A case study and interview with Jill McDonald CEO and President of McDonald's Northern Europe Division

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how strategy is developed and implemented within a subsidiary of a global organization, the relationship between subsidiary and headquarters and the need for continuous change and adaption to remain relevant. Furthermore, this case study describes a successful process of invention and adoption. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on documentary evidence and a semistructured interview with Jill McDonald CEO and President of McDonald’s Northern Europe Division with responsibility for the UK, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway and the Republic of Ireland. Management research rarely captures the views of the top executive, yet the top executives have a broad picture and are key strategic decision makers. Findings – The case study and interview offers a unique insight into factors contributing to McDonald’s unprecedented success (it has paid an increased dividend for the past 37 years). It also sheds light on its successful internationalization strategy. Originality/value – The case study draws on published material and augments this with an in-depth interview with the Chief Executive. Very few case studies offer insight into the thinking of a Chief Executive managing a subsidiary of a global organization. Its value lies in the lessons that managers and students of management can draw on the approach adopted by a highly successful global organization.

Private climate change reporting: an emerging discourse of risk and opportunity?

Purpose – This paper aims to explore the nature of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, which takes place in one-on-one meetings between institutional investors and their investee companies. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 20 UK investment institutions to derive data which was then coded and analysed, in order to derive a picture of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, using an interpretive methodological approach, in addition to explorative analysis using NVivo software. Findings – The authors find that private climate change reporting is dominated by a discourse of risk and risk management. This emerging risk discourse derives from institutional investors' belief that climate change represents a material risk, that it is the most salient sustainability issue, and that their clients require them to manage climate change-related risk within their portfolio investment. It is found that institutional investors are using the private reporting process to compensate for the acknowledged inadequacies of public climate change reporting. Contrary to evidence indicating corporate capture of public sustainability reporting, these findings suggest that the emerging private climate change reporting discourse is being captured by the institutional investment community. There is also evidence of an emerging discourse of opportunity in private climate change reporting as the institutional investors are increasingly aware of a range of ways in which climate change presents material opportunities for their investee companies to exploit. Lastly, the authors find an absence of any ethical discourse, such that private climate change reporting reinforces rather than challenges the “business case” status quo. Originality/value – Although there is a wealth of sustainability reporting research, there is no academic research on private climate change reporting. This paper attempts to fill this gap by providing rich interview evidence regarding the nature of the emerging private climate change reporting discourse.

Social and environmental report assurance: some interview evidence

The steady growth of social and environmental reporting (SER) is being accompanied by an increase in social and environmental reporting assurance (SERA). The existing literature on SERA suggests that it is necessary to build credibility and trust among corporate stakeholders. Prior work has also found evidence of managerial and professional capture of SERA. In this paper, we present empirical evidence from interviews with corporate social responsibility representatives from 20 UK listed companies on whether they consider SERA to be necessary. We believe this to be the first research into SERA that uses an interview method. Our interviews revealed mixed feelings. Half of the respondents believed that external SERA would enhance credibility and trust which confirmed the prior literature. However, the other half believed that external SERA was not necessary, believing that internal assurance was sufficient. This was because they saw SERA as predominantly a managerial tool, useful for checking the efficiency of internal management control systems, rather than as a mechanism for enhancing corporate accountability to stakeholders and building credibility and trust. The potential for SERA to be a mechanism whereby greater dialogue is created between companies and their stakeholders on social and environmental issues is not being harnessed. This paper thus demonstrates a fundamental difference between the external prior normative literature and the managerial motivation in the SERA area.

Stakeholder inclusivity in social and environmental report assurance

Purpose – The purpose of the research was to discover the process of social and environmental report assurance (SERA) and thereby evaluate the benefits, extent of stakeholder inclusivity and/or managerial capture of SERA processes and the dynamics of SERA as it matures. Design/methodology/approach – This paper used semi-structured interviews with 20 accountant and consultant assurors to derive data, which were then coded and analysed, resulting in the identification of four themes. Findings – This paper provides interview evidence on the process of SERA, suggesting that, although there is still managerial capture of SERA, stakeholders are being increasingly included in the process as it matures. SERA is beginning to provide dual-pronged benefits, adding value to management and stakeholders simultaneously. Through the lens of Freirian dialogic theory, it is found that SERA is starting to display some characteristics of a dialogical process, being stakeholder inclusive, demythologising and transformative, with assurors perceiving themselves as a “voice” for stakeholders. Consequently, SERA is becoming an important mechanism for driving forward more stakeholder-inclusive SER, with the SERA process beginning to transform attitudes of management towards their stakeholders through more stakeholder-led SER. However, there remain significant obstacles to dialogic SERA. The paper suggests these could be removed through educative and transformative processes driven by assurors. Originality/value – Previous work on SERA has involved predominantly content-based analysis on assurance statements. However, this paper investigates the details of the SERA process, for the first time using qualitative interview data.

Satanic Mills? An illustration of Victorian external environmental accounting

The paper evaluates a Victorian environmental account of the pollution of the River Wandle. This account was produced during a period of social and environmental crisis, when there were no significant industrial environmental regulations. This problematising external environmental account provides valuable insights into the historical development of social and environmental accounting. Our analysis located this account within an institutional reform programme to create systems of governance to mitigate the damage arising from unfettered industrial growth. We argue that problematising external environmental accounting has a longer tradition than previously recognised in the literature and predates corporate social and environmental reporting.

Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

A Habermasian model of stakeholder (non)engagement and corporate (ir)responsibility reporting

Inspired by Habermas’ works, we develop a prescriptive conceptual model of stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting against which empirical descriptions can be compared and contrasted. We compare the high profile case of Kraft's takeover of Cadbury with the conceptual model to illustrate the gap between an ideal speech situation and practice. The paper conducts a desk study of documents relating to the takeover and interviews with stakeholders from the local community to gauge their views of stakeholder engagement and CSR reporting by Cadbury/Kraft. The findings lead to policy recommendations for enhancing stakeholder accountability through improved steering mechanisms.

Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview

Purpose – This paper aims to review traditional corporate governance and accountability research, to suggest opportunities for future research in this field. Design/methodology/approach – The first part adopts an analytical frame of reference based on theory, accountability mechanisms, methodology, business sector/context, globalisation and time horizon. The second part of the paper locates the seven papers in the special issue in a framework of analysis showing how each one contributes to the field. The paper presents a frame of reference which may be used as a “roadmap” for researchers to navigate their way through the prior literature and to position their work on the frontiers of corporate governance research. The paper is primarily discursive and conceptual. Findings – The paper encourages broader approaches to corporate governance and accountability research beyond the traditional and primarily quantitative approaches of prior research. Broader theoretical perspectives, methodological approaches, accountability mechanism, sectors/contexts, globalisation, and time horizons are identified. Research limitations/implications – Greater use of qualitative research methods are suggested, which present challenges particularly of access to the “black box” of corporate boardrooms. Originality/value – Drawing on the analytical framework, and the papers in the special issue, the paper identifies opportunities for further research of accountability and corporate governance. Keywords Corporate governance, Management accountability, Research Paper type General review

The abandoned mandatory OFR: a lost opportunity for SER?

Purpose – An important outcome of the UK Company Law Review (CLR) involved draft regulations for a mandatory operating and financial review (OFR). The unprecedented abandonment of this mandatory OFR in November 2005 threw debate about the genuine motivations underlying the CLR into disarray. This paper seeks to reinterpret the abandonment of a mandatory OFR using interview research. Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted a series of 24 interviews with companies from the FTSE100 between May and August 2004, prior to the abandonment. Findings – The interviews showed that the OFR was perceived as an appropriate vehicle for social and environmental reporting (SER). The interviewees considered that a mandatory OFR would provide a means of forcing SER into the mainstream and making it mandatory at a basic level. The interviews revealed that processes for the identification of material SER differ widely between organisations, ranging from embryonic to highly structured. Further, interviewees believed that directors had the final veto on inclusion of information. Despite directors' inclination to hide behind materiality as a means of avoiding SER, interviewees did not view the proposed mandatory OFR as “greenwash” but as a vehicle that would increase stakeholder confidence, as processes underlying the proposed OFR would be audited. Practical implications – The research implies that abandoning the mandatory OFR represented a lost opportunity for SER. Originality/value – The paper provides new evidence on the processes of materiality decision making in the SER area as well as strong endorsement of the mandatory OFR, contrary to the government turn-around.

Whistle-blowing by external auditors: seeking legitimacy for the South African audit profession?

Auditing is often cited as playing an important role in managing agency-related costs and, accordingly, being integral to the sound functioning of capital markets. There may, however, be more to the attest function than a technical rational practice. By virtue of relying heavily on claims to technical expertise, professionalism, prudential judgement and public confidence, auditing is both a source of legitimacy for organisations and, paradoxically, dependent on claims to legitimacy for its continued existence. From this perspective, recent regulatory developments, purportedly enacted to increase arms-length control over the profession, may not only be about improving perceived audit quality and practice but also about ensuring continued faith in the well-established ‘rituals’ of the assurance function. A reporting duty imposed on South African external auditors, akin to whistle-blowing, is used as a case study to explore this perspective. In doing so, this paper contributes to the scant body of interpretive research on auditing, simultaneously offering one of the first insights into auditing regulation from an African perspective.