Swinburne Library

http://www.swinburne.edu.au/lib

Author: Elijido-Ten, Evangeline O.

Title: Determinants of strategic performance
measurement system disclosures in Australia’s
top100 publicly listed firms
Year: 2013
Journal: ournal of General Management
Volume: 38
Issue: 4
Pages: pp. 57-73

These details can be used to create a citation. Check with your department or school to see which
style is required.

Harvard style guide: http://www.swinburne.edu.au/lib/studyhelp/harvard_style.html

Swinburne University of Technology | CRICOS Provider 00111D | swinburne.edu.au

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Determinants of strategic
performance measurenrient
system disclosures in
Australia's Top 100 publicly
listed firms
Evangeline O. Elijicjo-Ten
Faculty of Business and Enterprise, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia

A strategic performance measurement system (SPMS) enables firms to translate strategies,

objectives and targets into an integrated set of financial and non-financial measures covering a
range of perspectives. The purpose of this study is to investigate the determinants of SPMS
disclosures by examining whether significant relationships exist between voluntary SPMS
disclosure practice and various corporate characteristics including profitability, age, size and
industry. It also aims to explore whether uncertainty in the business environment arising from
the onset of the global financial crisis may affect disclosure decisions. Content analysis of
publicly available data is conducted focusing on the Top 100 publicly listed firms in Australia.
Logistic regressions are used to test the hypotheses developed based on the predictions from
voluntary disclosure and socio-political theories. The results show that firm age, size and
industry prominence are significantly related to SPMS disclosures. However, the suggestion
that business uncertainty may affect SPMS disclosures is not supported.

Introduction
Strategic performance measurement systems (SPMS) allow firms to system-
atically define strategies and objectives over a range of perspectives and enables
management to supplement financial metrics with a diverse mix of non-
financial performance measures. The ubiquity of SPMS adoption (see Rigby
and Bilodeau, 2011) may have been prompted by the growing concern about
the inadequacy of financial measures to evaluate organisational performance
(Dearden, 1969; Johnson and Kaplan, 1987: Fisher, 1995a) but numerous
studies later attest to its multi-faceted benefits. For example, prior studies
show that SPMS helps shape the processes needed in strategy formulation
(Bourne, etal, 2000; Gimbert etal, 2010; Bisbe and Malagueño, 2012). Other
studies highlight the benefits of successful SPMS implementation such as
improved communication, better alignment of measures and enhanced
execution of intended strategies thereby enabling effective follow-up (Kaplan
and Norton, 2000; 2004; Garengo, etal, 2005; Yu, etal, 2008). There are also

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd.-Journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 57-73
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

numerous studies attesting to the beneficial impact of SPMS on overall firm

performance (Hoque and James, 2000; Davis and Albright, 2004; DeBusk and
Crabtree, 2006; De Geuser, et al, 2009). Contingency and economic theories
have formed the foundation for many of these studies. Proponents of
contingency theory assert that management control systems must be aUgned
with organisational mission and strategy (see Fisher, 1995b). Economic
theorists, on the other hand, claim that the design of the firm's communi-
cation and reward systems should be a function of its strategy (see Milgrom
and Roberts, 1992). Both theories are used to argue that an important factor in
managing links between strategy and performance is the identification and
measurement of the drivers that lead to firm value (Ittner and Larcker, 2001).
In line with this argument, Ittner, et al. (2003, p. 719) advocate that:
By linking strategies to their underlying value drivers and tying information
systems, goals and objectives, resource allocation, and performance evalu-
ation to these drivers, SPM systems are expected to improve communication
of the specific actions... motivate performance... and provide more rapid
feedback..."
Drawing from the notion ofimproving communication, Ittner, etal. (2003)
and others (e.g. Gates, 1999; Eccles, et al, 2001) propose that value driver
analysis, in particular, and the SPMS literature, in general, should not only
influence the design and use of measurement systems but should also affect
external disclosure requirements. It is this area of SPMS research that has been
left unattended and is the focus of this exploratory study. Motivated by the
information needs of report users, this study seeks to extend SPMS research
into the voluntary disclosure literature. To make sound judgements and
decisions, the users of company reports demand more transparency and
access to useful corporate information. However, given the costs involved in
the provision of such disclosures, report providers may not be willing to
disclose unless this action is perceived to add value to their firm or to deflect
additional costs arising from possible sanctions and/or mandatory require-
ments. Prior studies (e.g. Healy and Palepu, 2001) provide evidence that
reporting entities seek to lower their cost of capital by reducing information
asymmetry. Consequently, the voluntary provision of relevant corporate
information becomes the antidote for information asymmetry and the hall-
mark of transparency as alluded to in the voluntary disclosure literature. In
this regard, the purpose of this study is to investigate the determinants of
SPMS disclosures by examining whether significant relationships exist be-
tween voluntary corporate disclosure practice arid various corporate char-
acteristics including profitability, age, size and industry. This research also
aims to explore whether uncertainty in the business environment is associated
with disclosure practice. As SPMS usage becomes more ubiquitous, not only
as a performance measurement mechanism but also as a vehicle for improved
communication, there is much insight to be gained in exploring the char-
acteristics of firms likely to provide SPMS disclosures. The focus on this
research is the ToplOO Australian publicly .listed companies (ToplOO)
according to Standard & Poor's/Australian Stock Exchange (S&P/ASX)
2009. index. Australia's ToplOO largest firms, are chosen for two reasons.

58 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

Firstly, previous studies show that-large and highly visible companies are the
ones likely to provide more disclosure as a result of increasing public pressure
and because they are likely to have available resources by virtue of their size.
Secondly, it is insightful to explore the SPMS disclosure practices of Australian
firms since this country is one of the very few developed countries that has not
been so badly hit by the most recent global financial crisis (GFC). In an
attempt to explore whether the 2008 GFC has affected corporate disclosure
behaviour, SPMS disclosures are collated through content analysis of com-
pany websites and publicly available reports covering three years from 2007 to
2009, i.e. before, during and after the GFG. The logistic regression results show
that firm profitability, size, age and industry prominence are significantly
related to SPMS disclosures. Suggestions that business uncertainty, i.e. onset
of the global financial crisis rnay affect SPMS disclosures are not supported.
The paper proceeds as follows. The next section provides a short review of the
relevant literature which leads to hypothesis development. An explanation of
the research design precedes the discussion of results. Finally, the summary
and concluding comments are offered together with suggestions for future
studies. .

Brief review of relevant literature

SPMS is the term commonly Used in management accounting to describe
systems that translate strategies and objectives into an integrated set of
financial and non-financial measures (Chenhall, 2005). The 'performance
pyramid' (Lynch and Cross, 1991) and 'performance prisms' (Neely et al,
2002) are just some SPMS examples but the most well-known SPMS is the
balanced scorecard (Kaplan and Norton, 1992; 1996; 2004; Langfield-Smith,
et al, 2012) and possibly its evolved form, sustainability balanced scorecard
(see e.g. Figge; et al, 2002; Elijido-Ten and Tjan, 2012). According to the
literature (see, e.g. Kaplan and Norton, 1992,2000; Garengo, etal, 2005; Bisbe
and Malagueño, 2012), SPMS has certain distinct features including, but not
limited to: 1) the presence of long-term strategies over a number of per-
spectives such as financial, customer, business process and infrastructure; 2)
the translation of operational goals and objectives into financial and non-
financial measures; and 3) the integration of a sequence of actions/initiatives,
targets and metrics that are causally linked. As noted earlier, there is a
substantial body of literature identifying the advantages of adopting SPMS
such as strategic alignment and greater measurement diversity leading to
increased operational efficiencies. Whilst some studies highlight the positive
impact of SPMS adoption on financial and operating performance (Davis and
Albright, 2004; Crabtree and DeBusk, 2008), others consider the linkages and
effectiveness of SPMS implementation to strategy (re)formulation, value
drivers and its impact on managers' understanding of strategies (Hoque
and James, 2000; Iselin, etal, 2008; Yu, Perera and Crowe, 2008; Aranda and
Arellano, 2010; Bisbe and Malagueño, 2012). Prior studies examining the
value relevance of SPMS, i.e. its impact on shareholder returns (Ittner, etal,
2003; Crabtree and DeBusk, 2008) appear to have mixed results. Ittner et al
(2003) examine BSC implementation from a sample of US financial service

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 59
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

firms using a dichotomous variable ('yes' for BSC adopters and 'no' for non-
adopters). They find no evidence that BSC adoption is associated with stock
market returns although they acknowledge the existence of a time lag between
BSC adoption and improved performance. In contrast, Crabtree and DeBusk
(2008) investigate BSC usage in the three-year period following implementa-
tion. Using data fi-om an online survey of the Institute of Management
Accountants members, BSC-users are matched with non-users based on
various criteria, including industry. They report that BSC-users significantly
outperformed their non-user industry counterparts.
Hoque and James' (2000) survey of 66 Australian manufacturing compa-
nies provides evidence that greater SPMS usage is associated with improved
performance. They also report that larger firms make more use of SPMS.
Another Australian study, derived from interviews, with 50 CEOs from
manufacturing firms, confirms that the strength of the alignment of strategic
goals and the performance reporting system is positively associated with
performance (Iselin et al, 2008). Similarly, a survey of Australian manu-
facturing firm managers reveals that those who' believe that their SPMS
measures are linked to strategy and are causally affecting each other also
perceive a higher level of SPMS effectiveness (Yu et al, 2008). Aranda and
Arellano (2010), in their European bank managers' study, report that SPMS
brought about change in managers' beliefs by increasing the importance
placed on the measures in each SPMS perspective thereby aligning perform-
ance with strategic priorities. Finally, Bisbe and Malagueno's (2012) study of
267 Spanish companies conclude that SPMS positively influences firm
performance not only via its implementation but also through the shaping
of strategic decision arrays resulting from (re)formulation of intended strat-
egies. From this brief review of relevant studies, it is clear that the SPMS
literature is replete with research focussing on its usefulness and its beneficial
impact on company performance. What is missing, however, are studies
examining the external communication aspect of SPMS adoption. This is
where the link to voluntary public disclosure is understood as appropriate.
Although seemingly unrelated, the environmental/sustainability reporting
literature offers meaningful insights to extend the SPMS research. Over the
past few decades, the sustainability reporting literature has proliferated (Gray
etal, 1995a; Deegan etal, 2002; KPMG, 2008). Clarkson etal (2008) classify
the environmental accounting research into three groups: 1) strategic factors
affecting the firm's decision to disclose environmental information; 2) the
relationship between environmental performance and disclosure; and 3) the
value relevance of environmental performance information. Indeed, it is
interesting to note the similarities between these research groupings and those
of prior research in the SPMS adoption literature. In the same manner that
sustainability reports of all kinds have continued to increase over time
(KPMC, 2008), it is reasonable to expect that SPMS public disclosure will
also increase. But which companies are likely to provide SPMS disclosure? The
theoretical foundation for this study emerges from the environmental/
sustainability reporting literature.

60 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

Theoretical foundation and hypotheses

development /
Two sets of theories aré deemed useful in this study: the voluntary disclosure
theory and the socio-political théories. Advocates of voluntary disclosure theory
propose that firms with 'good news' have greater incentives to disclose their
'superior type' to distinguish themselves from the poor performing firms
(Verrècchia, 1983; Dye, 1985). The theory states that inferior performers will
have difficulty mimicking the disclosure activity of superior performers
because of proprietary costs associated with disclosure. Consequently, it is
suggested that 'good performers' are likely to disclose more in order to
differentiate themselves from the 'inferior performers' who are likely to
disclose less and remain silent. The voluntary disclosure theory is later appUed
to environmental reporting studies (see Li et al, 1997; Bewley and Li, 2000;
Clarkson et al, 2008) predicting a positive relationship between voluntary
environmental disclosures and proactive environmental strategies. Turning to
its application to SPMS disclosure, it seems logical to expect that firm stability
and SPMS disclosure would be positively associated. There is sufficient
evidence in the literature confirming that firms with SPMS in place have
better monitoring of strategic progress leading to strong and stable oper-
ational and financial performance. Firm profitability and age have been used
in previous studies as indicators of stability. In this regard, companies with
stable earnings per share and those that have been in business for a long period
of time are likely to disclose their SPMS adoption to signal their 'superior
type'. From this, the follov«ng hypotheses are developed (in alternate form):
HI: SPMS disclosure and corporate profitability are positively asso-
_ ciated
:,H2: SPMS disclosiire and company age are positively associated
•Whilst the voluntary disclosure theory has an intuitive appeal, additional
insights are offered by the overlapping socio-political theories which in the
literature include' such theories as political economy, legitimacy theory and
stakeholder theory. Collectively, these theories suggest that voluntary social
disclosure is a function of the political and social pressure faced by the firm
(see, for example, Lindblom, 1994; Gray et al, 1995b; O'Donovan, 2002;
Patten, 2002; Elijido-Ten, 2008; 2009). Therefore, as a firm faces more public
scrutiny possibly due to the nature and size of its operations, the pressure to
provide more disclosure • also increases. In the environmental reporting
literature, these theories collectively suggest a negative association between
disclosure and environmental performance (see Wiseman, 1982; Freedman
and Jaggi, 1996; Hughes, Anderson and Golden, 2001; Patten, 2002; Clarkson,
etal, 2008). This is because as societal/political pressures and legitimacy are
threatened due to unsustainable practices (i.e. poor environmental perform-
ance), the company's incentive to provide more disclosure is heightened. In
this study, the application of this prediction would suggest that SPMS
disclosure is a function of the political and social pressures encountered by
the firm. By virtue of their size, large firms have a wider general audience
interested in their overall activity for varied reasons. For example, current and/

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. Journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 61
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten.

or prospective investors/financiers would,be interested in the firm's financial

stability while others such as government agencies and special interest groups
would scrutinise both its economic and social/environmental performance.
Likewise, companies in highly prominent industries characterised by intense
competition and high level of political risk (e.g. environmentally sensitive
industries) are more likely to have strong public visibility. To the extent that
large companies and those that belong to prominent industries face more
societal scrutiny, thesefirmswould have more incentive to align their strategic
goals with their performance measurement systems and disclose their SPMS.
The literature suggests that such action is geared towards changing public
perceptions/expectations, deflecting attention from an issue of concern and/
or educating the public about change in their operational performance (see
e.g. Lindblom, 1994; Clarkson, etal 2008). Therefore, it is intuitive that SPMS
adoption and its subsequent disclosures are related to societal pressures. Thus,
the following hypotheses are introduced (stated in alternate form):
H3: SPMS disclosure and firm size are positively associated
H4: SPMS disclosure and industry prominence are positively asso-
ciated
Finally, to explore whether disclosure decisions are related to business
uncertainty, SPMS disclosures before, during and after the GFC period are
examined, i.e. 2007,2008 and 2009. Given the massive turbulence introduced
to the business environment by the GFC, it is conceivable that if SPMS
disclosure is affected by business uncertainty, a significant change in dis-
closure behaviour will be observed during these three years. The following
hypothesis is tested (in alternate form):
H5: SPMS disclosure and business uncertainty are significantly
associated

Research design
Data collection
This research is an archival-empirical study, using publicly available data^fi-om
corporate reports. Previous studies examining SPMS association with other
variables such as size and market/economic factors (Hoque and James, 2000;
Ittner, etal, 2003; Iselin, et al, 2008) focus mainly on SPMS adoption and not
on voluntary public disclosure. Most of these studies use datafi-ominterviews
and surveys. As such, the coverage of their research is limited to those firms
willing to participate in the study. To avoid this constraint, this study uses
publicly available data from corporate reports. Being exploratory, a preli-
minary word search from DatAnalysis database is conducted to find whether
SPMS disclosures are provided by Australian listed companies using terms
such as 'performance measurement system'; 'balanced scorecard' and other
variations. Subsequent analysis reveals that SPMS disclosing firms are all in the
2009 Top 100 publicly listed companies in Australia according to SandP/ASX
index. Thus, a decision is made to focus on the Top 100. To enable a
comparison before, during and after the GFC-onset, data on firm disclosures

62 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement Systerh disclosures?

is collected for three years from 2007 to 2009 and content analysis is conducted
on publicly available reports such as the annual reports (including concise or
interim reports), shareholder review report, sustainability/environmental
reports, social impact/stakeholder report and other relevant corporate website
documents. Industry, age and financial data including total revenue and
earnings per share are gathered from FinAnalysis and MintGlobàl databases.

SPMS disclosure model

Ordinal and binary logistic regressions are conducted using the following
model:
Ord-SPMS,-,/.Bin-SPMS;, = ßo + ßiEPS3Av,-, .^ ßzAGE.t H-ßsSIZE,-,+ß4+INDY,-
ßsPre-GFCi+ßsPost-GFC+e

Where:
ßo = Intercept;
Ord-SPMS,-, = Ordinal strategic performance measurement system
(SPMS) disclosure for firm i in period P,2 = Full SPMS
disclosure; 1 = Partial SPMS disclosure; 0 = No SPMS
disclosure;
Bin-SPMS,-, • = Binary strategic performance measurement system
(SPMS) disclosure for firm i in period i-, 1 = Full SPMS
disclosure; 0 = No/Partial SPMS disclosure;
EPS3Av,t = Earnings per share 3-year average for firm i in period t,
AGE.t . Age since incorporation for firm i in period t;
SIZE;,. = Na1:ural log for total revenue for firm i in period ^,
INDY; = Presence of firm i in prominent industry at period t; 1
for firms in energy, utilities, transportation, mining,
Pharmaceuticals and telecommunication industry; 0
otherwise;
Pre-GFC¡ = Period before the global financial crisis for firm i; 1 for
2007; 0 otherwise;
Post-GFCj = Period after the global financial crisis for firm i; 1 for
2009; 0 otherwise;
e — error term

Variable measurement
SPhAS disclosure
The dependent variable for the SPMS disclosure model is determined through
content analysis of reports provided by thefirmsin their company website and
other publicly available corporate reports. Since the main focus in this study is
SPMS public reporting, a systematic process of coding to analyse patterns,
meanings and themes (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005; Zhang and Wildemuth,
2009) is considered more appropriate rather than the mere counting ofwords.
A set of criteria, derived from the relevant SPMS literature, is used in the
coding process. These criteria and their explanations are provided as follows:
• Strategy statement and measures in multiple perspectives. Having a strat-
egy statement is the most basic criterion that must be met before a
company is considered to be an SPMS discloser. To meet this criterion.

) 20 i 3 The Braybrooi<e Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 63
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

the disclosure must state strategies, objectives and measures over a range of
areas such as financial, customer/market, business process, staff, health,
environment and community/sustainability perspectives.
• Backward-looking statements linked to-strategies. This criterion is met
when the disclosure states whether past initiatives targets and measures are
linked to stated strategies over a range of perspectives, regardless of
whether or not they have been achieved.
• Forward-looking statements linked to strategies. To satisfy this criterion,
the disclosure has to indicate future/planned actions and targets and how
these are linked to strategy statements in a range of perspectives.
All three criteria must be met before a firm is considered a fuU-SPMS
discloser and awarded a score of 2 for Ord-SPMS or a 1 for Bin-SPMS. A
company that satisfies at least one criterion (but not all) is considered a
partial-SPMS discloser and given a score of 1 for Ord-SPMS or 0 for Bin-
SPMS. Firms not meeting any of the criteria are considered a non-SPMS
discloser and coded 0 under both Ord-SPMS and Bin-SPMS models.

Profitability
In this study, the focus is on understanding the determinants of SPMS
disclosure to ascertain whether firms with stable profitability have greater
propensity to disclose. Prior studies use various forms of proxy for financial
performance, such as return on assets (e.g. Roberts, 1992) and shareholder
returns (e.g. Ittner, etal., 2003; Crabtree and Debusk, 2008) recognising a time
lag. To capture stability in profitability and take into account the time lag as in
prior research, the three-year-average earnings per share (EPS3Av) is used as
proxy for profitability. For example, for the year 2008, EPS from 2006 to 2008
are added and divided by three years.

Age
Previous studies (e.g. Roberts, 1992) suggest that as a corporation matures, its
reputation and history can become entrenched. Thus, another proxy for
corporate stability is age, which is measured as the number of years since the
firm's incorporation.

Size
The size of the firm can be measured in a number of ways such as total assets,
number of employees, sales revenue and market capitalisation. In this study,
the natural log of total revenue is used to proxy for size consistent with prior
accounting research (Hoque and James, 2000; Elijido-Ten, 2009; Habib,
2010).

Industry prominence
Previous research suggests that industry classification captures certain system-
atic relations between consumer visibility and other associated risks that could
lead to regulatory intervention. Various studies have shown that some
industries such as those in the oil, electronic computing, chemical, pulp

64 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of Generat Management ' Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

and paper, mining, electricity,.pharmaceuticals arid textiles (e.g. Wiseman,

1986; Roberts, 1992;Hughes, 2000; Clarkson, etal.;Q.OOá\ Liu and Anbumozhi,
2009) face unique societal pressures. Based on this hst, a perusal of the
industries included in this study shows that the energy, utilities, transporta-
tion, Pharmaceuticals, materials (which include mining) and telecommuni-
cation industries have the most intuitive appeal to be categorised in the high
profile industries because of their inherent.exposure to political risks, general
public visibility and intense competition among others. Thus, industry
prominence (INDY) is a dichotomous variable. A score of 1 is awarded to
firms that belong to high profile industries and 0 for companies in non-
prominent industries.

Business uncertainty
Given the substantial costs involved in providing disclosures, it is conceivable
that firms may choose not to be extravagant iri their disclosure particularly in
periods of financial distress and economic uncertainty. Business uncertainty
brought about by the 2008 GFC is included in the model to determine whether
general economic turbulence is related to voluntary corporate disclosure
behaviour. Since most Australian companies use 30th Junie balance dates, it
can be argued that using 2008 as proxy for uncertainty may not refiect the
trough of the GFC. As such, the years before and after the 2008 GFG are used as
proxy to analyse business uncertainty, i.e. 2007 for pre-GFG and 2009 for post-
GFC period.

Results and discussion

Descriptive statistics
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics. Panel A contains the continuous
variables whilst Panel B has the indicator variables. The three-year average
earnings per share (EPS3Av) has a maximum (minimum) of 683.07 (-55.43)
and a mean (standard deviation) of 79.91 (103.47). Mean average age is about
50 years with a maximum (minimum) of 174 (two) years and standard
deviation of 42.79. The natural logs of total revenues have a minimum of 4.49,
maximum of 11.02, a mean of 9.49 and a standard deviation of 0.83. Despite
the fact that Australia has not been as badly hit by the global financial crisis
compared to other countries such as the US and many European countries, the
descriptive statistics suggest that Austraha's ToplOO firms have not been
immune to the crisis. The wide range in EPS3Av of 738.50 indicates high
volatility in EPS over the three years covered. Panel B shows that when SPMS
disclosure is considered as a binary variable, less than half of the firms ( 127 or
42.33%) are considered as full S P M S disclosers. Ord-SPMS data show that of
the remaining companies (173 or 57.67%), 62 firms are partial SPMS-
disclosers while 111 are identified as non-disclosers. The descriptive statistics
also show that only 46% (138) of the firms included in the sample belong to
prominent industries.

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 65
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

Table I: Descriptive statistics

Panel A: Continuous Variables
Variable Variable Description Range Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
Deviation
EPS3AV Earnings Per Share 3-year Average 738.50 -55.43 683.07 79.91 103.47
AGE Age since incorporation 172 2 174 50.31 42.79
SIZE Natural log of total revenue 6.53 4.49 11.02 9.49 0.83

Panel B: Indicator Variables

Variable Variable Description Number of Number of Number of
Firms with 2 Firms with 1 Firms with 0
Ord-SPMS Ordinal strategic performance measurement 127 62 111
system (SPMS) disclosure; 2 = Full SPMS
disclosure; 1 = Partial SPMS disclosure; 0 = No
SPMS disclosure
Bin-SPMS Binary strategic performance measurement system 127 173
(SPMS) disclosure; 1 = Full SPMS disclosure; 0 =
No/Partial SPMS disclosure;
INDY Industry Prominence: 1 for firms in the energy, 138 162
transportation, mining, pharmaceutical and
utilities industries; 0 otherwise
Pre-GFC Pre-Global Financial Crisis: Period before the - 100 . 200
global financial crisis, i.e. 1=2007; 0 otherwise
Post-GFC Post-Global Financial Crisis: Period afi:er the 100 200
global financial crisis, i.e. 1=2009; 0 otherwise

Bivariate correlation results

Table 2 displays the parametric Pearson's product moment correlation (see
the bottom left side of Table 2) and Spearman's rank coefficients (top right
side of the table). Pearson's correlation is not suitable for categorical variables
because of its strict assumptions about normality and linearity of variables.
Spearman's correlation is the non-parametric alternative to correlation that
works by converting each variable to ranks (Tabachnik and Fiddell, 2001). As
revealed in the results, the significance levels shown in non-parametric
measure coincide with the Pearson's correlation indicating robustness of
results. There is no indication of an unacceptable level of multicollinearity
because the highest correlation coefficient between predictor variables is 0.31
and 0.38 for Pearson and Spearman, respectively. A number of statistics
experts (see, for example, Hair etal. 1998; Tabachnik and Fidell, 2001) agree
that a harmful level of multicollinearity is not present until the correlation
coefficient reaches around 0.80 or 0.90. The panel data correlation results also
show the bivariate association between the dependent variable and the
predictor variables. As expected, SPMS is significantly and positively related
to EPS3yrAv, AGE, SIZE and INDY at the significance level of p < 0.01.
However, the proxies for GFC (Pre-GFC and Post-GFC) are not significant.

66 I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement Systerh disclosures?

Table 2: Correlations
Variable Description SPMS EPS3yr Age Size Indy Pre-GFC Post-
GFC
SPMS Strategic Performance 1 • 0.258* • 0.263* 0.359* 0.244* -0.059 0.062
Measurement Sy'stem' (SPMS)
disclosure; 2 =fiiUSPMS
disclosure; 1 = partial SPMS
disclosure; 0 = no SPMS
disclosure '.
EPS3yr Earnings per share 3-year 0.280* 1 0.421* 0.380* -0.164* -0.025 -0.003
Av average . , ,,
Age Age since incorporation '' ' 0.195* 0.201* 1 0.219* -0.050 -0.034 0.034
Size Natural log of total revenue 0.325* 0.314* 0.186* 1 -0.169* -0.048 0.049
Indy Industry prominence: 1 for 0.246* , 0.022 -0.056 -0.224* 1 0.000 0.000
firms in the energy,
transportation, mining,
pharmaceutical and utilities
industries; 0 otherwise
Pre-GFC Pre-Global Financial Crisis: -0.058 -0.033 -0.017 -0.053 0.000 1 -0.500*
period before the global
financial crisis, i.e. 1 = 2009;
0 otherwise
Post- Post-Global Financial Crisis: 0.061 0.004 0.017 0.075 0.000 -0.500* • 1- ••
GFC period after the global financial
crisis, i.e. 1 - 2009; 0 otherwise
* Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Note: Pearson's coefficient is shown in the lower left while Spearman's Rho is shown on the upper right side of the table.

Logistic regression results

The hypotheses developed in this study, HI to H5, are tested using the panel
data covering three years from 2007 to 2009. Ordinal logistic regression takes
into account inherent ordering of outcome levels (Kleinbaum and Klein,
2010). Thus, in order to make foil use of the ordered nature of SPMS data in
this study; i.e. from no disclosure to partial and full disclosures, this variation
of logistic regression is used consistent with previous voluntary disclosure
studies (see, e.g. Roberts, 1992; Legendre and Coderre, 2013). The ordinal
logistic results are shown in Panel A of Table 3. The empirical model has a Chi-
square score statistic of 87.813 with 6 degrees of freedom significant at less
than 0.0001 level. The Cox and Snell and Nagelkerke pseudo R^ are 0.258 and
0.294, respectively. Pseudo R^ for logistic regression is interpreted thé same
way as in ordinary least squares regression. This means that the model explains
around 26% to 30% of the variability in the dependent variable. The model
predicts 71.4% of the observations correctly. In addition, the Pearson and
Deviance goodness-of-fif tests have significance level greater than 0.05
implying that the model's estimates fit the data at an acceptable level. With
the exception of the GFC proxies, all the independent variables are signific-
antly associated to SPMS" disclosures. EPS3Av (profitability) and AGE are

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd.Journal of General Management • Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 67
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

positively related to SPMS disclosure at the significance level of p < 0.01 and
p < 0.05, respectively, in line with the predictions in HI and H2. These results
provide support for the. voluntary disclosure theory confirming that firms
with 'good news' have greater incentive to provide more SPMS disclosures.
SPMS disclosure is also found to be significantly associated to firm SIZE and
INDY at p < 0.0001 providing strong support for H3 and H4. The positive sign
for SIZE suggests that larger firms are indeed providing more SPMS disclosure
publicly. For INDY, the negative sign in the coefficient implies that firms in
highly prominent industries have higher propensity to disclose. Hence, the
prediction fi-om socio-political theories that large firms and those in high
profile industries, are more likely to provide disclosures in publicly available
media is supported in the analysis. To check the robustness of the results, binary
logistic regression is also conducted. As noted earUer, partial and no SPMS
disclosures are collapsed into one category in the binary model. The results,
shown in Panel B, confirm thefindingsfrom the ordinal regression model. Size
and industry are strongly related to SPMS disclosures at the significance level
p < 0.0001. Profitability and age are also significant albeit at slightly higher p-
values, i.e. p = 0.017 and p = 0.095, respectively. Thus, both the ordinal and
binary models provide support for HI to H4. The odds ratios for the binary
logistic results are also presented in Panel B. It is worth noting that the odds
ratios for all the significant predictor variables are more than one. Tabachnik
and Fidell (2001, p. 548) explain that odds ratio is 'the increase (or decrease if the
ratio is less than one) in odds ofbeing in one outcome category when the value of
the predictor increases by one unit'. Hence for example, the odds ratio for INDY
indicates that the odds of afirmprovidingfiiUSPMS disclosure are 4.302 times
higher forfirmsin a highly prominent industry. Andfinally,under both ordinal
and binary models, the results reveal that the proxies for business uncertainty
(Pre- and Post-GFC) are not significant. This suggests that SPMS disclosure
decisions are not associated to the turbulence in the business environment.
Thus, H5 is not supported.

Summary and concluding comments

The purpose of this study is to examine the determinants of SPMS disclosure
among Australia's ToplOO listed companies through an examination of the
relationship between SPMS disclosures and various firm characteristics. It also
aims to explore whether uncertainties in the business environment infiuence
disclosure decisions. Drawing fi-om the predictions of voluntary disclosure
theory and the overlapping socio-political theories, hypotheses are developed
and tested using logistic regressions. The analyses conducted find support for
four of the five hypotheses tested. The prediction from voluntary disclosure
theory that firms with 'good news' are more likely to convey their 'superior
type' through voluntary public disclosure is reaffirmed by the results. The
three-year average earning per share and age since incorporation are found to
be significant and positively associated with disclosure behaviour. Size and
industry prominence are also found to be significantly related to SPMS
disclosure confirming the predictions from socio-political theories that large
companies and those that belong to highly prominent industries are more

68 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Managehient Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

Table 3: Logistic regression results

Panel A: Ordinal Logistic Results (N=300) <

Dependent Variable = Ordinal SPMS: 2=FuU SPMS; l=Pártial SPMS; 0=No SPMS Disclosure
Variable Name and Description Coefficient Standard Wald Chi- p-value
Error square (Sig.)
Dependent Variable: SPMS Threshold ,
SPMS = O •• ' • 7.244 -1.667 18.885 0.000
SPMS = 1 8.330' 1.685 24.440 0.000
Independent Variables:
EPS3Av: Earnings Per Share 3-year Average 0.005 0.002 8.510 0.004
AGE: Age since incorporation • 0.006 0.003 3.949 0.047
SIZE: Natural log of total revenue 0.868 0.179 "23.474 0.000
INDY: Industry Prominence: 1 for firms in the -1.576 0.261 36.475 0.000
energy, transportation, mining, pharmaceutical
and utilities industries; 0 otherwise
Pre-GFC: Period before the global financial crisis, 0.035 0.288 0.015 0.903
i.e. 1=2007; 0 otherwise
Post-GFC: Period after the global financial crisis, -0.134 0.289 0.216 0.642
i.e. 1 = 2009; 0 otherwise
Model chi-square = 87.813 with 6 df, significant at less than the 0.0001 level
Pseudo R^: Cox and Snell R^= 0.258; Nagelkerke R^= 0.294; 0.141

Panel B: Binary Logistic Results (N=300)

Dependent Variable = Binary SPMS Disclosure: l=Full SPMS; O=otherwise
Independent Variables Coefficient Standard p-value Odds Ratio
Error
EPS3Av: Earnings Per Share 3-year Average 0.004 0.002 0.017 1.004
AGE: Age since incorporation 0.005 0.003 0.095 1.005
SIZE: Natural log of total revenue 1.228 0.240 0.000 3.416
INDY: Industry Prominence -1.459 0.292 0.000 4.302
Pre-GFC: Period before global finaricial crisis 0.186 0.335 0.579 0.830
Post-GFC: Period after global financial crisis -0.172 0.330 0.602 1.188
Intercept -11.857 2.347 0.000 0.000
Model chi-square = 80.825 with 6 df, significant at less than the 0.0001 level
Pseudo R^: Cox and Snell R^= 0.240; Nagelkerke R^= 0.323
Correctly Classified Percentage: 71.4%

likely to disclose, quite possibly to deflect public scrutiny. However, sugges-

tions that general business uncertainties may affect SPMS disclosure are not
supported in the analysis. This finding confirms that the onset of the global
financial crisis has no immediate impact on corporate voluntary disclosures.

) 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 69
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

The resultsfi-omthis exploratory research are of interest given the insights

they provide for both the report users as well as the report providers.
Considering thé angle from the users' perspective, information asymmetry
is envisaged to decrease as more companies show willingness to report on their
SPMS implementation, thereby potentially achieving more transparency. This
should, however, be tempered by the insights drawn from the socio-political
theories that large and highly visible firms are likely to provide more
disclosures as supported in this research. As such, it is also important that
the report users be more discerning in interpreting these voluntary disclo-
sures. Turning to the report providers' point of view, the result confirming
support for voluntary disclosure theory implies that there is, indeed, an
incentive to adopt and provide SPMS disclosures to signal the company's
'superior type'. This finding, together with the increasing pressure to volun-
tarily disclose SPMS adoption could motivate firms to re-evaluate and
improve the linkages between their strategy, objectives, targets and perform-
ance measures making the favourite quote, 'what gets measured gets done'
self-fulfilling. While the insights gathered from this exploratory research can
be used for more in-depth studies, certain limitations must be acknowledged.
Although considerable efforts have been made to choose appropriate proxies
in line with the relevant literature, data constraints may limit the construct
validity of some variables. Furthermore, the inherent limitations of positivistic
empirical research to capture the complexity of numerous dimensions
influencing disclosure decisions need to be recognised. It should also be
borne in mind that the empirical tests in this study are performed on the
ToplOO Australian listed companies. As such, caution must be exercised in
terms of its generalisability. Finally, it is reiterated that the focus in this study is
on SPMS public disclosure and not the actual SPMS adoption. Therefore, it is
acknowledged that there could be some firms in the ToplOO that has SPMS in
place but may not provide SPMS disclosures. Future studies could extend the
analysis to later periods to determine whether.SPMS disclosures would
continue to proliferate in the same manner that sustainability reports increase.
Further, as sustainability and climate change become a significant public
policy issue, the extent by which a Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) is
used and disclosed byfirmswould be of general public interest. Richer insights
can be gained from case studies of firms embedding sustainability into their
SPMS.

Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to the Faculty of Business and Enterprise, Swinburne
University, for the funding provided and to Barbara Bok for her research
assistance support. Special thanks also go to Mark Bowden, Alpherhan
Babacan, Irene Tempone and Denny Meyer and the participants of the 2010
Intellectbase International Consortium for their useful comments in the
earlier draft of this paper.

70 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

References
Aranda, C. and Arellano, J. (2010), 'Strategic performance measurement systems and
managers' understanding of the strategy: Afieldresearch in a financial institution'. Journal
of Accounting and Organizational Change, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 330-358.
Bewley, K. and Li, Y. (2000), 'Disclosure of environmental information by Canadian manu-
facturing companies: A voluntary disclosure perspective'. Advances in Environmental
Accounting and Management, Vol. 1, pp. 201-226'.
Bisbe, J. and Malagueño, R. (2012), 'Using strategic performance measurement systems for
Strategy formulation: Does it work in dynamic environment?'. Management Accounting
Research, Vol. 23, pp. 296-311.
Bourne, M., Mills, J., Wilcox, M., Neely, A. and Platts, K. (2000), 'Designing, implementing and
updating performance measurement systems'. International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 20, No. 7, pp. 754-771.
Chenhall, R. (2005), 'Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic
alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: An exploratory study'.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 30, pp. 395-422.
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y, Richardson, G. D. and Vasvari, F. P. (2008), 'Revisiting the relation
between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis'.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 33, Issue 4, pp. 303-327.
Crabtree, A. D. and DeBusk, G. K. (2008), The effects of adopting the balanced scorecard on
shareholder returns. Advances in Accounting, incorporating Advances in International
Accounting, Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 8-15. . •
Davis, S. and Albright, T. (2004), 'An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard
implementation on financial performance'. Management Accounting Research, Vol. 15,
pp. 135-153.
De Geuser, F., Mooraj, S. and> Oyon, D. (2009), 'Does the balance scorecard add value?
Empirical evidence on its effect on performance', European Accounting Review, Vol. 18,
No. 1, pp. 93-122.
Dearden, J. (1969), 'The Case against ROI Control', Harvard Business Review, Vol. 47, No. 3,
pp. 124-135.
Debusk, G. K. and Crabtree, A. D. (2006), 'Does the balanced scorecard improve performance?'.
Management Accounting Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 44—48.
Deegan, C, Rankin, M. and Tobin, J. (2002), 'An examination of the corporate social and
• environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy'. Accounting,
Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 312-343.
Dye, R. A. (1985), 'Disclosure of non-proprietary information'. Journal ofAccounting Research,
Vol. 23, Spring, pp. 123-145.
Eccles, R., Herz, R. Keegan, E. and Phillips, D. (2001), The Value Reporting Revolution: Moving
Beyond the Earnings Game, New York, NY: John Wiley 8c Sons.
Elijido-Ten, E. O. (2008), 'The case for reporting pro-active environmental initiatives: A
Malaysian experiment on stakeholder influence stategies'. Issues in Social and Environmental
Accounting, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 36-60.
Elijido-Ten, E. O. (2009), 'Can stakeholder theory add to our understanding of Malaysian
environmental reporting attitudes?', Malaysian Accounting Review, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 85—
110.
Elijido-Ten, E. O. and Tjan, Y. (2012), Strategic Performance Measurement System and
Sustainability Commitment: Evidence from Australia's ToplOO Listed Eirms, LAP Lambert
Academic Publishing.
Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S. andWagner, M. (2002), 'The sustainability balanced
• scorecard - linking sustainability management to business strategy'. Business Strategy and
the Environment, Vol. 11, Issue 5, pp. 269-284.
Fisher, J. (1995a), 'Use of non-financial performance measures', in: Young, S. M. (ed.). Readings
in Management Accounting, Englewood Clififs, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp. 329-335,
Fisher, J. (1995b), 'Contingency-based research on management control systems: categor-
ization by level of complexity'. Journal of Accounting Literature, Vol. 14, pp. 24-53.

I 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. Journal of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 71
Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten

Freedman, M. and Jaggi, B. (1996) 'Association between environmental performance and

environmental disclosures: An assessment', Advances in Accounting, Vol. 14, p. 161.
Garengo, P., Biazzo, S. and Bititci, U. S. (2005), 'Performance measurement systems in SMEs: a
review for a research agenda', International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 7, No. 1,
pp. 25-47.
Gates, S. (1999), Aligning Strategic Performance Measures and Results, New York, NY: The
Conference Board.
Gimbert, X., Bisbe, J. and Mendoza, X. (2010), 'The role of performance measurement systems
in strategy formulation processes'. Long Range Planning, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 477-497.
Gray, R, Kouhy, R. and Lavers, S. (1995), 'Corporate social and environmental reporting'.
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 47-77.
Gray, R., Kouhy, R. and Lavers, S. (1995b), 'Methodological themes: Constructing a research
database of social and environmental reporting by UK Companies', Accounting, Auditing
and Accountability Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 78-101.
Habib, A. (2010), 'Value relevance of alternative accounting performance measures: Australian
evidence'. Accounting Research Journal, Vol 23, No. 3, pp. 190-212.
Hair, J. F. ]r, Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis
(5th edn.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Healy, P. M. and Palepu, K. G. (2001), 'Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the
capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature'. Journal of Accounting and
Economics, Vol. 31, No. 1-3, pp. 405-440.
Hoque, Z. and James, W. (2000), 'Linking balanced scorecard measures to size and market
factors: Impact on organizational performance'. Journal of Management Accounting
Research,yol 12, pp. 1-17.
Hsieh, H.-F. and Shannon, S. E. (2005), 'Three approaches to qualitative content analysis'.
Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 15, No. 9, pp. 1277-1288.
Hughes, K. E. (2000), 'The value relevance of nonñnancial measures of air pollution in the
electric utility industry', TTie Accounting Review, Vol. 75, Issue 2, April, pp. 209-228.
Iselin, E. R., Mia, L. and Sands, J. (2008), 'The effects of the balanced scorecard on performance:
The impact of the alignment of the strategic goals and performance reporting'. Journal of
General Management, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 71-85.
Ittner, C. Larcker, D. F. and Randall, T. (2003), 'Performance implications, of strategic
performance measurement in financial services firms'. Accounting, Organizations and
Society, Vol. 28, No. 7/8, pp. 715-741.
Ittner, C. and Larcker, D. (2001), 'Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a
value-based management perspective'. Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 32,
pp. 349^10.
Johnson, H. T. and Kaplan, R. S. (1987), Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management
Accounting, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1992), The balanced scorecard ~ measures that drive
performance. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70, No. 1, pp. 71-79.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D. P. (1996), The Balanced Scorecard, Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press.
Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2000), The Strategy - Focused Organization, Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2004), Strategy Maps, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press.
Kleinbaum, D. G. and Klein, M. (2010), Logistic Regression: A Self-learning Text {3Tá edn.). New
York: Springer Science Business Media.
KPMG (2008), KPMG International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2008, USA:
KPMG International.
Langfieid-Smith, K., Thome, H. and Hilton, R. W. (2012), Management Accounting: Informa-
tion for Creating and Managing Value (6th edn.), Sydney, NSW: McGraw Hill Australia, Pty
Ltd.
Legendre, S. and Coderre F. (2013), 'Determinants of GRIG3 application levels: The case of the
Fortune Global 500', Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol.
20, pp. 182-192.

72 © 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journal of General Monogement ,• Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013
 What determines Strategic Performance Measurement System disclosures?

Li, Y., Richardson, G. D. and Thornton, D. (1997), 'Corporate disclosure of environmental

information: theory and evidence',' Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 14, No. 3,
pp. 435-474. . . -: .
Lindblom, C. (1994), The impliCatioris of organizational legitimacy for corporate social perform-
ance disclosure. Paper presented at the Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, New
York. • - •
Liu, X. and Anbumozhi, V. (2009), 'Determinant factors of corporate environmental informa-
tion disclosure: An empirical st:udy of Chinese listed companies'. Journal of Cleaner
Production, VoL 17, pp. 593-600: t
Lynch, R. L. and Cross, K. F. (1991), Measure Up: Yardsticks from Continuous Improvement,
Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Milgrom, P. and Roberts,. J. (1992),-Economics, Organization and Management, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice HaU. •
Neely, A. Adams, C. Kennerly, M. (2002), The Performance Prism: The Scorecard for Measuring
- and Managing Stakeholder Relationships, London: Prentice HaU.
O'Donovan, G. (2002), 'Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the
applicability andpredictive power of legitimacy theory'; Accounting, Auditing and Account-
ability Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 344-371.
Patten, D. M. (2002), 'The relation between environmental performance and environmental
disclosure: A research note'. Accounting Qrganizations and Society, Vol. 27, Issue 8, pp. 763-
773.
Rigby, D. and Bilodeau, B. (2011), Management Tools and Trends 2011, Bain and Company.
Roberts, R. W. (1992), 'Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An
application of stakeholder theory'. Accounting, Qrganizations and Society, Vol. 17, No. 6,
pp. 395-612. .
Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (2001), Using Multivariate Statistics (4th edn.), Pearson
Education, Needham Heights, MA.
Verrecchia, R. (1983), 'Discretioiiary disclosure'. Journal of Accounting and Economics,Vo\. 5,
pp. 179-194.
Wiseman, J. (1982), 'An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual
reports'. Accounting, Qrganizations and Society, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 53-63.
Yu, L., Perera, S. and Crowe, S. (2008), 'Effectiveness of the balanced scorecard: The impact of
strategy and causal links'. Journal ofApplied Management Accounting Research, Vol. 6, No. 2,
pp. 37-55.
Zhang, Y. and WUdemuth, M. B. (2009), 'Qualitative analysis of content', in: Wildemuth, B. M.
(ed.). Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science,
Westport: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 308-319.

Dr Evangeline O. Elijido-Ten is a Senior Lecturer in Accounting and the Program Leader for
the Sustainability Research Stream of the Centre for Enterprise and Performance (CEP) at
Swinburne University of Technology in Australia. She worked for a number of non-profit
organisations including the Seventh Day Adventlst Mission in Malaysia before joining academia.
Her publications appear in various academic journals like Accounting, Auditing and Accountability
journal. Accounting Forum and Journo/ of Applied Managerhent Accounting Research, among others.
She has recently published a research book entitled: Beyond Environmental Reporting Decisions:
Developing A Stakeholder Framework

© 2013 The Braybrooke Press Ltd. journo/ of General Management Vol. 38 No. 4 Summer 2013 73
Copyright of Journal of General Management is the property of Braybrooke Press Ltd. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.