Beattie, V., Dhanani, A. and Jones, M. (2008) Investigating presentational change in UK annual reports: a longitudinal perspective. Journal of Business Communication, 45(2), pp. 181-222. (doi: 10.1177/0021943607313993)
|
Text
beattiedhananijones_2008.pdf 554kB |
Publisher's URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021943607313993
Abstract
This article examines structural and format changes in annual reports of U.K. listed companies from 1965 to 2004 with a particular focus on graph use. The article compares a new sample of 2004 annual reports with preexisting samples by Lee and by Beattie and Jones. Lee's identified trends continue. There has been a sharp increase in page length, voluntary information, and narrative information, particularly among large listed companies. A detailed analysis of voluntary disclosure indicates changes in the incidence and pattern of generic sections. Graph usage is now universal. However, key financial graph use has slightly declined, replaced by graphs depicting other operating issues. Impression management through selectivity, graphical measurement distortion, and manipulation of the length of time series graphed are common. Overall, annual reports continue to exhibit many features of public relations documents rather than financially driven, statutory documents, and the analysis of graph usage suggests a need for policy guidelines to protect users.
Item Type: | Articles |
---|---|
Keywords: | annual report, graphs, impression management, longitudinal study, narratives, pictures |
Status: | Published |
Refereed: | Yes |
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID: | Beattie, Prof Vivien |
Authors: | Beattie, V., Dhanani, A., and Jones, M. |
Subjects: | H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD28 Management. Industrial Management |
College/School: | College of Social Sciences > Adam Smith Business School > Accounting and Finance |
Journal Name: | Journal of Business Communication |
Publisher: | Sage |
ISSN: | 0021-9436 |
Copyright Holders: | Copyright © 2008 Sage |
First Published: | First published in Journal of Business Communication 45(2):181-222 |
Publisher Policy: | Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher |
University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record