Loading…

Constructs for Assessing Integrated Reports—Testing the Predictive Validity of a Taxonomy for Organization Size, Industry, and Performance

The lack of an agreed valid measurement of integrated reporting () among organizations poses a constant problem to empirical researchers. Lueg and Lueg proposed an score that rates and categorizes reports according to their compliance with the principles of . This study tested and validated their pr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sustainability 2022-06, Vol.14 (12), p.7206
Main Author: Lueg, Rainer
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The lack of an agreed valid measurement of integrated reporting () among organizations poses a constant problem to empirical researchers. Lueg and Lueg proposed an score that rates and categorizes reports according to their compliance with the principles of . This study tested and validated their proposed coding catalogue, constructs, and taxonomy using capital market data and multivariate statistics. These findings suggested that this score and the corresponding taxonomy for classifying reports has a high predictive validity and can be used by future researchers to measure . In particular, this score confirmed that integrated thinking reports tend to be published by large organizations in controversial industries with an above-average performance (Adj. R2 = 42.2%). The findings also suggested that the construct form of the integrated report contributes more explanatory power than the construct content. In this regard, the results indicated that only full implementers of show associations with performance, unlike organizations that partially comply with the principles.
ISSN:2071-1050
2071-1050
DOI:10.3390/su14127206