Practice Variation in Big-4 Transparency Reports

Sakshi Girdhar, Kim Klarskov Jeppesen

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

57 Downloads (Pure)

Resumé

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the transparency reports published by the Big-4 public accounting firms in the UK, Germany and Denmark to understand the determinants of their content within the networks of big accounting firms.
Design/methodology/approach: The study draws on a qualitative research approach, in which the content of transparency reports is analyzed and semi-structured interviews are conducted with key people from the Big-4 firms who are responsible for developing the transparency reports.
Findings: The findings show that the content of transparency reports is inconsistent and the transparency reporting practice is not uniform within the Big-4 networks. Differences were found in the way in which the transparency reporting practices are coordinated globally by the respective central governing bodies of the Big-4. The content of the transparency reports is particularly influenced by the national institutional environment in which the Big-4 member firms operate, thus leading them to introduce practice variation and resulting in cross-national differences. Practical implications: The study results have important implications for standard setters, regulators and practitioners, as the research provides insights into the variation taking place within the common regulatory frame.
Originality/value: This is the first study to analyze how transparency reporting practices are developed within the networks of Big-4 firms, thereby influencing the content of transparency reports.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftAccounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal
Vol/bind31
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)261-285
Antal sider25
ISSN0951-3574
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2018

Emneord

  • Legitimacy
  • Institutional logics
  • Accounting firms
  • Cross-country difference
  • Practice variation
  • Transparency reports

Citer dette

@article{037406d62a0748edaf14a4e042b58163,
title = "Practice Variation in Big-4 Transparency Reports",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the transparency reports published by the Big-4 public accounting firms in the UK, Germany and Denmark to understand the determinants of their content within the networks of big accounting firms. Design/methodology/approach: The study draws on a qualitative research approach, in which the content of transparency reports is analyzed and semi-structured interviews are conducted with key people from the Big-4 firms who are responsible for developing the transparency reports. Findings: The findings show that the content of transparency reports is inconsistent and the transparency reporting practice is not uniform within the Big-4 networks. Differences were found in the way in which the transparency reporting practices are coordinated globally by the respective central governing bodies of the Big-4. The content of the transparency reports is particularly influenced by the national institutional environment in which the Big-4 member firms operate, thus leading them to introduce practice variation and resulting in cross-national differences. Practical implications: The study results have important implications for standard setters, regulators and practitioners, as the research provides insights into the variation taking place within the common regulatory frame. Originality/value: This is the first study to analyze how transparency reporting practices are developed within the networks of Big-4 firms, thereby influencing the content of transparency reports.",
keywords = "Legitimacy, Institutional logics, Accounting firms, Cross-country difference, Practice variation, Transparency reports, Legitimacy, Institutional logics, Accounting firms, Cross-country difference, Practice variation, Transparency reports",
author = "Sakshi Girdhar and {Klarskov Jeppesen}, Kim",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1108/AAAJ-11-2015-2311",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "261--285",
journal = "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal",
issn = "1368-0668",
publisher = "JAI Press",
number = "1",

}

Practice Variation in Big-4 Transparency Reports. / Girdhar, Sakshi; Klarskov Jeppesen, Kim.

I: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Bind 31, Nr. 1, 2018, s. 261-285.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practice Variation in Big-4 Transparency Reports

AU - Girdhar, Sakshi

AU - Klarskov Jeppesen, Kim

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the transparency reports published by the Big-4 public accounting firms in the UK, Germany and Denmark to understand the determinants of their content within the networks of big accounting firms. Design/methodology/approach: The study draws on a qualitative research approach, in which the content of transparency reports is analyzed and semi-structured interviews are conducted with key people from the Big-4 firms who are responsible for developing the transparency reports. Findings: The findings show that the content of transparency reports is inconsistent and the transparency reporting practice is not uniform within the Big-4 networks. Differences were found in the way in which the transparency reporting practices are coordinated globally by the respective central governing bodies of the Big-4. The content of the transparency reports is particularly influenced by the national institutional environment in which the Big-4 member firms operate, thus leading them to introduce practice variation and resulting in cross-national differences. Practical implications: The study results have important implications for standard setters, regulators and practitioners, as the research provides insights into the variation taking place within the common regulatory frame. Originality/value: This is the first study to analyze how transparency reporting practices are developed within the networks of Big-4 firms, thereby influencing the content of transparency reports.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the transparency reports published by the Big-4 public accounting firms in the UK, Germany and Denmark to understand the determinants of their content within the networks of big accounting firms. Design/methodology/approach: The study draws on a qualitative research approach, in which the content of transparency reports is analyzed and semi-structured interviews are conducted with key people from the Big-4 firms who are responsible for developing the transparency reports. Findings: The findings show that the content of transparency reports is inconsistent and the transparency reporting practice is not uniform within the Big-4 networks. Differences were found in the way in which the transparency reporting practices are coordinated globally by the respective central governing bodies of the Big-4. The content of the transparency reports is particularly influenced by the national institutional environment in which the Big-4 member firms operate, thus leading them to introduce practice variation and resulting in cross-national differences. Practical implications: The study results have important implications for standard setters, regulators and practitioners, as the research provides insights into the variation taking place within the common regulatory frame. Originality/value: This is the first study to analyze how transparency reporting practices are developed within the networks of Big-4 firms, thereby influencing the content of transparency reports.

KW - Legitimacy

KW - Institutional logics

KW - Accounting firms

KW - Cross-country difference

KW - Practice variation

KW - Transparency reports

KW - Legitimacy

KW - Institutional logics

KW - Accounting firms

KW - Cross-country difference

KW - Practice variation

KW - Transparency reports

UR - https://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=954921411358&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

U2 - 10.1108/AAAJ-11-2015-2311

DO - 10.1108/AAAJ-11-2015-2311

M3 - Journal article

VL - 31

SP - 261

EP - 285

JO - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

JF - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

SN - 1368-0668

IS - 1

ER -