Författarna har sett att det finns samband mellan olika företagsegenskaper och granskning, och det kan eventuellt finnas fler företagsegenskaper som kan påverka valet att externt granska hållbarhetsredovisningen. Det kan därför vara intressant att göra en liknande studie men med andra variabler såsom exempelvis val av granskare, om börsnotering av företaget kan påverka och hur ägarspridningen ser ut. Det kan även vara intressant att gå ner på na- tionell nivå och jämföra detta.
Att det finns skillnader mellan de olika nationerna är tydligt men författarna till denna stu- die anser att det även vore intressant att testa andra kulturvariabler än Hofstedes. Andra förslag är att göra en mer kvalitativ studie av kulturens påverkan på valet att granska sin hållbarhetsredovisning.
Referenslista
Aczel, A. & Sounderpandian, J. (2006). Complete Business Statistics. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Adams, C.A. (2002). Interorganisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical re-
porting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 15(2), 223-250.
Adams, C.A. (2004). The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 17(5), 731-757.
Adams, C.A., Hill, W-Y. & Roberts, C.B. (1998). Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour? British Accounting Review. 30, 1-21.
Adams, C.A. & Kuasirikun, N. (2000). A comparative analysis of corporate reporting on ethical issues by UK and German chemical and pharmaceutical companies. European Accounting Review. 9(1), 53-80.
Ahmed, K. & Courtis J.K. (1999). Associations between corporate characteristics and dis- closure levels in annual reports: a meta-analysis. British Accounting Review. 31, 35- 61.
Anonym. (2006). Bank bäst i Europa på hållbarhetsredovisning. Balans. 32(5), 25-26.
Ball, A., Owen, D.L. & Gray, R. (2000). External transparency or internal capture? The role of third-party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports. Business Strategy and theEnvironment. 9(1), 1-23.
Bartolomeo, M., Bennett, M., Bouma, J.J., Heydkamp, P., James, P. & Wolters, T. (2000). Environmental management accounting in Europe: current practice and future potential. The European Accounting Review. 9(1), 31-52.
Baskerville, R.F. (2003). Hofstede never studied culture. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 28 (1), 1-14.
Bebbington, J., Gray, R. & Larringa, C. (2000). Editorial: environmental and social account- ing in Europe. The European Accounting Review. 9(1), 3-6.
Bergström, S., Catasús, B. & Ljungdahl, F. (2002). Miljöredovisning. Andra upplagan. Malmö: Liber Ekonomi AB.
Bromwich, M. & Hopwood, A.G. (1983). Accounting standard setting: an international perspective. London: Pitman.
Brorson, T. & Park, J. (2005). Experiences of and views on third-party assurance of corpo- rate environmental and sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production. 13(1), 1095-1106.
Campbell, D., Craven, B. & Shrives, P. (2003). Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE sectors: a comment on perception and legitimacy. Accounting, Auditing & Ac- countability Journal. 16(4), 558-581.
Caroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society. 38(3), 268-295.
Cerin, P. (2005). Legitimitet i den frivilliga hållbarhetsredovisningen. Balans. 31(11), 44-45. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Cohen, J.R, Pant, L.W. & Sharp, D.J. (1993). Culture-based ethical conflicts confronting multinational accounting firms. Accounting Horizons. 7(3), 1-13.
Dando, N. & Swift, T. (2003). Transparency and assurance: minding the credibility gap. Journal of Business Ethics. 44, 195-200.
Deegan, C. & Rankin, M. (1996). Do Australian companies report environmental news ob- jectively? An analysis of environmental disclosures by firms prosecuted suc- cessfully by the environmental protection authority. Accounting, Auditing & Ac- countability Journal. 9(2), 50-67.
Deegan, C., Rankin, M. & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and en- vironmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997. Accounting, Auditing & Ac- countability Journal. 15(3), 312-343.
Diamantopoulos, A. & Schlegelmilch, B.B. (1997). Taking the fear out of data analysis. London: The Drygden Press.
Dixon, R., Mousa, G.A & Woodhead, A.D. The necessary characteristics of environmental auditors: a review of the contribution of the financial auditing profession. Ac- counting Forum. 28(2), 119-138.
Djurfeldt, G., Larsson, R. & Stjärnhagen, O. (2003). Statistisk verktygslåda- samhällsvetenskaplig orsaksanalys med kvantitativa metoder. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Agency Theory: an assessment and review. The Academy of Man- agement review. 14(1), 57-74.
Eliasson, A. (2006). Kvantitativ metod från börja. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Eriksson, L.T. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (2006). Att utreda forska och rapportera. Åttonde up- plagan. Malmö: Liber AB.
FEE. (1999). FEE Discussion Paper- Providing assurance on environmental reports. Hämtad 2007-
03-13 från;
http://www.fee.be/fileupload/upload/DP%20Assurance%20Environmental %20Reports173200531524.pdf
Frucot, V. & Shearon, W.T. (1991). Budgetary participation, locus of control, and Mexican managerial performance and job satisfaction. The Accounting Review. 66(1), 80- 99.
Fröberg, J. (2007, mars 28). Miljöansvar utan extern kontroll. Svenska Dagbladet. Hämtad 2007-04-17, från http://www.e24.se/dynamiskt/sverige/did_14913632.asp Gray, R. (2000). Current developments and trends in social and environmental auditing, re-
porting and attestation: a review and comment. International Journal of Auditing. 4, 247-268.
Gray, R. (2001). Thirty years of social accounting, reporting and auditing: what (if anything) have we learnt? Business Ethics: A European Review. 10(1), 9–15.
Gray, S.J. (1988). Towards a theory of cultural influence on the development of accounting systems internationally. ABACUS. 24(1), 1-15.
Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D.M & Sinclair, C.D. (2001). Social and environmental disclo- sure and corporate characteristics: a research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting. 28(3&4), 327-356.
Gray, R.H., Owen, D.L. & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. London: Prentice Hall.
Gröjer, J-E. & Stark, A. (1978). Social redovisning. Stockholm:SNS.
Hackston, D. & Milne, M.J. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclo- sures in New Zealand companies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 9(1), 77-108.
Halling, P. (2007). Få hållbarhetsredovisningar i Sverige är bestyrkta. Balans. 33(3), 17-19. Harrison, G.L. (1992). The cross-cultural generalizability of the relation between participa-
tion, budget emphasis and job related attitudes. Accounting, Organisations and Soci- ety. 17(1), 1-15.
Harrison, G.L. & McKinnon, J.L. (1986). Cultural and accounting change: a new perspec- tive on corporate reporting regulation and accounting policy formation. Ac- counting, Organizations and Society. 11(3), 233.
Hetah, J. & Norman, W. (2004). Stakeholder theory, corporate governance and public management: what can the history of state-run enterprises teach us in the post- Enron era? Journal of Business Ethics. 53, 247-265.
Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories. Journal of International Business Studies. 14(2), 75-89.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 1(2). 81-99.
Hofstede, G. (1986). The ritual nature of accounting systems. Amsterdam: EIASM Workshop on Accounting and Culture.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences- Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organisa- tions across nations. London: Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. & Pedersen, P.B. (2002). Exploring culture- exercises, stories and synthetic cultures. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.
Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G.J. (2005). Organisationer och kulturer. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Holme, I.M. & Solvang, B.K. (1997). Forskningsmetodik- om kvalitativa och kvantitativa metoder.
Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Holmes, S.L. (1976). Executive perceptions of corporate social responsibility. Business Hori- zons. 19 (3), 34-40.
Inchausti, B.G. (1997). The influence of company characteristics and accounting regulation on information disclosed by Spanish firms. The European Accounting Review. 6(1), 45-68.
Jacobsen D., (2002) Vad, hur och varför: om metodval i företagsekonomi och andra samhällsvetenskap- liga ämnen. Lund. Studentlitteratur.
Jawahar, I.M. & Mclaughlin, G.L. (2001).Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: an or- ganizational life cycle approach. Academy of Management Review. 26(3), 397-414. Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W.H (1979). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency
costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics. 3(4), 305-360. Kamp-Roelands, N. (2002). Towards a framework for auditing environmental reports. Tilburg: Cen-
tER Tilburg University.
Kimberly, J.R. (1976). Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: a review, cri- tique, and proposal. Administrative Science Quartely. 21(4), 571-597.
KPMG. (2005). KPMG International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2005. Amster- dam: University of Amsterdam and KPMG Global Sustainability Services. Larsson, L.O. (1997). Miljöledning, miljörevision, miljöredovisning. Stockholm: Ekerlids Förlag. Larsson, L.O. & Ljungdahl, F. (1999). Miljöinformation och miljöredovisning: en vägledning för före-
tag och revisorer. Stockholm: KPMG Bohlins.
Larsson, L.O. & Ljungdahl, F. (2005). Miljöredovisningen avskaffas. Balans. 31(9), 13-15. Lind, D.A., Marchal, W.G., & Mason, R.D. (2002). Statistical techniques in business & economics.
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lundahl, U. & Skärvad, P-H. (1999). Utredningsmetodik för samhällsvetare och ekonomer. Tredje upplagan. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
MacKay, J. & Watson, M. (2003). Auditing for the environment. Managerial Auditing Journal. 18(8), 625-630.
Mathews, M.R. (1997). Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting research- Is there a silver jubilee to celebrate?. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 10(4), 481-531.
McComb, D. (1979). International harmonization of accounting: a cultural dimension. In- ternational Journal of Accounting Education and Research. 14(2), 2.
McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and the conse- quences: A triumph of faith – a failure of analysis. Human Relations. 55 (1), 89– 118.
Milne, M. & Chan, C. (1999). Narrative corporate social disclosures: how much of a difference do they make to investment decision-making? British Accounting Review, 31(4), 439-457. Moore, G. (2001). Corporate social and financial performance: an investigation in the U.K.
supermarket industry. Journal of Business Ethics. 34, 299-315.
Myers, M.D., Tan, F.B. (2002). Beyond models of national culture in information system research. Journal of Global Information Management. 10 (1), 24-32.
Nobes, C.W. & Parker, R.H. (2002). Comparative international accounting. London: Pearson Education.
O’Donovan, G. (2001). Environmental disclosures in the annual report- extending the ap- plicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Ac- countability. 15(3), 344-371.
O’Dwyer, B. (2002). Managerial perspections of corporate social disclosures- an Irish story. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 15(3), 406-436.
O’Dwyer, B. & Owen, D. L. (2005). Assurance statement practice in environmental, social and sustainability reporting: a critical evaluation. British Accounting Review. 37, 205-229.
Ostlund, L.E. (1977). Attitudes of managers toward corporate social responsibility. Califor- nia Management Review. 19(4), 35-49.
Owen, D.L, Swift, T.A., Humphrey, C. & Bowerman, M. (2000). The new social audits: ac- countability, managerial capture or the agenda of social champions? The Euro- pean Accounting Review. 9(1), 81-98.
Pallant, J. (2004). SPSS survival manual. Sydney: Open University Press.
Patel, C. & Psaros, J. (2000). Perceptions of external auditors’ independence: some cross- cultural evidence. British Accounting Review. 32, 311-338.
Perera, M.H.B. (1989). Towards a Framework to Analyze the Impact of Culture on Ac- counting. The International Journal of Accounting. 24(1), 42-56.
Perera, M.H.B. & Mathews, M.R. (1990). The cultural relativity of accounting and interna- tional patterns of social accounting. Advances in International Accounting. 3, 215- 251.
Precht, E. (2005). Vem vill revidera socialt ansvar?. Balans. 31 (2), 24-31.
Power, M. (1991). Auditing and environmental expertise: between protest and profession- alisation. Acounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 4(3), 30-42.
Power, M. (1997). The audit society- rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rosell, A. (2005). Riskerna inte enbart finansiella dags för hållbarhetsredovisning. Balans.
31(8-9), 24- 26.
Soeters, J. & Schreuder, V. (1988). The interaction between national and organizational cul- tures in accounting firms. Accounting, Organisations and Society. 13(1), 75-86. Suchman, M.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Academy
of Management Review. 20(3), 571-610.
Svenning, C. (2003). Metodboken. Femte upplagan. Eslöv: Lorentz Förlag.
Violet, W.J. (1983). The development of international accounting standards: an anthropo- logical perspective. International Journal of Accounting Education and Research. 18(2), 1.
Watson, A., Shrives, P. & Marston, C. (2002). Voluntary disclosure of accounting ratios in the UK. British Accounting Review. 34, 289-313.
Wennberg, I. (2004). Vägen tillbaka till social redovisning. Balans. 30(8-9), 38-41.
Williamson, D. (2002). Forward from a critique of Hofstede’s model of national culture. Human relations. 55 (11), 1373–1395.
Wilmshurst, T.D. & Frost, G.R. (2000). Corporate environmental reporting- a test of le- gitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 13(1), 10-26.
Bilaga 1 Hofstedes fem kulturdimensioner
Individualismindex (IDV)Land Poäng Land Poäng
USA 91 Sverige 71 Australien 90 Norge 69 Storbritannien 89 Tyskland 67 Kanada 80 Sydafrika 65 Nederländerna 80 Finland 63 Belgien 75 Spanien 51 Italien 76 Japan 46 Danmark 74
Belgien har i tabellen ovan ett individualismindex på 75. Detta är dock framräknat genom att lägga ihop vad den flamländska delen och den fransktalande delen har för index (78 re- spektive 72) och dela detta med två.
Maskulinitetsindex (MAS)
Land Poäng Land Poäng
Japan 95 Kanada 52 Italien 70 Spanien 42 Tyskland 66 Finland 26 Storbritannien 66 Danmark 16 Sydafrika 63 Nederländerna 14 USA 62 Norge 8 Australien 61 Sverige 5 Belgien 52
Belgiens maskulinitetsindex har räknats ut precis som tidigare, den fransktalande delen har 60 och den flamländska delen 43.
Maktdistansindex (MDI)
Land Poäng Land Poäng
Belgien 64 Australien 36 Spanien 57 Tyskland 35 Japan 54 Storbritannien 35 Italien 50 Finland 33 Sydafrika 49 Norge 31 USA 40 Sverige 31 Kanada 39 Danmark 18 Nederländerna 38
Författarna har gjort samma uträkning vad gäller maktdistansindexet för Belgien som på individualismindexet. Här hade dock den flamländska delen 61 och den fransktalande delen 67.
Osäkerhetsundvikandeindex (OUI)
Land Poäng Land Poäng
Belgien 95 Norge 50 Japan 92 Sydafrika 49 Spanien 86 Kanada 48 Italien 75 USA 46 Tyskland 65 Storbritannien 35 Finland 59 Sverige 29 Nederländerna 53 Danmark 23 Australien 51
Vad gäller osäkerhetsundvikandeindexet hade Belgiens flamländska del 97 och den fransk- talande delen 93. Det genomsnitt vi då får ut för hela Belgien blir då 95.
Index över långsiktig inriktning (ILI)
Land Poäng Land Poäng
Japan 80 Australien 31 Danmark 46 Tyskland 31 Nederländerna 44 USA 29 Norge 44 Storbritannien 25 Finland 41 Kanada 25 Belgien 38 Spanien 19 Italien 34 Australien 31 Sverige 33
Som nämnts tidigare så fattas detta index på Sydafrika. Belgiens index behövdes inte räknas om då det redan fanns för hela landet.