Advertisement

Integrated reporting and the performativity of intellectual capital

  • Silvano Corbella
  • Cristina Florio
  • Alice Francesca Sproviero
  • Riccardo StacchezziniEmail author
Article

Abstract

The research investigates how intellectual capital (IC) is problematised in the context of integrated reporting. Drawing on a performative approach to IC, the paper explores the role of organisational actors in defining, classifying and valuing IC within the process of preparing an integrated report (IR). The analysis relies on in-depth interviews with IR preparers of a European oil and gas company that has been issuing IRs since 2012 and considers IC to be a core element of its business model and value creation story. The case study reveals that IC definition, classification and valuation stimulate ongoing interaction among various actors. An active role is played by the staff of the department responsible for the IR preparation process, but also by organisational actors who are not directly involved in this process and by external actors, such as the company’s peers, IIRC representatives and the company’s accounting advisors. Some sketches, matrixes and maps inspired by the IIRC Framework (i.e., the business model sketch, the KPIs matrix and the connectivity map) were pivotal in defining concepts and categories of IC and its connection to value creation, although the quantification of IC’s effect on value creation remains disputed. In showing how organisational actors problematise and engage with IC inscriptions within the process of IR preparation, the paper enriches the scant research that examines the performativity of IC in the context of corporate external reporting and answers the call for more research on how IC affects the management of organisations.

Keywords

Intellectual capital Integrated reporting Performative approach Connectivity maps Oil and gas company 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the guest editors and the reviewers for their insightful comments. The authors also recognize the kind availability of the Financial Reporting manager and other interviewees at the case study company. In its earlier version, the article benefited from the feedback provided by the attendees at the IX Financial Reporting Workshop (Bologna, June 2018) and the 13th Interdisciplinary Workshop on «Intangibles & Intellectual Capital». Value creation, integrated reporting and governance (Ancona, September 2017). The authors are thankful to the scientific committee of this latter workshop for conferring a Special Mention. While the paper is the result of a joint effort of the authors, Silvano Corbella wrote Section 4.3 (with Cristina Florio), Cristina Florio wrote Sections 3, 4.1 and 4.3 (this latter with Silvano Corbella), Alice Francesca Sproviero wrote Sections 4.2 and 6, and Riccardo Stacchezzini wrote Sections 1, 2 and 5.

Funding

The research benefited from funds obtained within the “Ricerca di Base 2015” project of the University of Verona (Italy).

References

  1. Abeysekera, I. (2013). A template for integrated reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(2), 227–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abhayawansa, S. (2014). A review of guidelines and frameworks on external reporting of intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 100–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abhayawansa, S., Aleksanyan, M., & Cugasan, S. (2018). Conceptualisation of intellectual capital in analysists’ narratives: A performative view. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(3), 950–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boedker, C. (2010). Ostensive versus performative approaches for theorising accounting-strategy research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(5), 595–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bukh, P. N., Larsen, H. T., & Mouritsen, J. (2001). Constructing intellectual capital statements. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17(1), 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catasús, B., Ersson, S., Gröjer, J. E., & Wallentin, F. Y. (2007). What gets measured gets… on indicating, mobilizing and acting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(4), 505–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Catasús, B., & Gröjer, J.-E. (2006). Indicators: On visualizing, classifying and dramatizing. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(2), 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiucchi, M. S., & Montemari, M. (2016). Investigating the “fate” of Intellectual Capital indicators: A case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(2), 238–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chiucchi, S. M. (2013). Measuring and reporting intellectual capital: Lessons learnt from some interventionist research projects. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(3), 395–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Villiers, C., & Sharma, U. (2017). A critical reflection on the future of financial, intellectual capital, sustainability and integrated reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2017.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dumay, J. (2016). A critical reflection on the future of intellectual capital: From reporting to disclosure. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(1), 168–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dumay, J., & Garanina, T. (2013). Intellectual capital research: A critical examination of the third stage. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(1), 10–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dumay, J., & Rooney, J. (2011). “Measuring for managing?” An IC practice case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), 344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feng, T., Cummings, L., & Tweedie, D. (2017). Exploring integrated thinking in integrated reporting—An exploratory study in Australia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), 330–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giuliani, M. (2016). Sensemaking, sensegiving and sensebreaking: The case of intellectual capital measurements. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(2), 218–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guthrie, J., Ricceri, F., & Dumay, J. (2012). Reflections and projections: A decade of intellectual capital accounting research. The British Accounting Review, 44(2), 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). (2013). International Integrated Reporting Framework. http://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2018.
  19. Lai, A., Melloni, G., & Stacchezzini, R. (2018). Integrated reporting and narrative accountability: The role of preparers. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(5), 1381–1405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Latour, B. (1986). The power of association. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, actions and belief: A new sociology of knowledge (pp. 264–280). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  21. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor network-theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Marr, B., Schiuma, G., & Neely, A. (2004). The dynamics of value creation: Mapping your intellectual performance drivers. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 312–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Melloni, G. (2015). Intellectual capital disclosure in integrated reporting: An impression management analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(3), 661–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mouritsen, J. (2006). Problematising intellectual capital research: Ostensive versus performative IC. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(6), 820–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mouritsen, J., Larsen, H. T., & Bukh, P. N. (2001). Intellectual capital and the ‘capable firm’: Narrating, visualising and numbering for managing knowledge. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(7–8), 735–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schultze, U., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2010). Research commentary—Virtual worlds: A performative perspective on globally distributed, immersive work. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 810–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Stewart, T. (1997). Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations. London: Nicholas Brealey.Google Scholar
  28. Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The new organizational wealth: Managing & measuring knowledge-based assets. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Veltri, S., & Bronzetti, G. (2015). A critical analysis of the intellectual capital measuring, managing, and reporting practices in the non-profit sector: Lessons learnt from a case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. World Intellectual Capital/Assets Initiative (WICI). (2016). WICI intangibles reporting framework. Version 1.0. http://www.wici-global.com/wirf/WICI_Intangibles_Reporting_Framework_v1.0.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2018.
  31. Yu, A., Garcia-Lorenzo, L., & Kourti, I. (2017). The role of Intellectual Capital Reporting (ICR) in organisational transformation: A discursive practice perspective. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 45, 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zambon, S. (2016). Ten years after: The past, the present and the future of scholarly investigation on intangibles and intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(1), 45–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of VeronaVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations