Information Systems for Sustainability: Hofstede’s Cultural Differences in the Perception of a Quality Measure for Sustainability Reports

2011 ◽  
pp. 54-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belen Fernandez-Feijoo ◽  
Silvia Romero ◽  
Silvia Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Quality Measure ◽  
Sustainability Reports

Cultural Differences, Information and Code Systems

2006 ◽  
pp. 51-71
Author(s):  
Brian J. Corbitt ◽  
Konrad J. Peszynski ◽  
Saranond Inthanond ◽  
Byron Hill
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
National Culture ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Structural Framework ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Information Systems Research ◽  
And Behavior

This paper explores an alternative way of framing information systems research on the role and impact of national culture. It argues that the widely accepted structural framework of Hofstede reduces interpretation to a simplistic categorical description which in many cases ignores differentiation within cultures. The alternative model suggests, that national culture can be better understood by seeking out the dominant codes that frame the discourse pervasive in a culture and understanding how that discourse affects the obvious social codes of ritual, custom and behavior and the textual codes which express the nature of that culture. This framework is applied to two different case studies — one in New Zealand and one in Thailand — to demonstrate its applicability.

Cross-Cultural Research in MIS

2011 ◽  
pp. 847-851
Author(s):  
Elena Karahanna ◽  
Roberto Evaristo ◽  
Mark Srite
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Methodological Issue ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

“Globalization of business highlights the need to understand the management of organizations that span different nations and cultures” (Srite et al., 2003, p. 31). In these multinational and transcultural organizations, there is a growing call for utilizing information technology (IT) to achieve efficiencies, coordination, and communication. However, cultural differences between countries may have an impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of IT deployment. Despite its importance, the effect of cultural factors has received limited attention from information systems’ (IS) researchers. In a review of cross-cultural research specifically focused on the MIS area (Evaristo, Karahanna, & Srite, 2000), a very limited number of studies were found that could be classi- fied as cross-cultural. Additionally, even though many of the studies found provided useful insights, raised interesting questions, and generally contributed toward the advancement of the state of the art in its field, with few exceptions, no study specifically addressed equivalency issues central to measurement in cross-cultural research. It is this methodological issue of equivalency that is the focus of this article.

Beyond Models of National Culture in Information Systems Research

2011 ◽  
pp. 14-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Myers ◽  
Felix B. Tan
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
National Culture ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Global Organizations ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Dynamic View ◽  
Information Systems Research

Many IS scholars argue that global organizations need to understand cultural differences if they are to successfully deploy information technology. We agree that an understanding of cultural differences is important, but suggest that the concept of “national culture” that has tended to dominate the IS research literature is too simplistic. In this article, we challenge information systems researchers to go beyond models of national culture. We propose that IS researchers should adopt a more dynamic view of culture – one that sees culture as contested, temporal and emergent.

Effect of Hofstede’s Cultural Differences in Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Romero ◽  
Belen Fernandez-Feijoo
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Power Distance ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure ◽  
High Power Distance ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
Culture Differences

This paper looks at culture differences in sustainability reporting among countries. The authors use data from the survey conducted by KPMG in 2008 within 22 countries, applying Hofstede’s framework. The authors find an effect of culture on the interest in highlighting the credibility of sustainability reports in different countries. Level of corporate social responsibility disclosure, on the other hand, does not change with cultural differences, but with the levels of enforcement of the regulations. The results are revealing, given that assurance statements are not mandatory. Companies in countries with collectivistic characteristics and low power distance do not need to increase their credibility in terms of the disclosure levels of corporate social responsibility; they are democratic and careful of their inner group. On the contrary, companies in countries with individualistic characteristics and high power distance need to run the extra mile to show their commitment and guarantee that their reporting on social responsibility is transparent.

Cross-Cultural Research in MIS

2005 ◽  
pp. 640-644
Author(s):  
Elena Karahanna ◽  
Roberto Evaristo ◽  
Mark Srite
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Methodological Issue ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

“Globalization of business highlights the need to understand the management of organizations that span different nations and cultures” (Srite et al., 2003, p. 31). In these multinational and transcultural organizations, there is a growing call for utilizing information technology (IT) to achieve efficiencies, coordination, and communication. However, cultural differences between countries may have an impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of IT deployment. Despite its importance, the effect of cultural factors has received limited attention from information systems’ (IS) researchers. In a review of cross-cultural research specifically focused on the MIS area (Evaristo, Karahanna, & Srite, 2000), a very limited number of studies were found that could be classified as cross-cultural. Additionally, even though many of the studies found provided useful insights, raised interesting questions, and generally contributed toward the advancement of the state of the art in its field, with few exceptions, no study specifically addressed equivalency issues central to measurement in cross-cultural research. It is this methodological issue of equivalency that is the focus of this article.

Beyond Models of National Culture in Information Systems Research

2011 ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Myers ◽  
Felix B. Tan
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
National Culture ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Global Organizations ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Dynamic View ◽  
Information Systems Research

Many IS scholars argue that global organizations need to understand cultural differences if they are to successfully deploy information technology. We agree that an understanding of cultural differences is important, but suggest that the concept of “national culture” that has tended to dominate the IS research literature is too simplistic. In this article, we challenge information systems researchers to go beyond models of national culture. We propose that IS researchers should adopt a more dynamic view of culture – one that sees culture as contested, temporal and emergent.

An exploratory study on the components and quality of combined assurance in an integrated or a sustainability reporting setting

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Prinsloo ◽  
Warren Maroun
Keyword(s):  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Quality Measure ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Reporting ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
External Sources ◽  
Sustainability Reports ◽  
Integrated Or

Purpose This research complements the corporate reporting literature by exploring the different types of assurance, which companies are using to bolster the credibility of their integrated and sustainability reports. A composite quality measure is proposed and this study aims to provide evidence on how combined assurance quality (CAQ) varies among firms. Design/methodology/approach Content analysis is used to identify “elements” of combined assurance disclosed in integrated and sustainability reports and company webpages. Results are presented in tabular format and supported by non-parametric tests to evaluate differences in CAQ among firms in more detail. Findings Combined assurance is framed as a function of the responsibility of the board of directors to ensure accurate, complete and reliable reporting and the characteristics of different internal and external sources of assurance. Overall, combined assurance models are being designed conservatively. They focus mainly on specific disclosures and are guided by a limited number of assurance methodologies or frameworks instead of taking a more pluralistic approach to verification of integrated and sustainability reports as a whole. Research limitations/implications The study is based on combined assurance practices by a sample of large listed companies in a single jurisdiction. An international comparison of combined assurance and the calibration of the proposed quality measure is deferred for future research. Practical implications Limitations in existing assurance practices are identified for the consideration of preparers and assurance providers. The quality schematic also offers practitioners, standard-setters and academics an easy-to-apply technique for examining the different elements of a company’s combined assurance model. Social implications A better understanding of the quality of combined assurance is essential for users’ to place reliance on integrated and sustainability reports and for informing change to existing assurance practices. Originality/value The study is the first to examine the operation and quality of combined assurance. The method used to gauge assurance quality provides a useful basis for a more detailed empirical study on the relevance of combined assurance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document