Abstract
We use more than 21,000 firm-year observations for 2534 U.S. companies between 1993 and 2018 to investigate the relationship between corporate social responsibility performance and the reading difficulty of annual reports. We find a significant negative relationship, suggesting that the annual reports of socially responsible firms are more readable (i.e., easier to read and understand). Overall, our results suggest that socially responsible firms are more ethical and transparent, which is consistent with the stakeholder view.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Data are available from sources identified in the paper.
Notes
Readability is related to transparency; however, they are not the same concept. Based on prior research (e.g., Kim, Park, and Wier 2012), transparency refers to the tendency of a firm to disclose truthful facts to stakeholders. Hence, such firms are less likely to engage in opportunistic behavior. Readability refers to the extent how easy or difficult for readers to understand corporate disclosures. Therefore, transparency is more related to corporate behavior, while readability is more related to the complexity of corporate disclosures. In general, annual reports of transparent firms are more readable.
Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) database.
The final year of CSR data from MSCI ESG in Compustat is 2018 as of March 23, 2022.
Perhaps closet to our study are the findings of Bacha and Ajina (2020), who find that CSR is positively related to annual report readability among French firms. Our study complements Bacha and Ajina (2020) but differs along several important dimensions. First, our results rely on U.S. data rather than French dada. Second, Bacha and Ajina (2020) use the Fog Index to measure readability, while we use the Bog Index, which is suggested by many recent studies such as Bonsall et al. (2017) as a more comprehensive readability measure than the Fog Index. Third, our sample period covers the period of 1993–2018, while that of Bacha and Ajina (2020) covers only 4 years (i.e., 2013–2016). Hence, our findings may be more robust, relative to Bacha and Ajina (2020).
We thank Professor Feng Li for providing the Fog Index data and Professor McDonald for providing file size data.
We do not include bond ratings and corporate governance in the baseline model because adding these two variables greatly reduces our sample size.
Bebchuk et al. (2009) construct this index using six components including staggered boards, limits to shareholder amendments of the bylaws, supermajority requirements for mergers, supermajority requirements for charter amendments, poison pills, and golden parachute arrangements. A high E-index suggests weak corporate governance.
References
Arouri M, Pijourlet G (2017) CSR performance and the value of cash holdings: International evidence. J Bus Ethics 140(2):263–284
Attig N, Ghoul SE, Guedhami O, Suh J (2013) Corporate social responsibility and credit ratings. J Bus Ethics 117:679–694
Aupperle KE, Carroll AB, Hartfield JD (1985) An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Acad Manag J 28(2):446–463
Axjonow A, Ernstberger J, Pott C (2018) The impact of corporate social responsibility disclosure on corporate reputation: a non-professional stakeholder perspective. J Bus Ethics 151(2):429–450
Bacha S, Ajina A (2020) CSR performance and annual report readability: evidence from France. Corp Gov 20(2):201–215
Bebchuk LA, Cohen A, Ferrell A (2009) What matters in corporate governance? Rev Financ Stud 22(2):783–827
Ben-Amar W, Belgacem I (2018) Do CSR firms provide more readable financial disclosures? Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 25(5):1009–1018
Berman SL, Wicks AC, Kotha S, Jones TM (1999) Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Acad Manag J 42:488–506
Beurden PV, Gossling T (2008) The worth of values—a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. J Bus Ethics 82(2):407–422
Bloomfield R (2002) The incomplete revelation hypothesis: implications for financial reporting. Account Horiz 16(3):233–244
Bonsall SB, Leone AJ, Miller BP, Rennekamp K (2017) A plain English measure of financial reporting readability. J Account Econ 63:329–357
Bonsall SB, Miller BP (2017) The impact of narrative disclosure readability on bond ratings and the cost of debt capital. Rev Acc Stud 22(2):608–643
Bozanic Z, Thevenot M (2015) Qualitative disclosure and changes in sell-side financial analysts’ information environment. Contemp Account Res 32(4):1595–1616
Bozzolan S, Fabrizi M, Mallinand CA, Michelon G (2015) Corporate social responsibility and earnings quality: international evidence. Int J Account 50(4):361–396
Brammer S, Millington A (2008) Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strateg Manag J 29:1325–1343
Brennan NM, Merkl-Davies DM (2018) Do firms effectively communicate with financial stakeholders? A conceptual model of corporate communication in a capital market context. Account Bus Res 48(5):553–577
Carmeli A, Gilat G, Waldman D (2007) The role of perceived organizational performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. J Manage Stud 44:972–992
Carroll A (1979) A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):497–505
Chakravarthy J, deHaan E, Rajgopal S (2014) Reputation repair after a serious restatement. Account Rev 94(4):1329–1363
Chen Y-C, Hung M, Wang Y (2018) The effect of mandatory CSR disclosure on firm profitability and social externalities: Evidence from China. J Account Econ 65:169–190
Cheung A (2016) Corporate social responsibility and corporate cash holdings. J Corp Finan 37:412–430
Cho SY, Lee C, Pfeiffer RJ (2013) Corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry. J Account Public Policy 32:71–83
Cho CH, Patten DM (2007) The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: a research note. Acc Organ Soc 32:639–647
Cho CH, Patten DM (2010) Environmental reporting on the internet by America’s toxic 100: legitimacy and self-presentation. Int J Account Inf Syst 11:1–16
Christensen DM (2016) Corporate accountability reporting and high-profile misconduct. Account Rev 91(2):377–399
Christensen HB, Floyd E, Liu LY, Maffett M (2017) The real effects of mandated information on social responsibility in financial reports: Evidence from mine-safety records. J Account Econ 64:284–304
Church BK, Jiang W, Kuang XJ, Vitalis A (2019) A dollar for a tree or a tree for a dollar? The behavioral effects of measurement basis on managers’ CSR investment decision. Account Rev 94(5):117–137
Davis AK, Guenther DA, Krull LK, Williams BM (2016) Do socially responsible firms pay more taxes? Account Rev 91(1):47–68
Deckop JR, Merriman KK, Gupta S (2006) The effect of CEO pay structure on corporate social performance. J Manag 32(3):329–342
De Franco C, Hope O, Vyas D, Zhou Y (2015) Analyst report readability. Contemp Account Res 32(1):76–104
Demerjian P, Lev B, McVay S (2012) Quantifying managerial ability: a new measure and validity tests. Managerial Science 58(7):122–1248
Deng X, Kang J, Low BS (2013) Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: evidence from mergers. J Financ Econ 110:87–109
Dhaliwal D, Li D, Tsang A, Yang Y (2011) Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: the initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. Account Rev 86(1):59–100
Dhaliwal D, Li OZ, Tsang A, Yang YG (2014) Corporate social responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The roles of stakeholder orientation and financial transparency. J Account Public Policy 33:328–355
Dhaliwal D, Radhakrishnan S, Tsang A, Yang YG (2012) Nonfinancial disclosure and analyst forecast accuracy: international evidence on corporate social responsibility disclosure. Account Rev 87(3):723–759
Ertugrul M, Lei J, Qiu J, Wan C (2017) Annual report readability, tone ambiguity, and the cost of borrowing. J Financ Quant Anal 52(2):811–836
Fatima T, Elbanna S (2022) Corporate social responsibility implementation: a review and a research agenda towards an integrative framework. J Bus Ethics (forthcoming)
Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston, MA
Friedman M (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine (September 13)
Godfrey PC (2005) The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: a risk-management perspective. Acad Manag Rev 30(4):777–798
Godfrey PC, Merrill CB, Hansen JM (2009) The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strateg Manag J 30:425–445
Griffin JJ, Mahon JF (1997) The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: twenty-five years of incomparable research. Bus Soc 36(1):5–31
Graves S, Waddock SA (1994) Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Acad Manag J 18(4):303–317
Guay W, Samuals D, Taylor D (2016) Guiding through the FOG: Financial statement complexity and voluntary disclosure. J Account Econ 62(2–3):234–269
Hasan MM (2020) Readability of narrative disclosure in 10-K reports: Does managerial ability matter? Eur Account Rev 29(1):147–168
Hoi CK, Wu Q, Zhang H (2013) Is corporate social responsibility associated with tax avoidance: evidence from irresponsible CSR activities? Account Rev 88(6):2025–2059
Jensen MC (2001) Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. J Appl Corp Financ 14(3):8–21
Jiraporn P, Jiraporn N, Boeprasert A, Chang K (2014) Does corporate social responsibility improve credit ratings? Evid Geogr Identif Financ Manag 43(3):505–531
Jo H, Harjoto MA (2011) Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics 103(3):351–383
Johnson RA, Greening DW (1999) The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Acad Manag J 42(5):564–576
Karnani A (2010) The case against corporate social responsibility. Wall Street Journal (August 23)
Khan M, Serafeim G, Yoon A (2016) Corporate sustainability: first evidence on materiality. Account Rev 91(6):1697–1724
Kile CO, Phillips ME (2009) Using industry classification codes to sample high-technology firms: analysis and recommendations. J Acc Audit Financ 24(1):35–58
Kim Y, Li H, Li S (2014) Corporate social responsibility and stock price crash risk. J Bus Financ 43:1–13
Kim Y, Park MS, Wier B (2012) Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? Account Rev 87(3):761–796
Kothari SP, Leone A, Wasley CE (2005) Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. J Account Econ 35(1):163–197
Lang M, Stice-Lawrence L (2015) Textual analysis and international financial reporting: large sample evidence. J Account Econ 60(2):110–135
Lanis R, Richardson G (2015) Is corporate social responsibility associated with tax avoidance? J Bus Ethics 127(2):439–457
Lawrence A (2013) Individual investors and financial disclosure. J Account Econ 56:130–147
Lehavy R, Li F, Merkley K (2011) The effect of annual report readability on analyst following and the properties of their earnings forecasts. Account Rev 86(3):1087–1115
Li F (2008) Annual report readability, current earnings, and earnings persistence. J Account Econ 45(2):221–247
Lo K, Ramos F, Rogo R (2017) Earnings management and annual report readability. J Account Econ 63:1–25
Loughran T, McDonald B (2011) When is a liability not a liability? Textual analysis, dictionaries, and 10-Ks. J Financ 66(1):1–25
Loughran T, McDonald B (2014) Measuring readability in financial disclosures. J Financ 69(4):1643–1671
Lundholm RJ, Rogo R, Zhang JL (2014) Restoring the tower of Babel: How foreign firms communicate with U.S. investors. Account Rev 89(4):1453–1485
Luo JH, Li X, Chen H (2018) Annual report readability and corporate agency costs. China J Account Res 11:187–212
Lys T, Naughton JP, Wang C (2015) Signaling through corporate accountability reporting. J Account Econ 60:56–72
Mahoney L, Thorn L (2006) An examination of the structure of executive compensation and corporate social responsibility: a canadian investigation. J Bus Ethics 69(2):149–162
Malik M (2015) Value-enhancing capabilities of CSR: a brief review of contemporary literature. J Bus Ethics 127(2):419–438
Manchiraju H, Rajgopal S (2017) Does corporate social responsibility (CSR) create shareholder value? Evidence from the Indian Companies Act 2013. J Account Res 55(5):1257–1300
Margolis JD, Walsh JP (2003) Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Adm Sci Q 48:268–305
Maso LD, Lobo GJ, Mazzi F, Paugam L (2019) Implications of the joint provision of CSR assurance and financial audit for auditors’ assessment of going concern risk. Contemporary Accounting Research (forthcoming)
Martinez-Ferrero J, Garcia-Sanchez IM, Cuadrado-Ballestero B (2015) Effect of financial reporting quality on sustainability disclosure strategies. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 22(1):45–64
McGuire JB, Sundgren A, Schnessweis T (1988) Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Acad Manag J 31(4):854–872
Moser DV, Martin PR (2012) A broad perspective on corporate social responsibility research in accounting. Account Rev 87(3):797–806
Nelling E, Webb E (2009) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the “virtuous circle” revisited. Rev Quant Financ Acc 32(2):197–209
Orlitzky M, Schmidt FL, Rynes SL (2003) Corporate social and financial performance: a meta analysis. Organ Stud 24(3):403–411
Petersen MA (2009) Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Rev Financ Stud 22(1):435–480
Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9(4):97–118
Securities and Exchange Commission (1998) A plain English handbook: How to create clear SEC disclosure. SEC Office of Investor Education and Assistance
Securities and Exchange Commission (2013) The path forward on disclosure. Speech given by SEC chairperson Mary White to the National Association of Corporate Directors
Securities and Exchange Commission (2014) Disclosure effectiveness: remarks before the American Bar Association Business Law Section Meeting
Shank T, Manullang D, Hill R (2005) Doing well while doing good revisited: a study of socially responsible firms’ short term versus long-term performance. Manag Financ 30:33–46
Smith NC (1994) The new corporate philanthropy. Harv Bus Rev 6:105–116
Smith NC (2003) Corporate social responsibility: Whether or how? Calif Manage Rev 45(4):52–76
Sun L, Johnson G, Bradley W (2022) CEO power and annual report reading difficulty. J Contemp Account Econ (forthcoming)
Ullman AE (1985) Data in search of a theory: a critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure and economic performance of U.S. firms. Acad Manag Rev 10(3):540–557
Waddock S, Graves S (1997) The corporate social performance – financial performance link. Strateg Manag J 18(4):303–319
Walls JL, Berrone P, Phan PH (2012) Corporate governance and environmental performance: Is there really a link? Strateg Manag J 33(8):885–913
Wang C, Qureshi I, Guo F, Zhang Q (2022) Corporate social responsibility and disruptive innovation: the moderating effect of environmental turbulence. J Bus Res 139:1435–1450
Wood DJ, Jones RE (1995) Stakeholder mismatching: a theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance. Int J Org Anal 3(3):229–267
Ye K, Zhang R (2011) Do lenders value corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China. J Bus Ethics 104(2):197–206
You H, Zhang X (2009) Financial disclosure complexity and investor underreaction to 10-K information. Rev Acc Stud 14(4):559–586
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1: CSR components (publicly available at www.msci.com)
CSR components | CSR strengths items | CSR concerns items |
---|---|---|
Community relations | Charitable giving Innovative giving Support for housing Support for education Non-U.S. charitable giving Volunteer programs Other strengths | Investment controversies Negative economic impact Tax disputes Other concerns |
Diversity | CEO Promotion Board of directors Work–life benefits Women and minority contracting Employment of the disabled Gay and lesbian policies Other strengths | Controversies Non-representation Other concerns |
Employee relations | Union relations No-layoff policy Cash profit sharing Employee involvement Retirement benefits Health and safety Other strengths | Union relations Health and safety concerns Workforce reductions Retirement benefits concern Other concerns |
Environment | Beneficial products Pollution prevention Recycling Clean energy Property, plant, and equipment Management systems Other strengths | Hazardous waste Regulatory problems Ozone depleting chemicals Substantial emissions Agricultural chemicals Climate change Other concerns |
Product | Quality Research and development innovation Benefits to economically disadvantaged Other strengths | Product safety Marketing/contracting concern Antitrust Other concerns |
Corporate governance | Limited compensation Ownership strength Transparency strength Political accountability strength Public policy strength Other strengths | High compensation Ownership concern Accounting concern Transparency concern Political accountability concern Public policy concern Other concerns |
Human rights | Positive record in S. Africa Indigenous peoples’ relations Labor rights strength Other strengths | S. Africa Northern Ireland Mexico Burma concern Labor right concern Indigenous peoples’ relations concern Other concerns |
Appendix 2: Variable definitions
Variable | Definition | |
---|---|---|
READ_DIFF | = | The Bog Index by Bonsall et al. (2017) to measure reading difficulty; |
CSR_NET | = | Total strengths of Community Relations, Corporate Governance, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, Human Rights, and Product – Total concerns of Community Relations, Corporate Governance, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, Human Rights, and Product; |
CSR_STR | = | Total strengths of Community Relations, Corporate Governance, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, Human Rights, and Product; |
CSR_CON | = | Total concerns of Community Relations, Corporate Governance, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, Human Rights, and Product; |
SIZE | = | The natural log of total firms assets (AT); |
LEV | = | Leverage ratio, measure as the ratio of long-term liabilities (DLTT) to total assets (AT); |
ROA | = | Profitability, measured as income before extraordinary items (IB) scaled by total assets (AT); |
MTB | = | Market-to-book ratio, measured as market value of outstanding common shares [Outstanding common shares (CSHO) × price at fiscal year-end (PRCC_F)] divided by total book value of outstanding common shares (CEQ); |
CFO | = | Cash flows from operating activities (OANCF) scaled by total assets (AT); |
CAPINT | = | Capital expenditures (CAPX) scaled by total assets (AT); |
FIRMAGE | = | The natural log of the number of firms since the firm has been listed in the Compustat database; |
MARANK | = | Decile ranks of managerial ability scores by Demerjian et al. (2012); |
VOLATILITY | = | Volatility of sales (SALE); |
SPEITEM | = | Special items (SPI) scaled by total assets (AT); |
MER_ACQ | = | An indicator variable that equals one if a firm engages in merger & acquisition transactions and zero otherwise; |
ACCRUALS | = | The absolute value of discretionary accruals using performance-matched modified Jones model; |
LOSS | = | An indicator variable that equals one if a firm reports a loss and zero otherwise; |
SEGMENT | = | The natural log of the number of business segments; |
BIG4 | = | An indicator variable that equals one if a firm uses a Big 4 accounting firm and zero otherwise; |
FSZIE | = | The natural log of the gross file size of 10-K reports by Loughran and McDonald (2011); |
FOG | = | The Fog Index of reading difficulty; |
HCSR | = | An indicator variable that equals one if an observation’s net CSR score (CSR_NET) is greater than zero and zero otherwise; |
CSR_ALT | = | Total strengths of Community Relations, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, and Product – Total concerns of Community Relations, Diversity, Employee Relations, Environment, and Product; |
ΔREAD_DIFF | = | READ_DIFF in year t – READ_DIFF in year t − 1; |
ΔCSR_NET | = | CSR_NET in year t – CSR_NET in year t − 1; |
ΔSIZE | = | SIZE in year t—SIZE in year t − 1; |
ΔLEV | = | LEV in year t—LEV in year t − 1; |
ΔROA | = | ROA in year t—ROA in year t − 1; |
ΔMTB | = | MTB in year t—MTB in year t − 1; |
ΔCFO | = | CFO in year t—CFO in year t − 1; |
ΔCAPINT | = | CAPINT in year t—CAPINT in year t − 1; |
ΔFIRMAGE | = | FIRMAGE in year t—FIRMAGE in year t − 1; |
ΔMARANK | = | MARANK in year t – MARANK in year t − 1; |
ΔVOLATILITY | = | VOLALITITY in year t – VOLALITITY in year t − 1; |
ΔSPEITEM | = | SPEITEM in year t – SPEITEM in year t − 1; |
ΔMER_ACQ | = | MER_ACQ in year t – MER_ACQ in year t − 1; |
ΔEARNINGS | = | EARNINGS in year t—EARINGS in year t − 1; |
ΔACCRUALS | = | ACCRUALS in year t—ACCRUALS in year t − 1; |
ΔLOSS | = | LOSS in year t—LOSS in year t − 1; |
ΔSEGMENT | = | SEGMENT in year t—SEGMENT in year t − 1; |
ΔBIG4 | = | BIG4 in year t – BIG4 in year t − 1; |
BOND RATING | = | The bond credit ratings from S&P’s; |
GOVERNANCE | = | The entrenchment index; |
CSR_COMMUNITY | = | Total strengths of Community Relations – Total concerns of Community Relations; |
CSR_GOVERNANCE | = | Total strengths of Corporate Governance – Total concerns of Corporate Governance; |
CSR_DIVERSITY | = | Total strengths of Diversity – Total concerns of Diversity; |
CSR_EMPLOYEE | = | Total strengths of Employee Relations – Total concerns of Employee Relations; |
CSR_ENVIRONMENT | = | Total strengths of Environment – Total concerns of Environment; |
CSR_HUMAN RIGHTS | = | Total strengths of Human Rights – Total concerns of Human Rights; |
CSR_PRODUCT | = | Total strengths of Product – Total concerns of Product; |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Bajaj, A., Leonard, L.N.K., Sun, L. et al. Corporate social responsibility and annual report reading difficulty. Rev Quant Finan Acc 60, 1393–1428 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-023-01132-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-023-01132-9