Digital Business Reporting Is a Key to Enhance Financial Reporting Quality – An XBRL Perspective
Abhishek N 1
, Ashoka M L 2
, Ambrish Singh 3
,
Parameshwara 4, M S Divyashree 5
1 Research Professor, Srinivas University,
Mangalore, India
2 Professor,
DoS in Commerce, University of Mysore, Mysore, India
3 Assistant
Professor, Management, Rajkiya Engineering College
Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India
4 Associate
Professor and Chairmen, DoS in Commerce, Mangalore University, India
5 Assistant Professor and PhD Scholar, Govt. First Grade College, Uppinangady, Mangalore, India
|
|
|
ABSTRACT |
|
|
Communication
of high-quality business and financial information to decision-makers helps
to get clear insights on the business outlook and assists them in making
timely decisions. Financial reporting acts as a media to disseminate the
information of the business to various interested parties by providing
operating and financial insights through financial statements, notes to
accounts and other footnotes and narratives in the Annual Business Report (ABR).
Today stakeholders of the business are very keen in getting both financial
and non-financial information in a single report i.e., ABR. Therefore, the
companies are required to communicate enhanced information in their ABR to
facilitate and assist the stakeholders in their decision-making process. The
method of dissemination of both business and financial information in a
single ABR is EBR Model (Enhanced Business Reporting Model). The EBR model of
communication is only possible by the application of XBRL (Extensible
Business Reporting Language). The purpose of present paper is to analyze the
impact of XBRL on the quality of financial reporting. For this purpose, the
study analyzed the financial reporting pattern of 23 select companies in
India through the analysis of their annual reports from 2005 to 2020. To
derive valid conclusions Tukey test, dummy variable regression analysis
techniques were employed and concluded that XBRL has made a significant
impact on the quality of financial reporting of select companies. |
|||
|
Received 14 July 2022 Accepted 21 August 2022 Published 31 August 2022 Corresponding Author Abhishek
N, abhishekalmighty93@gmail.com
DOI10.29121/granthaalayah.v10.i8.2022.4797 Funding: JRF/SRF AWARD
NO :978/(OBC/UGC-NET.DEC-2015). Copyright: © 2022 The
Author(s). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License. With the
license CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download,
reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work
must be properly attributed to its author.
|
|||
|
Keywords: Financial Reporting, Quality of Financial
Reporting, XBRL, Enhanced Business Reporting, Annual Business Reporting |
|||
1. INTRODUCTION
The efficient and effective communication of business and financial information to end-users helps to get clear insights on the business outlook and assists them in making timely decisions. Financial reporting acts as a vehicle to disseminate the financial information of the business to various interested parties by communicating operating and financial information through financial statements, notes to financial statements and other footnotes in the annual report. The operational and financial outlook of a business can be communicated through various Media such as annual reports, news item in newspapers, press meets and so forth. But annual reports are considered as the most appropriate way to disseminate the operational and financial outlook of the business Kavitha and Nandagopal (2011), Harris and Morsfield (2012). Consistent reporting of business and financial information through annual reports enables the organisation in ensuring a high quality of financial reporting Naser and Nuseibeh (2003). Financial reports are said to be qualitative only when they are caters to the actual information needs of various stakeholders. Nowadays stakeholders of the business are more expecting both financial and non-financial information to be communicated in a single annual report. Therefore, the corporate houses are required to communicate enhanced information in their annual reports to facilitate the stakeholders in their decision-making process. Communication of enhanced information in the annual report is only possible with the help of the EBR Model (Enhanced Business Reporting Model) which is only possible by the application of XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) to the business reporting purpose.
XBRL is the global business reporting standard and is
adopted in more than 140 nations across the globe. India is one of those
nations, which mandated the financial reporting through XBRL by a select class
of companies from 2016 onwards. XBRL promotes high-quality transparent business
reporting, and which eases the corporate reporting's various purposes further
it offers many benefits which can be enjoyed during analysis, interpretation,
and decision-making process by the stakeholders. In this paper, an attempt has
been made to assess the Impact of XBRL on the Quality of Financial Reporting in
India. The rest of the paper is organized into different sections such as
earlier studies and literature gap; research questions and objectives;
theoretical framework and hypothesis development; research methodology; results
and discussions; findings, conclusions, and suggestions; and lastly scope for
future research and limitations of the study.
2. Earlier studies
and Literature Gap
To understand the conceptual foundations and to find out the
literature gap the study reviewed a sufficient number of
literatures and the summary of the review is presented as follows:
Technological advances in financial reporting provide more opportunities for enhanced corporate reporting to external stakeholders by the companies Uyar (2016). The quality of financial reporting depends on the effective implementation of superior accounting and reporting standards accepted and implemented in the global scenario Agarwal (2013). To ensure the quality of financial reporting it is necessary to consider well accepted conceptual framework issued by standard setters Zeff (2013). Qualitative aspects of financial reporting are also influenced by various technical aspects such as XBRL and by inducing XBRL in reporting process timeliness of financial reporting can be enhanced Lambert et al. (2019). To induce advanced technologies in the financial reporting process the adopting firms can bear additional costs and needs training for their employees who are involved in the process of preparation and presentation of financial statements Krisko (2017). Financial reporting quality is influenced by various dimensions that may be differing from one organization to another Tarmidi and Roni (2014). Financial reports prepared by using advanced technologies such as XBRL enhance the comparability and utility of information so communicated. Further, the cost of re-arranging information for various compliance purposes can also be eliminated as XBRL based reports can be used to file with various regulatory authorities prevailing under a particular business environment Wenger et al. (2013). For assessing the quality of financial reporting there is a need to have a comprehensive tool that should be constructed based on the various factors such as financial reporting standards, corporate laws, and any other regulatory requirements Van et al. (2009). To assess the impact of XBRL based financial reports it is prominent to evaluate the taxonomies. For analysing the taxonomies there is a necessity of having a framework Zhu and Wu (2014). Relevance, timeliness, reliability, clarity, and low cost of reporting can be ensured only with the help of XBRL, and which would benefit various stakeholders including regulatory authorities Harris and Morsfield (2012). XBRL based financial reports help business organisations in web data management, data analysis and presentation. Further, it also enhances the accessibility feature with high accuracy of information communicated Wang and Gao (2012). XBRL enables the business organizations to report and communicate enhanced information which will cater for the dynamic information needs of various stakeholders Boritz and No (2008). XBRL based financial reports are interoperable and can be easily exchanged with other regulatory authorities and help regulatory authorities quickly gather the required information from companies' filings Rahwani et al. (2019), Hoffman and Rodríguez (2013).
From the analysis of earlier studies, it is found that
many of the studies have focused on fundamental aspects of financial reporting;
the application of XBRL for financial reporting and only a few studies have
focused on analysing the quality of financial reporting and no studies have
focused on studying the impact of XBRL on quality of financial reporting.
Therefore, the present study intended to analyse the “Impact
of XBRL on Quality of Financial Reporting in India”.
3. Research
Questions
1) By observing the
summary of outcomes of earlier studies and the literature gap following
research question has been developed:
2) What is the level
of quality of financial reporting of select companies during entire period of
study?
How does XBRL impact on quality of financial reporting in
India?
4. Objectives
Based on the research question study framed the following
objective for the present study:
1) To analyse the
level of quality of financial reporting of select companies during the entire
period of study.
2) To assess the
impact of XBRL on the quality of financial reporting of select companies.
5. Theoretical Framework
and Hypothesis Development
The present business environment is dynamic in which various
stakeholders need multiple sources of information to be communicated by the
companies in which they are interested. Nowadays both financial and
non-financial information getting equal importance in the decision-making
process by various interested parties. For making timely and sound decisions by
the stakeholders, it is necessary to communicate high-quality information Hill (2001), Parish (2000), Bovee (2005). The information
communicated by the business organisation is said to be highly qualitative only
when it caters for the information needs of various stakeholders Beattie et al. (2004), Kavitha and Nandagopal
(2011). Only the way to
ensure high-quality information in the annual reports of the business
organisation is that Enhanced Business Reporting (EBR). EBR is only possible
through the adoption of XBRL for financial reporting. XBRL is the global
business reporting language that positively influences the quality of business
reporting and eases the entire financial reporting system of a business
organisation. To keep this in mind the following hypotheses have been developed
to achieve the objective of the present paper:
H0:
There exist the same level of quality of financial reporting among select
companies during the period of study.
H0:
XBRL does not impact on quality of financial reporting of select companies in
India.
6. Research
Methodology
The present study is empirical. The methodological aspects of
the present study are based on the analysis of secondary data. The data was
collected from annual reports of select companies for analysing the impact of
XBRL on financial reporting. To analyse conceptual aspects and review earlier
studies information is gathered from various reputed journals, newspapers, websites,
and books.
1)
Data collection
For the collection of secondary data, annual reports of the
top 30 NSE listed companies were considered. But out of the top 30 companies, 7
companies were eliminated because of the non-application of XBRL for financial
reporting and these companies are out of the purview of XBRL regulations as
they are operating in the banking, finance, and power sector.
2)
Research Period
To analyse the impact
of XBRL on the quality of financial reporting the study is considered 2011 as
the base year because XBRL was implemented in India for financial reporting by
select companies. Based on the availability of annual reports of all the 23 select
companies from 2005 to 2010 is considered as pre-XBRL implementation period and
from 2011 to 2020 is considered as XBRL period.
3)
Research
Instrument
The self-constructed research instrument (Appendix-1) was
used and is based on the financial reporting quality assessment model
(developed by Jonas & Blanchet, 2000). The research instrument contains 11
dimensions and 44 variables, and which is the base for assessing the quality of
financial reporting both during the pre-XBRL period and during the XBRL period.
The list of dimensions considered for assessing the quality of financial
reporting is shown in the following table. Table 1
Table 1
|
Table 1 Quality of Financial Reporting Dimensions |
||
|
S. No. |
Quality
of Financial Reporting Dimensions |
No.
of. Variables |
|
1 |
Relevance |
4 |
|
2 |
Predictive Value |
6 |
|
3 |
Feedback Value |
4 |
|
4 |
Timeliness |
4 |
|
5 |
Verifiability |
6 |
|
6 |
Completeness |
3 |
|
7 |
Representational Faithfulness |
5 |
|
8 |
Neutrality |
2 |
|
9 |
Comparability |
2 |
|
10 |
Consistency |
4 |
|
11 |
Clarity (Understandability) |
4 |
|
Total number of items |
44 |
|
|
Source Jonas and
Blanchet (2000) |
||
4)
Content Analysis
Information from annual reports of selected companies is
gathered with the help of content analysis techniques based on a checklist
developed with the help of Jonas & Blanchet's model of financial reporting
quality assessment. Content Analysis is the scientific and systematic approach
that involves classifying and codifying qualitative and quantitative
information contained in the annual reports of companies into pre-defined
categories for drawing valid conclusions by applying more appropriate
statistical tools Holsti (1969), Krippendorff (1980), Guthrie and Abeysekera
(2006). To mark the
score about the information contained in the annual report binary code or
ordinal scale method can be used. The binary code method of scoring is used for
quantitative analysis which involves recording either the presence or absence
of information which is indicated in '1' or ‘0’ respectively Guthrie and Abeysekera
(2006), Marston and Shrives (1991). Under the
ordinal scale method both quantitative and qualitative analysis can be done Guthrie and Abeysekera
(2006), Beattie et al. (2004), Kavitha and Nandagopal
(2011). The score is
ranging from 5 to 1, where 5 indicates the high quality of information and 1 indicated
the low quality of information.
5)
Quality of
Financial Reporting Index
The quality of the Financial Reporting Index (QFRI) was calculated
from the data gathered from content analysis for further statistical analysis. The main aspect of the present study is
to assess the quality of financial reporting of select companies both in the
context of XBRL and Non-XBRL reporting. Several methods can be employed for
assessing the quality of financial reporting. Among the several methods, the
disclosure index method is the most popular in accounting research for
assessing the quality of financial reporting. Further, the disclosure index methodology
helps in assessing both the quantity and quality of financial reporting Cerf (1961), Hooks et al. (2002). Therefore, the
study is used the following index to assess the quality of financial reporting,
and which is adopted from Beattie (2002), Urquiza et al. (2009).
QFRi = (As – Mins) / (Maxs – Mins)
Were,
QFRi= Quality of Financial Reporting Index.
As= Actual score obtained by the company on a specific QFR dimension.
Mins= Minimum score a company can obtain on a specific QFR dimension.
Maxs= Maximum score a company can obtain on a specific QFR
dimension
6)
Reliability and
Validity
Reliability analysis was made to check the internal consistency of the research instrument. Validity shows the accuracy of data to test and re-test to derive valid conclusions. The following table reveals the results of the reliability analysis. Table 2
Table 2
|
Table 2 Results of Reliability Analysis |
|||
|
Scale |
No. of Items |
Cronbach Alpha |
Remarks |
|
Relevance |
4 |
0.814 |
|
|
Predictive Value |
6 |
0.866 |
|
|
Feedback Value |
4 |
0.854 |
|
|
Timeliness |
4 |
0.864 |
|
|
Verifiability |
6 |
0.875 |
|
|
Completeness |
3 |
0.739 |
|
|
Representational Faithfulness |
5 |
0.885 |
The reliability level of data is Excellent |
|
Neutrality |
2 |
0.612 |
|
|
Comparability |
2 |
0.716 |
|
|
Consistency |
4 |
0.878 |
|
|
Clarity |
4 |
0.801 |
|
|
Overall |
44 |
0.926 |
|
|
Source Annual Reports of Companies |
|||
The Cronbach's Alpha concerning all the financial reporting
quality dimensions is more than 0.6. Hence, it can be concluded that the
internal consistency and validity of data gathered from annual reports of
select companies is excellent.
Statistical Tools
For drawing valid conclusions from the data gathered for the
study statistical and econometric tools were used which include ANOVA dummy
variable regression models for assessing the level of Quality of Financial Reporting
and the Impact of XBRL on the Quality of Financial Reporting and to test the
hypothesis Tukey's Post Hoc Multiple comparison tests are used.
7. Results and
Discussions
This section of the paper deals with the analysis and
interpretation of data collected for the study through various statistical
techniques.
The
following table depicts the summary of the QFR Index Analysis, and the
descriptions of the values shown in the table are given in the notes. Table 3
Table 3
|
Table 3 Results of Tukey Test on Level of Quality of Financial Reporting Among Select Companies |
|||||||||||
|
Companies |
D1 |
D2 |
D3 |
D4 |
D5 |
D6 |
D7 |
D8 |
D9 |
D10 |
D11 |
|
APS |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
AP |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
BAL |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
BATL |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
CIPLA |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
COI |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
DRL |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
HEMO |
2 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
HIUNI |
3 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
INFY |
3 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
ITC |
3 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
L&T |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
M&M |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
MSI |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
NTPC |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
ONGC |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
RIL |
3 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
SPI |
1 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
TCS |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
BPCL |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|
TMOTO |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
TSL |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
WIPRO |
3 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
F-Value |
3.582 |
0.939 |
1.870 |
1.157 |
3.742 |
2.982 |
1.493 |
5.733 |
4.956 |
2.789 |
2.677 |
|
Sig |
0.000 |
0.543 |
0.011 |
0.284 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.073 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
Note:(1=
low, 2=medium, 3=high, 4=No difference (Similar)) (D1: Relevance,
D2: Predictive Value, D3: Feedback Value, D4: Timeliness, D5: Verifiability, D6: Completeness, D7:
Representational Faithfulness, D8:
Neutrality, D9:
Comparability, D10:
Consistency, D11:
Clarity (understandability) |
|||||||||||
Based on the financial reporting quality index Tukey Post Hoc Multiple comparison tests have been conducted and it has been found that a significant difference exists among the companies in the financial reporting quality dimensions of Relevance, feedback value, verifiability, completeness, neutrality, comparability, consistency, clarity, and differences doesn't exist in dimensions of predictive value, timeliness, and representational faithfulness. Accordingly, the Null hypothesis (H0) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. Therefore, there are significant differences in the level of quality of financial reporting in most of the dimensions in the select companies.
8. Analysis of Company Wise Impact of XBRL on Quality of Financial Reporting
The major focus of the present paper is to analyse the impact of XBRL on the QFR of select companies in India by considering all 11 dimensions together. The company-wise results of dummy variable regression models are presented in the following section:
The following model has been used for the estimation of the impact of XBRL on company-wise QFR:
Yt =
β0+ β1 D1+Ut
Where,
Yt =
Value of index for company-wise QFR.
β0=
Benchmark and represents the pre-XBRL period.
β1= Difference
between benchmark and dummy variable.
D1= Dummy
variable for XBRL.
Ut=
random error term.
Table 4
|
Table 4 Impact of XBRL on Financial Reporting of Select Companies |
|||||||
|
Company |
β0 |
t-value |
Sig. |
β1 |
t-value |
Sig. |
|
|
COI |
0.360 |
21.476 |
0.000 |
0.258 |
12.173 |
0.000 |
|
|
0.395 |
19.620 |
0.000 |
0.214 |
8.416 |
0.000 |
|
|
L&T |
0.414 |
21.382 |
0.000 |
0.215 |
8.772 |
0.000 |
|
|
SPI. |
0.429 |
20.259 |
0.000 |
0.188 |
7.013 |
0.000 |
|
|
BAL |
0.407 |
20.097 |
0.000 |
0.230 |
8.973 |
0.000 |
|
|
BATL |
0.413 |
23.374 |
0.000 |
0.231 |
10.347 |
0.000 |
|
|
APS |
0.392 |
21.578 |
0.000 |
0.272 |
11.819 |
0.000 |
|
|
HEMO |
0.427 |
18.897 |
0.000 |
0.213 |
7.463 |
0.000 |
|
|
CIPLA |
0.458 |
24.636 |
0.000 |
0.176 |
7.462 |
0.000 |
|
|
TMOTO |
0.470 |
26.640 |
0.000 |
0.140 |
6.250 |
0.000 |
|
|
DRL |
0.433 |
24.293 |
0.000 |
0.218 |
9.682 |
0.000 |
|
|
INFY |
0.444 |
24.440 |
0.000 |
0.188 |
8.192 |
0.000 |
|
|
MSI |
0.432 |
25.316 |
0.000 |
0.220 |
10.179 |
0.000 |
|
|
NTPC |
0.435 |
22.603 |
0.000 |
0.234 |
9.629 |
0.000 |
|
|
HIUNI |
0.462 |
29.633 |
0.000 |
0.178 |
8.980 |
0.000 |
|
|
TCS |
0.458 |
25.633 |
0.000 |
0.196 |
8.654 |
0.000 |
|
|
ONGC |
0.483 |
27.121 |
0.000 |
0.157 |
6.961 |
0.000 |
|
|
TSL |
0.482 |
24.199 |
0.000 |
0.177 |
7.023 |
0.000 |
|
|
M&M |
0.474 |
23.595 |
0.000 |
0.188 |
7.385 |
0.000 |
|
|
BPCL |
0.483 |
30.521 |
0.000 |
0.158 |
7.904 |
0.000 |
|
|
RIL |
0.476 |
29.756 |
0.000 |
0.182 |
8.973 |
0.000 |
|
|
ITC |
0.518 |
25.522 |
0.000 |
0.138 |
5.368 |
0.000 |
|
|
WIPRO |
0.498 |
34.869 |
0.000 |
0.206 |
11.402 |
0.000 |
|
|
Source Annual Reports of Companies, Compiled by Researcher |
|||||||
The Table 3 depicts results of dummy variable regression models and explains the company wise impact of XBRL on financial reporting quality. During the pre-XBRL period, the quality of financial reporting of COI was 0.360 and it increased by 0.258 times during the XBRL period which shows a significant impact of XBRL on enhancing the quality of financial reporting. In the above table, we can observe the value of β1 for all the select companies are having a significant t-value which signifies the positive impact of XBRL on the quality of financial reporting during the XBRL period.
9. Overall Impact of XBRL on Quality of Financial Reporting
In the following section, an attempt has also been made to analyse the impact of XBRL on the overall QFR of the companies by considering all 11 dimensions of 23 selected companies for both pre-XBRL and XBRL periods i.e., (2005-2010 and 2011-2016) together.
The following model has been used for the estimation of the impact of XBRL on the QFR of all the selected companies:
Yt =
β0+ β1 D1+Ut
Where,
Yt = Value of index for Overall QFR of 23 companies, 11 dimensions and 16 years period.
β0= Benchmark and represents the pre-XBRL period.
β1= Difference between benchmark and dummy variable.
D1= Dummy variable for XBRL.
Ut= random error term.
The above ANOVA dummy variable regression model estimated the overall impact of XBRL on QFR by considering all the selected companies, and 11 QFR dimensions for the entire study period. The results are as follows:
Yt = 0.427+0.208
t- Value = (31.353) (12.070)
P-value = (0.000) (0.000)
The constant of the model for QFR concerning all the selected companies, 11 QFR dimensions for the entire study period is significant at one per cent level. Therefore, during the pre-XBRL period, the average QFR was 0.427. The co-efficient of the dummy is also significant at the one per cent level. Therefore, the average QFR has increased by 0.208 times. Therefore, XBRL has made a significant impact on the overall QFR of all the selected companies. Hence, the null hypothesis "XBRL does not impact on quality of financial reporting of select companies in India” is rejected and the alternative hypothesis “XBRL has made a significant impact on quality of financial reporting of select companies in India” is accepted.
10. Findings and Conclusions
Based on the objectives and analysis of gathered
information with the help of the Tukey Post Hoc, Multiple comparisons test the
study found that there were a lot of fluctuations in the level of quality of
financial reporting during the pre-XBRL period and in the XBRL period the level
of financial reporting is improving and becoming consistent, and which shows
the positive impact of XBRL. Further, there is an inconsistency in the quality
of financial reporting among select companies in respect of all the financial
reporting quality dimensions. Concerning the second objective with the help
dummy variable regression model it is found that the quality of financial
reporting of select companies during the pre-XBRL period is comparatively low
and it is increased among all the select companies after the initiation of XBRL
for financial reporting. This can be observed from the overall analysis of
dummy variable regression analysis that the overall financial reporting quality
during the pre-XBRL period was 0.427 and it was increased by 0.208 times after
the introduction of XBRL. This study concludes that enhanced business reporting
is the only tool that enhances the quality of financial reporting and certainly
meets the varied information needs of different stakeholders Hill (2001), Parish (2000), Bovee et al. (2005). Further, the
application of technologies like XBRL improves the transparency of financial
reporting and enhances the timeliness, comparability, and uniformity of
financial reports for various corporate filings. This builds confidence among
various stakeholders’ group and contributes to the long-lasting survival of the
business at large.
11. Limitations
The study is confined only to secondary data and assessment of the impact of XBRL on the quality of financial reporting and it is not focused on the primary opinions of regulators, reporters, and users of annual reports.
12. Future Research
Based on the limitations of the study the future research can address the following issues:
1) The study can be undertaken to analyse the XBRL based reporting for value relevance of the firms.
2) The primary opinion-based analysis from the different stakeholder's points of view can be conducted.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
None.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thankful to UGC for granting fellowship under SRF scheme.
REFERENCES
Agarwal, H. (2013). Corporate Financial Reporting Practices in Emerging Capital Markets : An Empirical Study With Special Reference to Asia-Pacific Region. Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Agra, India. https://sg.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/34133.
Beattie, V., McInnes, B., and Fearnley, S. (2002). Narrative Reporting by Listed Uk Companies : A Comparative within-Sector Topic Analysis. Research paper the University of Stirling.
Beattie, V., McInnes, B., and Fearnley, S. (2004). A Methodology for Analysing and Evaluating Narratives in Annual Reports : A Comprehensive Descriptive Profile and Metrics for Disclosure Quality Attributes. In Accounting Forum, 28(3), 205-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2004.07.001
Boritz, J. E., and No, W. G. (2008). The SEC's XBRL Voluntary Filing Program on Edgar : A Case for Quality Assurance. Current Issues in Auditing, 2(2), A36- A50. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia.2008.2.2.A36.
Bovee, M., Kogan, A., Nelson, K., Srivastava, R. P., and Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2005). Financial Reporting and Auditing Agent with Net Knowledge (FRAANK) and Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL). Journal of Information Systems, 19(1), 19-41. https://doi.org/10.2308/jis.2005.19.1.19.
Cerf, A. R. (1961). Corporate Reporting and Investment Decisions. Public Accounting Research Program, Institute of Business and Economic Research, University of California.
Guthrie, J., and Abeysekera, I. (2006). Content Analysis of Social, Environmental Reporting : what is new ? Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting. 10(2), 114-126. https://doi.org/10.1108/14013380610703120.
Harris, T. S., and Morsfield, S. G. (2012). An Evaluation of the Current State and Future of XBRL and Interactive Data for Investors and Analysts. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CJ8NV2.
Hill, G. (2001). Slouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. E-Company (May), 52-62.
Hoffman, C., and Rodríguez, M. M. (2013). Digitizing Financial Reports-Issues and Insights : A Viewpoint. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research, 13(1), 73-98. https://doi.org/10.4192/1577-817/1577-8517-v13_3.
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities, Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
Hooks, J., Coy, D., and Davey, H. (2002). The Information Gap in Annual Reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, i.15(4), 01-22. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210440577.
Jonas, G. J., and Blanchet, J. (2000). Assessing the Quality of Financial Reporting. Accounting Horizons, 14(3), 353. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2000.14.3.353.
Kavitha, D., and Nandagopal, R. (2011). Disclosure Studies -A Commentary on the Methods and Measures. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 4(1), 29-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974686220110103.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis : An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills. CA : Sage Publications.
Krisko, A. (2017). The Role of Resistance in Incorporating XBRL into Financial Reporting Practices. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 5(2), 100-111. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijaes.v5i2.7981.
Marston, C. L., and Shrives, P. J. (1991). The Use of Disclosure Indices in Accounting Research : A Review Article. The British Accounting Review, 23(3), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-8389(91)90080-L.
Naser, K., and Nuseibeh, R. (2003). Quality of Financial Reporting: Evidence from the Listed Saudi Nonfinancial Companies. The International Journal of Accounting, 38(1), 41-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7063(03)00002-5.
Parish, A. (2000). Breaking the Ice. Investor Relations (October), 26-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(00)80018-1.
Rahwani, N. R., Sadewa, M. M., Qalbiah, N., Mukhlisah, N., and Nikmah, N. (2019). XBRL Based Corporate Tax Filing in Indonesia. Procedia Computer Science, 161, 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.108.
Tarmidi, M., and Roni, R. A. (2014). An International Comparison of the Determinants and Financial Information Quality in The XBRL Reporting Environment. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164, 135-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.11.061.
Urquiza, F. B., Navarro, M. C. A., and Trombetta, M. (2009). Disclosure Indices Design : Does it Make a Difference ? Revista de Contabilidad, 12(2), 253-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1138-4891(09)70008-1.
Uyar, A. (2016). Evolution of Corporate Reporting and Emerging Trends. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 27(4), 27-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcaf.22157.
Van Beest, F., Braam, G., and Boelens, S. (2009). Quality of Financial Reporting : Measuring Qualitative Characteristics. Nijmegen Center for Economics (NiCE). Working Paper, 09-108.
Wang, Z., and Gao, S. S. (2012). Are XBRL-based Financial Reports Better than non- XBRL Reports ? A Quality Assessment. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 6(1), 513-518. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1328326.
Wenger, M. R., Thomas, M. A., and Babb, J. S. (2013). Financial Reporting Comparability : Toward XBRL Ontology of the FASB-IFRS Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Electronic Finance, 7(1), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEF.2013.051754.
Zeff, S. A. (2013). The Objectives of Financial Reporting : A Historical Survey and Analysis. Accounting and Business Research, 43(4), 262-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2013.782237.
Zhu, H., and Wu, H. (2014). Assessing the Quality of Large-Scale Data Standards : A Case of XBRL GAAP Taxonomy. Decision Support Systems, 59(1), 351-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2014.01.006.
This work is licensed under a: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
© Granthaalayah 2014-2022. All Rights Reserved.
