Abstract
The study examines the empirical evidence of the submissions received from third sector organisations and their stakeholders in response to proposed changes to the New Zealand accounting standard setting framework. The study aims to determine whether third sector stakeholders have voice in third sector accounting standard setting. Critical comparison of submissions and proposals appear to show that the standard setters were not listening to their third sector stakeholders. However, the study found that the standard setters utilised legitimacy management strategies to gather third sector stakeholders’ voice. The standard setters proactively achieved this by conforming to the environment and achieving pragmatic legitimacy to ensure that their decisions were based on third sector stakeholders’ voice. The study is important for those countries where accounting standard setters are grappling with the due process to undertake for third sector accounting standards in its elevation of working groups to the role of salient stakeholders.
Résumé
Cette étude examine les preuves empiriques des réponses envoyées par les organisations du secteur tiers et leurs intervenants en réaction à la proposition de changement du cadre règlementaire de comptabilité en Nouvelle-Zélande. L’étude vise à déterminer si les intervenants du secteur tiers ont voix au chapitre dans l’établissement de règles comptables pour le secteur tiers. Une comparaison critique des réponses et des propositions effectuées semble montrer que les responsables de l’établissement des règles n’étaient pas à l’écoute des intervenants du secteur tiers. Cependant, l’étude a révélé que ces décideurs de règles ont utilisé des stratégies de gestion de la légitimité afin de recueillir les opinions des intervenants du secteur tiers. Les responsables de l’établissement de règles se sont activement employés à atteindre cet objectif en se conformant à leur environnement et en obtenant une légitimité pragmatique afin de s’assurer que leurs décisions puissent incorporer les voix des intervenants du secteur tiers. Cette étude est importante pour les pays où les responsables de l’établissement de règles comptables débattent d’une approche juste à adopter vis-à-vis des règles comptables du secteur tiers qui leur permette d’élever les groupes de travail au rôle d’intervenants majeurs.
Zusammenfassung
Die Studie untersucht die empirischen Daten aus Stellungnahmen von Organisationen des Dritten Sektors und ihren Stakeholdern zu vorgeschlagenen Änderungen des Rechnungslegungssystems in Neuseeland. Ziel der Studie ist es zu bestimmen, ob Stakeholder im Dritten Sektor bei der Festlegung von Rechnungslegungsrichtlinien ein Mitspracherecht haben. Ein kritischer Vergleich der Antworten und Vorschläge scheint darauf hinzuweisen, dass die Richtliniengeber die Belange ihrer Stakeholder außer Acht ließen. Man kam in der Studie jedoch zu dem Ergebnis, dass die Richtliniengeber Legitimitätsmanagementstrategien anwandten, um die Interessen der Stakeholder des Dritten Sektors zu berücksichtigen. Dies wurde erreicht, indem sich die Richtliniengeber dem Umfeld anpassten und eine pragmatische Legitimität erzielten, um so zu gewährleisten, dass die Meinungen der Stakeholder des Dritten Sektors bei ihren Entscheidungen relevant waren. Die Studie ist für die Länder von Bedeutung, in denen sich die Richtliniengeber bei der Anhebung von Arbeitsgruppen zu bedeutenden Stakeholdern mit dem gebührenden Verfahren für die Rechnungslegungsgrundsätze auseinandersetzen müssen.
Resumen
El estudio examina la evidencia empírica de las alegaciones recibidas de organizaciones del tercer sector y de sus partes interesadas en respuesta a los cambios propuestos al marco de establecimiento de normas contables de Nueva Zelanda. El estudio tiene como objetivo determinar si las partes interesadas del tercer sector tienen voz en el establecimiento de normas contables del tercer sector. La comparación crítica de las alegaciones y propuestas parece mostrar que los responsables del establecimiento de las normas no estaban escuchando a las partes interesadas de su tercer sector. Sin embargo, el estudio encontró que los responsables del establecimiento de las normas utilizaron estrategias de gestión de la legitimidad para reunir la voz de las partes interesadas del tercer sector. Los responsables del establecimiento de normas lograron esto de manera proactiva adaptándose al entorno y alcanzando legitimidad pragmática con el fin de asegurarse de que sus decisiones se basasen en la voz de las partes interesadas del tercer sector. El estudio es importante para aquellos países en los que los responsables del establecimiento de normas contables están tratando de resolver el proceso debido para acometer las normas contables del tercer sector elevando los grupos de trabajo al papel de partes interesadas prominentes.
抽象
针对新西兰会计准则设置框架的计划变动,本研究论文调查了第三部门机构提出意见的实证证据。本研究论文旨在确定第三部门股东是否在第三部门会计准则设定中享有发言权。对意见和建议的批判性对比似乎显示,准则制定者并未采纳第三部门利益相关方的意见。然而,本研究发现,准则制定者利用合法性管理策略来收集第三部门股东的意见。准则制定者遵循环境要求,实现务实基础上的合法性,以此确保他们的决策以第三部门利益相关方的意见,从而积极实现上述目标。有些国家的会计准则制定者在评估工作小组对显著利益相关者发挥的作用时,面临着第三部门会计准则的程序问题,本项研究论文对这些国家而言具有重要意义。
ملخص
تفحص الدراسة الأدلة التجريبية للبيانات الواردة من منظمات القطاع الثالث وأصحاب المصلحة في إستجابة للتغيرات المقترحة على وضع معايير الإطار المحاسبي الجديد لنيوزيلندا. تهدف الدراسة إلى تحديد ما إذا كان أصحاب مصلحة القطاع الثالث لهم صوت في وضع معاييرمحاسبة القطاع الثالث. المقارنة الإنتقادية للتقارير والمقترحات يبدو أنها تبين أن واضعي المعايير لم يكونوا سامعين إلى أصحاب المصلحة من القطاع الثالث. مع ذلك، وجدت الدراسة أن واضعي المعايير إستخدموا إستراتيجيات إدارة شرعية لجمع صوت أصحاب مصلحة القطاع الثالث. واضعي المعاييريعملون مسبقا˝ على تحقيق ذلك عن طريق التأكيد على البيئة وتحقيق شرعية عملية من أجل ضمان أن تستند قراراتهم على صوت أصحاب مصلحة القطاع الثالث. الدراسة مهمة بالنسبة لتلك البلدان حيث يتصارع واضعي المعايير المحاسبية مع العملية الواجبة بسبب قيام المعايير المحاسبية للقطاع الثالث في السمو بالمجموعات العاملة إلى دور أصحاب المصلحة البارزة.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Accounting Standards Board. (2007). Statement of principles for financial reporting: Interpretation for public benefit entities. London: Accounting Standards Board. Retrieved from http://www.frc.org.uk/asb/technical/projects/project0017.html.
Accounting Standards Board. (2011). The future of financial reporting in the UK and Republic of Ireland: Financial reporting exposure draft 45 financial reporting standard for public benefit entities. Retrieved from http://www.frc.org.uk/Our-Work/Publications/ASB/FRED-45-Financial-Reporting-Standard-for-Public-Be.aspx.
Accounting Standards Board. (2012). Revised financial reporting exposure drafts. Retrieved 27 August 2012 from http://www.frc.org.uk/Our-Work/Publications/ASB/The-Key-Facts-FREDs-46,-47-and-48-%28January-2012%29/Revised-FRED-The-Future-of-Financial-Reporting-%281%29.aspx.
Accounting Standards Review Board. (2009). Proposed application of accounting and assurance standards under the proposed new statutory framework for financial reporting. Wellington: Accounting Standards Review Board. Retrieved from http://www.asrb.co.nz.
Accounting Standards Review Board. (2010a). Suitability of IPSAS review: Report of the working group. Wellington: Accounting Standards Review Board. Retrieved from http://www.asrb.co.nz.
Accounting Standards Review Board. (2010b). Suitability of IPSAS for NFP entities: Working group report. Wellington: Accounting Standards Review Board. Retrieved from http://www.asrb.co.nz.
Accounting Standards Review Board. (2010c). Board deliberations. Wellington: ASRB. Retrieved from http://www.asrb.co.nz/Site/Financial_Reporting/Board_Deliberatons.aspx.
Altheide, D. L. (2000). Tracking discourse and qualitative document analysis. Poetics, 27, 287–299.
Association of Charitable Foundations (2011). Comments on FRED45 financial reporting standard for public benefit entities. Retrieved August 27, 2012, from http://www.frc.org.uk/Our-Work/Publications/ASB/FRED-45-Financial-Reporting-Standard-for-Public-Be/Responses-to-FRED-45/CL4-Association-of-Charitable-Foundations.aspx.
Australian Treasury. (2011). Final report on the scoping study for a national not-for-profit regulator: Treasury. Retrieved from August 10, 2011, from http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=035&ContentID=2054.
Baskerville, R. F., & Newby, S. P. (2002). Due process failure in sector-neutral accounting standard-setting. Financial Accountability & Management, 18(1), 1–23. (ISSN:0267-4424).
Baylin, G., MacDonald, L., & Richardson, A. J. (1996). Accounting standard-setting in Canada, 1864–1992: A theoretical analysis of structural evolution. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 5(1), 113–131. doi:10.1016/s1061-9518(96)90018-x.
Bernstein, S., & Hannah, E. (2008). Non-state global standard setting and the WTO: Legitimacy and the need for regulatory space. Journal of International Economic Law, 11(3), 575–608. doi:10.1093/jiel/jgn022.
Bradbury, M. E., & Baskerville, R. (2008). The ‘NZ’ in ‘NZ IFRS’: Public benefit entity amendments. Australian Accounting Review, 18(3), 185–190.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2007). Business research methods (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Charities Commission. (2011). A snapshot of New Zealand’s charitable sector: A profile of registered charities as at 28 February 2011. Wellington: Charities Commission. Retrieved from http://www.charities.govt.nz/assets/docs/key-statistics/2011/sector.pdf.
Charity Commission. (2005). Accounting and reporting by charities: Statement of recommended practice. London: Accounting Standards Board. Retrieved from http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/investigations/sorp/sorp05.asp.
Charity Commission. (2008). Charities (accounts & reports) regulations. Wellington: Charity Commission.
Christensen, A. L., & Mohr, R. M. (1999). Nonprofit lobbying: Museums and collections capitalization. Financial Accountability & Management, 15(2), 115–133. doi:10.1111/1468-0408.00077.
Collier, P. M. (2008). Stakeholder accountability: A field study of the implementation of a governance improvement plan. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(7), 933–954.
Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2000). Charity accounting: An empirical analysis of the impact of recent changes. British Accounting Review, 32, 77–100.
Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2001). A comparative study on the impact of revised SORP2 on British and Irish Charities. Financial Accountability & Management, 17(1), 73–97.
Connolly, C., Hyndman, N., & McMahon, D. (2009). Charity reporting and accounting: Taking stock and future reform. London: Charity Commission. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/publications/rs21.aspx.
Cooper, D. J., & Robson, K. (2006). Accounting, professions and regulation: Locating the sites of professionalization. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(4–5), 415–444. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.003.
Cordery, C. J., & Baskerville, R. (2007). Charity financial reporting regulation: a comparative study of the UK and New Zealand. Accounting History, 12(1), 7–27.
Cordery, C. J., & Baskerville, R. (2011). Charity Transgressions, Trust and Accountability. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 22(2), 197–213. doi:10.1007/s11266-010-9132-x.
Cordery, C. J., & Patel, K. (2011). Financial reporting stock take: An assessment of accountability through charities’ filing on New Zealand’s charities register. Wellington: Victoria University.
Dainelli, F., Manetti, G., & Sibilio, B. (2012). Web-based accountability practices in non-profit organizations: The Case of national museums. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations,. doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9278-9.
Deegan, C., & Blomquist, C. (2006). Stakeholder influence on corporate reporting: An exploration of the interaction between WWF-Australia and the Australian minerals industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(4–5), 343–372.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.
Durocher, S., & Fortin, A. (2010). Standard-setting institutions’ user-oriented legitimacy management strategies: The Canadian case. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 7(4), 476–504. doi:10.1108/11766091011094545.
Durocher, S., Fortin, A., & Côté, L. (2007). Users’ participation in the accounting standard-setting process: A theory-building study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(1–2), 29–59. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2006.03.004.
Ellwood, S., & Newbury, S. (2006). A bridge too far: A common conceptual framework for commercial and public benefit entities. Accounting and Business Research, 36(1), 19–32.
External Reporting Board. (2011a). Accounting standards framework: A multi standards approach. Wellington: External Reporting Board. Retrieved from http://www.xrb.govt.nz/Site/Financial_Reporting_Strategy/default.aspx.
External Reporting Board. (2011b). Accounting standards framework for general purpose financial reporting by public benefit entities. Wellington: External Reporting Board. Retrieved from http://www.xrb.govt.nz/Site/Financial_Reporting_Strategy/Consultation_Documents.aspx.
External Reporting Board. (2011c) New Zealand international accounting standard 1: Presentation of financial statement. Wellington: NZICA. Retrieved from http://www.xrb.govt.nz/Site/Accounting_Standards/Current_Standards/Standards_For-Profit_Entities.aspx.
External Reporting Board. (2011d). Simple format reporting for NFP entities: Working group report. Wellington: External Reporting Board. Retrieved from http://xrb.govt.nz/Site/Financial_Reporting_Strategy/Accounting_Standards_Framework.aspx#deliberationspaper.
External Reporting Board. (2012). New Zealand accounting standard board members. Retrieved from http://www.xrb.govt.nz/Site/about_us/NZASB_Board/NZASB_Board_Members.aspx.
Financial Reporting Act. (1993). New Zealand Government, legislation number 106.
Fogarty, T. J. (1994). Structural-functionalism and financial accounting: Standard setting in the US. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 5(2), 205–226. doi:1045-2354/94/030205.
Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. London: Pitman.
Gerboth, D. L. (1973). Research, intuition, and politics in accounting inquiry. The Accounting Review, 48(3), 475–482.
Gerboth, D. L. (1987). The conceptual framework: Not definitions, but professional values. Accounting Horizons, 1(3), 1–8.
Guthrie, J., Petty, R., Yongvanich, K., & Ricceri, F. (2004). Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into intellectual capital reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 282–293. doi:10.1108/1469193041053374.
Hansen, T. B. (2011). Lobbying of the IASB: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Accounting Research, 10(2), 57–75. doi:10.2308/jiar-10078.
Hines, A., & Jones, M. J. (1992). The impact of SORP on the UK charitable sector: An empirical study. Financial Accountability & Management, 8(1), 49–67.
Hooper, K., Sinclair, R., Hui, D., & Mataira, K. (2008). Financial reporting by New Zealand charities: Finding a way forward. Managerial Auditing Journal, 23(1), 68–83.
Hyndman, N. (1990). Charity accounting: An empirical study of the information needs of contributors to UK fund raising charities. Financial Accountability & Management, 6(4), 295–307.
Hyndman, N. (1991). Contributors to charities: A comparison of their information needs and the perceptions of such by the providers of information. Financial Accountability & Management, 7(2), 69–82.
Hyndman, N., & Kirk, R. (1988). Charities called to account. Management Accounting, 66(9), 36–37.
Hyndman, N., & McMahon, D. (2010). The evolution of the UK charity statement of recommended practice: The influence of key stakeholders. European Management Journal, 28(6), 455–466. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2010.06.004.
Hyndman, N., & McMahon, D. (2011). The hand of government in shaping accounting and reporting in the UK charity sector. Public Money & Management, 31(3), 167–174. doi:10.1080/09540962.2011.573226.
International Accounting Standards Board. (2010). Conceptual framework for financial reporting 2010. London: IASB. Retrieved from http://eifrs.ifrs.org/eifrs/files/136/Conceptual%20fw%202010_130.pdf.
International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board. (2010). Conceptual framework exposure draft 1. London: IFAC. Retrieved from http://www.ifac.org/guidance/EXD_Downlaod.php?EDFID=0298.
Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies. (2003). Handbook on non-profit institutions in the system of national accounts. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.jhu.edu/gnisp/handbookdraft.html.
Johnson, S. B., & Solomons, D. (1984). Institutional legitimacy and the FASB. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 3(3), 165–183. doi:10.1016/0278-4254(84)90015-2.
Kilcullen, L., Hancock, P., & Izan, H. Y. (2007). User requirements for not-for-profit entity financial reporting: An international comparison. Australian Accounting Review, 17(1), 26–37.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Larson, R. K. (2007). Constituent participation and the IASB’s international financial reporting interpretations committee [article]. Accounting in Europe, 4(2), 207–254. doi:10.1080/17449480701727981.
Larson, R. K., Herz, P. J., & Kenny, S. Y. (2011). Academics and the development of IFRS: An invitation to participate. Journal of International Accounting Research, 10(2), 97–103. doi:10.2308/jiar-10082.
Lee, M. (2004). Public reporting: A neglected aspect of nonprofit accountability. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(2), 169–185. doi:10.1002/nml.60.
McCarthy, J. (2007). The ingredients of financial transparency. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(1), 156–164. doi:10.1177/0899764006296847.
Minister of Commerce. (2011a). Regulatory impact statement: The review of the financial reporting framework. Wellington: Ministry of Economic Development. Retrieved from http://www.med.govt.nz/upload/78100/RIS-RFRF.pdf.
Minister of Commerce. (2011b). Review of the financial reporting framework: Primary issues. Wellington: Ministry of Economic Development. Retrieved from http://www.med.govt.nz/upload/78100/Cabinet-Paper-RFRF-Primary-Issues.pdf.
Minister of Commerce. (2011c). Review of the financial reporting framework: Secondary issues. Wellington: Ministry of Economic Development. Retrieved from http://www.med.govt.nz/upload/78100/Cabinet-Paper-RFRF-Secondary-Issues.pdf.
Ministry of Economic Development. (2009). The statutory framework for financial reporting: Discussion document. Wellington: Ministry of Economic Development. Retrieved from http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC_41975.aspx.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105.
Newberry, S. (1992). Special issues of accounting for charities in New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants.
Palmer, P. D. (2011). Exploring attitudes to financial reporting in the Australian not-for-profit sector. Accounting & Finance,. doi:10.1111/j.1467-629X.2011.00456.x.
Palmer, P., Isaacs, M., & D’Silva, K. (2001). Charity SORP compliance: Findings of a research study. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16(5), 255–262.
Parker, L. D. (2007). Financial and external reporting research: The broadening corporate governance challenge. Accounting and Business Research, 37(1), 39–54. doi:10.1080/00014788.2007.9730057.
Rees, J., & Dixon, B. R. (1983). Accounting for non-profit organisations. Wellington: New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants.
Richardson, A. J. (1985). Symbolic and substantive legitimation in professional practice. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 10(2), 139.
Richardson, A. J., & Dowling, J. B. (1986). An integrative theory of organizational legitimation. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies, 3(2), 91–109. doi:10.1016/0281-7527(86)90022-8.
Salamon, L. M. (2010). Putting the civil society sector on the economic map of the world. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 81(2), 167–210. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8292.2010.00409.x.
Samkin, G., & Schneider, A. (2010). Accountability, narrative reporting and legitimation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(2), 256–289. doi:10.1108/09513571011023219.
Shapiro, B. P. (1997). Objectivity, relativism, and truth in external financial reporting: What’s really at stake in the disputes? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(2), 165–185. doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(96)00017-7.
Sinclair, R. (2010). Understandability and transparency of the financial statements of charities (PhD). AUT University, Auckland.
Steenkamp, N., & Northcott, D. (2007). Content analysis in accounting research: The practical challenges. Australian Accounting Review, 17(3), 12–25.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
Tandy, P. R., & Wilburn, N. L. (1992). Constituent participation in standard-setting: The FASB’s first 100 statements. Accounting Horizons, 6(2), 47–58.
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Williams, S., & Palmer, P. (1998). The state of charity accounting: Developments, improvements and continuing problems. Financial Accountability & Management, 14(4), 265–279.
Woodward, S., & Marshall, S. (2004). The more the merrier? Stakeholders in not-for-profit companies (survey). Third Sector Review, 10(1), 101(128).
Young, J. J. (1994). Outlining regulatory space: Agenda issues and the FASB. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19(1), 83–109. doi:10.1016/0361-3682/94.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Carolyn Cordery, Gareth Morgan, Kay Switzer, the two blind reviewers, and participants at the 2012 ISTR panel on charity accounting. One of the authors would like to declare that this paper is written in her role as an academic not as a member of the External Reporting Board’s sub-board the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Board.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sinclair, R., Bolt, R. Third Sector Accounting Standard Setting: Do Third Sector Stakeholders Have Voice?. Voluntas 24, 760–784 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9356-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9356-7