3.8 Article

Social reports in Italian universities: disclosures and preparers' perspective

期刊

MEDITARI ACCOUNTANCY RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 91-110

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-09-2014-0054

关键词

Content analysis; Italian university; Online survey; Social report

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - Although there is no mandatory requirement for Italian universities to report beyond a financial report, several universities have produced a social report, despite the context of increasing pressure to cut financial resources. This study aims to investigate if Italian state universities produce voluntary social reports and, if so, what they disclose. Also to explore their motivations to do so and the main difficulties encountered. Design/methodology/approach - Content analysis is applied to the total pool of Italian universities' social reports obtained. Also, a subsequent online survey was undertaken with preparers of those social reports. Findings - The findings indicate that a social report is not a common practice in Italian universities. Subsequent online interviews and thematic analysis found that a key individual within the university played a pivotal role in developing a social report. In the pool of reports examined, there were few social and environmental aspects disclosed. Also the respondents to the survey highlighted that the main difficulty in the development of social reports was the lack of systematic collection of non-financial information within the university. Researchlimitations/implications - The study is limited to the Italian university social reports produced and those answering the online survey. Originality/value - Most of the prior Italian literature on social reports is normative in nature and focuses on what should be reported, rather than on what was actually reported. This study is an attempt at analysing the pool of Italian universities' social reports and is useful for understanding how and why organisations voluntarily produce social reports.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据