربردی در گزارشگری مالی، 8(2): 87-115.


• گل‌محمدی، مجتبی.، پورحیدری، امید.، بهارمقدم، مهدی. (1396). بررسی تأثیر مدیریت ذینفعان بر سود تقسیمی و ارزش شرکت، بررسی‏‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 24(3)، 394- 371.


• نجفیان، خدیجه.، صفری‌گرایلی، مهدی. (1396). معاملات با اشخاص وابسته و قابلیت مقایسه صورت‌های مالی: آزمون تجربی نظریه تضاد منافع. حسابداری مدیریت، 10(35): 77-90.


• نوروش، ایرج.، عبداله‌زاده، سلام.، مالکی، مریم. (1398). تغییرات در ارزش محتوای اطلاعات حسابداری طی گذر زمان در شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران، پژوهش حسابداری، 9(2): 57-80.


• Balmer, J. (2017). The corporate identity, total corporate communications, stakeholders’ attributed identities, identifications and behaviors continuum, European Journal of Marketing, 51(9/10): 1472-1502. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2017-0448


• Barnett, M, L. (2007). Stakeholder Influence Capacity and the Variability of Financial Returns to Corporate Social Responsibility, the Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 794-816.


• Beaver W, H. (1989). "Financial reporting: an accounting revolution" Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: PrenticeHall.


• Benson, B. W. & Davidson, W. N. (2010). The relation between stakeholder management, Firm Value, and CEO compensation: A Test of Enlightened Value Maximization. Financial Management, 39(3), 929-963.


• Bohren, O., Josefsen, M. G. & Steen, P. E. (2012). Stakeholder conflicts and dividend policy, Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(10), 2852–2864.


• Bridoux, F., & Stoelhorst, J. W. (2014). Micro-foundations for stakeholder theory: Managing stakeholders with heterogeneous motives, Strategic Management Journal, 35(1): 107–125


• Chambers, A, E., Penman, SH. (1984). Timeliness of reporting and the stock price reaction To earnings announcements, Accoumting Review, 22(1): 21–47.


• Choi, J., & Wang, H. (2009). Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance, Strategic Management Journal, 30(8), 895–907.


• Drake, M, S., Johnson, B, A., Roulstone, D, T., Thornock, J, R. (2019). Is There Information Content in Information Acquisition? The Accounting Review, In-Press.


• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.


• Gao, J., Slawinski, N. (2015). The Impact of Stakeholder Management on Corporate International Diversification, Business and Society Review, 120(3): 409-433. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12061


• Gray, R., Owen, D., Afams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Change and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting, London: Prentice Hall.


• Herremans, I. M., Nazari, J. A., & Mahmoudian, F. (2016). Stakeholder relationships, engagement, and sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(3), 417–435.


• Hersey, P., Blanchard, K, H. (1989). Management of organizational behavior: utilizing human resources, 5th Ed, Prentice Hall, Inc.


• Jiang, W., Wang, A, X., Zhou, K, Zh., Zhang, Ch. (2019). Stakeholder Relationship Capability and Firm Innovation: A Contingent Analysis, Journal of Business Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04161-4


• Jones, T. M., Harrison, J. S., & Felps, W. (2018). How applying instrumental stakeholder theory can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 371–391.


• Karaye, Y, I., Ishak, Z., Che-Adam, N. (2014). The mediating effect of stakeholder influence capacity on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 164(4): 528–534


• Kelton, A, S., Murthy, U, S. (2016). The Effects of Information Disaggregation and Financial Statement Interactivity on Judgments and Decisions of Nonprofessional Investors, Journal of Information Systems, 3(30): 99-118. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-51327


• Kumar, V., Rahman, Z. and Kazmi, A. (2016). Stakeholder identification and classification: a sustainability marketing perspective, Management Research Review, 39(1): 35-61. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0224


• Landry, R., Amara, N., Lamari, M. (2002). Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69, 681-701.


• Laplume, A. O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. A. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us, Journal of Management, 34(6): 1152–1189.


• Leventis, S., Weetman, P. (2004). Timeliness of financial reporting: applicability of disclosure theories in an emerging capital market, Accounting and Business Research, 34(1): 43-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2004.9729950


• Lilius, J. M., Worline, M. C., Maitlis, S., Kanov, J., Dutton, J. E., Frost, P., (2008). The contours and consequences of compassion at work”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(2): 193-218


• Loi, T. (2016). Stakeholder management: a case of its related capability and performance, Management Decision, 54(1): 148-173. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-06-2015-0244


• Martin, M, V., Reinhardt, R., Gurtner, S. (2016). Stakeholder integration in new product development: a systematic analysis of drivers and firm capabilities, 46(3): 1095-1112.


• Merton, R, K. (1948). The Self-fulfilling prophecy, Antioch Review Journal, 8(2): 193-210.


• Mitchell, R., Agle, B., Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principles of who and what really counts, Academy of Management Review, 22: 55-886


• Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., de Colle, S., & Purnell, L. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403–445.


• Petalas, P, D., Shie, H, V., Vettehen, P, H. (2017). Forecasted economic change and the self-fulfilling prophecy in economic decision-making, Plos One, 12(3): 17-43. 10.1371/journal.pone.0174353


• Romero, S., Ruiz, S., Fernandez-Feijoo, B. (2018). Sustainability reporting and stakeholder engagement in Spain: Different instruments, different quality, Business Strategy and The Environment, 28(1): 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2251


• Romijn, H., Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research Policy, 31, 1053-1067.


• Rosenthal, R. (2012). Self-fulfilling prophecy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Second Edition): 328–335.


• Rueda-Manzanares, A., Aragn-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2008). The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: The moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. British Journal of Management, 19(2): 185–203.


• Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2): 159–180.


• Siemroth, Ch. (2019). The informational content of prices when policy makers react to financial markets, Journal of Economic Theory, 179(3): 240-274 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2018.11.002


• Tang, Y., Li, J., Yang, H. (2015). What I see, what I do: how executive hubris affects firm innovation. Journal of Management. 41, 1698-1723.


• Tong, L., Liu, N., Zhang, M., Wang, L. (2018). Employee Protection and Corporate Innovation: Empirical Evidence from China, Journal of Business Ethics, 153(2), 569-589.


• Verbeke, A., & Tung, V. (2013). The future of stakeholder management theory: A temporal perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(3): 529–543.


• Veronica, S., Alexeis, G, P., Valentina, C., Elisa, G. (2019). Do stakeholder capabilities promote sustainable business innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises? Evidence from Italy, Journal of Business Research, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.06.025


• Wagner Mainardes, E., Alves, H., Raposo, M. (2011). Stakeholder theory: issues to resolve, Management Decision, 49(2): 226-252. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111109133


• Wan, Y., Yang, X. (2019). An empirical study of the self-fulfilling prophecy effect in Chinese stock market, The Journal of Finance and Data Science, 5(2):116-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfds.2019.04.001


• Wang, H, M., Sengupta, S. (2016). Stakeholder relationships, brand equity, firm performance: A resource-based perspective, Journal of Business Research, 2(3): 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.05.009


• Watson, R., Wilson, H, N., Smart, P., Macdonald, E, K. (2017). Harnessing Difference: A Capability‐Based Framework for Stakeholder Engagement in Environmental Innovation, 35(2): 254-279.


• Yang, D., Jiang, W., Zhao, W. (2019). Proactive environmental strategy, innovation capability, and stakeholder integration capability: A mediation analysis, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2329